by Jim Cooperman
A Ministry of Forests and Range compliance and enforcement technician confided to me the other day about the sad state of current forest management. “They have legislated us out of the bush,” he complained. “Companies are controlling prices and are bullies in the forests.” He had heard that his union was going to do a survey to determinethe level of job satisfaction under the province’s Forest and Range Practices Act (FRPA), but the survey was mysteriously canned.
He does not know anyone that is satisfied, “except the managers.” Essentially, he said, some companies are “running amok.” His views coincide with a consulting forester who was once a major licensee woods manager, but now does not like to look anymore when he is out in the field. No wonder, as he now sees a management style similar to the 1970s, with openings that are too large, cut block boundaries that are too close in proximity to other blocks, improper riparian management, too much waste, and a lack of attention to visual quality. Although profits are finally falling for the industry because of the current low price of lumber, most companies have done very well this decade. Thanks to the provincial Liberals, logging rules are virtually non-existent and the subsidies have been generous. The provincial government has spent hundreds of millions of dollars buying back timber to establish its new market-based tenure system, timber that the companies never paid for in the first place. Another $125-million has been allocated for worker and community adjustment programs. This is public money being used to prop up an industry that always claims it pays for our schools and hospitals!
BC Timber Profits Flowing South
Despite the billions of dollars that were spent on softwood duties, most BC forest companies were able to make sizable profits thanks to low stumpage rates and mechanization in the mills and in the bush. Now these profits are getting invested in the US as BC forest companies purchase sawmills there. What a sweet deal: companies can get paid for the 20 percent of the timber that the government takes back and then they use this money to invest outside of the country, providing jobs to US workers. Then they are able to purchase at auctions the timber removed from their tenures to use in their mills.
Environmentalists Silent
There is quite a contrast between this decade and the last, when every move by the government faced harsh criticism from the environmental community and the forest industry fought hard to pursue its goals with its Forest Alliance public relations campaign and Share movement. Now the industry has achieved its entire wish list from the government it helped to elect with generous election funding. The Forest Alliance and Share movement is gone and with it the industry’s and government’s commitment to communities. And sadly, the environmental community is nearly silent with its censure, even though government policies are abysmal. Perhaps there is a lack of critical analysis because there are few groups working on forestry policy anymore and the media avoids reporting on any criticism of forestry.
Softwood Treaty
The softwood lumber agreement is a dog’s breakfast that quickly puts the public to sleep. Clearly, the Harper government has agreed to terms that continue to benefit the US, despite many court victories in Canada’s favour including two recent ones. Perhaps they agreed to the terms because they know, but will never admit, that Canadian lumber is indeed subsidized and that the final court decision may support the US, which does need controls on Canadian exports to protect its industry. While Canadian companies are eager to see most of their duty payments returned, many remained opposed to the deal. The Harper government has basically bullied the companies to accept the agreement and we will likely never know how many companies actually support it. Under the treaty, the Canadian public could benefit more from lumber exports as the proposed treaty calls for a sliding scale of export charges that will flow into provincial treasuries combined with quotas when the price of lumber falls below $355 per thousand board feet. However, under B.C.’s “market-based system,” stumpage rates will likely fail to account for the export duties, resulting in no change in resource rents. Currently, the price is well below $300/thousand.
Coastal Shell Game
There is a real disparity between the interior of the province, where there is a glut of beetle killed timber that is more than the mills can handle and the coast, where mills are shutting down and the industry is suffering. While the companies claim they need new investment dollars to build high tech mills that can process smaller dimension timber, the real problem is that decades of overcutting have depleted the supply and the costs are too high to access what timber is left. It has been an empty shell game on the coast, with MacBlo cashing out first, settling up with all their shareholders. Weyerhaeuser cashed in next — buying up the shards and making off with millions in government compensation. Then the companies benefited from their private land being removed from the TFLs, so the final logging of the second and third growth could take place without any provincial oversight and with the logs exported whole. Now that these former railway grant parcels of land (one third of Vancouver Island) are stripped of trees, the former forests are ready for malls and condos! Meanwhile the cut is down in the public forests because the remaining difficult-to-access timber is of inferior quality and Japan no longer wants to buy hemlock that twists when it dries.
Climate Change Impacts
The forestry scene is further complicated by the impacts of climate change. BC’s forests are rapidly succumbing to voracious, climate-change induced western pine beetle populations that show no signs of slowing down now that they have made it past the Rocky Mountains. The latest projection for the beetle epidemic shows 80 percent of the province’s lodgepole pine forests to be dead or dying within ten years. And other insect pests are also gobbling other species, including spruce and ponderosa pine. Then there are the fires and the impacts from drought. Chief Forester Jim Snetsinger, in conjunction with a team of government experts, has developed an adaptation plan that focuses on maintaining ecological resilience through the Future Forest Ecosystems (FFE) Initiative. Learn more about this initiative that focuses on more studies, better monitoring and a re-evaluation of silviculture policies from www.for.gov.bc.ca/hts/Future%5FForests .
Comprehensive Analysis Needed
Forest companies do not deserve the lack of critical analysis that they are currently enjoying. What is needed is a thorough study of all the subsidies they have and continue to receive, as well as the policies that now provide them with nearly carte blanche freedom to operate in the forests. The study should also consider the impacts that forestry continues to have on the environment, including loss of species and damage to watersheds. And the government employees’ union should carry on with its proposed survey to gauge how current policies are working. The Forest Practices Board has been very critical of the inadequate Forest Stewardship Plans, which are devoid of any detail. But the public needs to hear more about the kind of problems that foresters like those mentioned above are experiencing.
***
Jim Cooperman was editor of the BC Environmental Report and the BCEN Forest Caucus coordinator from 1990 to 2000. He lives above Shuswap Lake, is president of the Shuswap Environmental Action Society, www.seas.ca and continues to write and study about B.C. forestry issues. Contact him at jkcooperman@yahoo.ca.
[From WS September/October 2006]