|
Forest Policy Changes Essential
• Back to News
Prince George Citizen
January 5, 2006
FOREST POLICY CHANGES ESSENTIAL – Bruce Strachan
Two recent forest-industry studies are ringing a loud wake-up call for B.C. forest policy change.
First, the B.C. Progress Board has called the pine beetle epidemic a major economic challenge. The report goes on to say government must maximize the economic benefits of increased logging allowances in the short term while planning for the predicted economic downturn in the medium term.
In light of the “predicted economic downturn” the Progress Board says new markets for blue-stained pine, wood pellets and liquid fuels should be encouraged. The board also noted the government has tendered cutting rights that exclude increasing lumber production.
Second, a study by WOOD Markets Research said B.C. Interior sawmills trail their counterparts on the U.S. west coast and Australia in terms of profitability. The report also noted a competitive management advantage of European sawmills saying: “The European process is also more flexible and can produce commodity or specialty orders of lumber in almost any size or length.”
To sum up, our Interior B.C. lumber industry is running out of trees and competitive ground.
Wow, Happy New Year. But, to quote U.S. President Harry S. Truman: “When given lemons, make lemonade.”
The answer, in part provided by the Progress Board, is one of timing. Maximize short-term utilization is one board suggestion and that policy is in place now. Annual allowable cuts have increased for area sawmills and the Canfor megamill at Houston shows how quickly the corporate sector can react to a profit opportunity. Nothing wrong with that, by the way. Profit is a good word, and as Houston goes, so goes Prince George.
nbsp;
It’s the mid-term and long-term which pose the more serious economic questions – and for our local economy – the necessity for long-term answers.
For example, the Progress Board encouragement of new markets for blue-stained pine, wood pellets and liquid fuels seems counterproductive. Sure, there’s the potential for a current market in these products, but who will make a heavy investment in a production facility that will soon run out of its resource supply?
Let’s instead look at a couple of local producers who are already in what the Progress Board would call the “new markets.”
First, to Winton Global which supplies prefabricated homes to developers in England. Now there’s a story. Winton Global produces high-quality component homes and cottages, puts the product in a shipping container, sends it one-third of the way around the world, makes a profit and does this right in the backyard of those aforementioned European lumber producers who are supposedly more competitive.
How does Winton Global do this? According to Maureen Low at Winton Global, the company has a high-quality product that’s easy to ship: Winton Global also has an energetic marketing program.
But, there’s one more component: a shortage of skilled trades people in England. Sound familiar? You bet it does. Skilled trades are in short supply everywhere, and obviously English housing developers can’t find carpenters. Enter Winton Global with an easy-to-assemble, no-skilled-trade-required package and the sale is made.
Second, to Brink Forest Products. Briefly, Brink takes short ends of reject lumber, joins the pieces in a process called finger-jointing and sells the finished project as a superior board. The Brink lumber has no warp, no wane, and it’s straight because it’s engineered to be straight. According to John Brink, his mill sells all the lumber he can produce. In short, Brink makes a superior product out of waste.
What’s the connection between Brink and Winton Global? They’re both taking advantage of changing conditions, they’re both contributing to our local economy, and most importantly, they are maximizing the resource, a resource we all know is in diminishing supply.
No doubt there are many more innovative lumber-industry stories out there, it’s just that Winton Global and Brink are local and well known.
But the experience and successes of Brink and Winton Global, accompanied by the WOOD and Progress Board reports, tell us the generally accepted current practice of giving forest licenses to high-capacity, low-value lumber producers, like the Houston megamill, must end.
Unless there is a compelling argument that current lumber producers cannot handle the expected volume of beetle-kill wood – and I doubt if that argument can be made – government must ensure all future forest licenses are for value-added producers only.
There may be a downturn in short-term revenue, but insisting on value-added licenses that maximize the return on our reduced resources is the only way to ensure sustainable forest revenues in the future.
We’ve already been given the lemons; it’s time to start making lemonade as well as a whole lot of smarter decisions about the future of our forest industry.
Bruce Strachan is a former B.C. cabinet minister and Prince George city councilor.
His column appears Thursdays
|
