Forest Tenure Problems: One Man's Opinion
By Ben Meisner
The announcement by the provincial government that it will initiate a practice of offering small salvage log contracts is welcome news to those people in the industry such as the Log Home builders, but it is window dressing to a problem that will need to be fixed.
We cannot allow large forest tenures such as those held by CANFOR to not be tied to direct harvesting. A forestry license should not be money in the bank for the company that holds that piece of paper but that is not the case.
Nothing prevents CANFOR from moving its major operations to Russia and other of shore countries while still retaining the forest tenure here. There are joint ventures being developed with China and Russia and that wood could conceivably be shipped back into Canada using money obtained from the sale of the forest tenure to establish those operations.
We call it the Crown resource, the timber that we are cutting, but the value of that resource is diminished if a single company owns the exclusive rights to harvest that timber.
It is an ongoing dilemma but never the less an issue that must be dealt with.
The Pine beetle is about to change the way that we harvest timber in many parts of this province. It will also mean that it will become more expensive to harvest that timber.
At that point does the license holder then sell for what they can now get and head for greener pastures? Or do they stay the course and try and weather the storm looking for a more productive future?
We all know that the money flows where it makes the biggest return, and loyalty to either a region or a country for that matter, is lost in the mix.
I’m Meisner and that is one man’s opinion.
Previous Story - Next Story
Return to Home
The province manages its forests for fibre production. I doubt that the scenario of letting timber stand much beyond a harvestable age will come about.
I also understand that such parts of the agreement were not comforting to some licensees who shifted operations from lands which had no pine, or very few pine on it, to other lands with major MPB infestation. Apparently the Ministry was very slow in addressing that rather obvious issue.
However, what we do know is that there will be a 50 year or so fall down in the AAC as a result of the MPB. As a result, if companies wish to stay active at the level which they have been, they will have to find timber somewhere else or go into another business, such as providing tertiary manufacturing processes, which they traditionally have not done.
Going international sounds like a sound financial plan to keep a large company with major investments in BC, a province which will soon have a shrinking timber supply, viable in this era of large companies.
Then again, we could encourage companies such as Canfor to play dead and allow American multinationals to buy up the bones and rationalize their operations by closing up mills, etc.
Whoever is in charge, one thing is for sure, they will not operate a business at a loss for long. I suspect that there is little the province can do about it. One cannot regulate a business to operate at a loss.
http://www.cortex.ca/TimberTenSysWeb_Nov2001.pdf