Category Archives: Opinion / EdiTOADial

Denise Mullen

David Elstone

The longstanding softwood lumber dispute, wherein the US persistently alleges BC subsidizes its lumber industry already has the Americans imposing a 14.4% duty on BC lumber, so an additional 25 per cent tariff could prove catastrophic, triggering layoffs, mill closures and economic turmoil in forestry-dependent communities. … Given the escalating risk of a full-scale trade war, BC must adopt innovative and assertive countermeasures to safeguard its forest sector. These measures are emergency response actions to address the regulatory and tax regime in BC and, while temporary, some could have long-term benefits after the tariffs are gone. …Given the potential for widespread sawmill closures, BC must actively seek alternative markets, particularly in Asia. Furthermore, in such extreme times as the province faces, consideration of less politically popular exporting opportunities may need to be explored.

These include temporarily eliminating fee-in-lieu charges on unmanufactured log exports… Eliminating the provincial sales tax where applicable on forestry-related transportation. …Repeal of the carbon tax and other fuel consumption-related taxes. …BC could look to pause, for now, the introduction and implementation of new environmental and forestry policies. …It is imperative to emphasize that… none of these proposals require direct financial handouts from the provincial government. Instead, the focus should be on targeted regulatory relief and cost reductions, ensuring business continuity and workforce stability. BC now faces a critical juncture — either accept mass unemployment and economic stagnation, or implement bold, temporary measures to keep the proverbial lights on for its forest sector. A decisive and calculated response is not just desirable, it is essential for the long-term sustainability of BC’s economy and the forest sector, in particular.

As most may have heard by now, Premier Eby has announced an agreement in principle between the BC NDP and Greens. …Of key significance to the forest sector, the agreement commits “to undertake a review of BC forests with First Nations, workers, unions, business and community to address concerns about sustainability, jobs, environmental protection and the future of the industry.” Such broad encompassing reviews typically take several months, if not over a year to complete and even longer before acting on recommendations. To propose such a review now is a prime example of just how forestry in British Columbia has truly become all about politics and not common sense. The two parties in their wisdom, have agreed to a review while the BC forest industry is literally in its death throes.

People, please we are in a CODE RED situation when it comes to solutions and immediate action for the survival of BC forestry. Trump’s proposed 25% tariff on Canadian goods and the US softwood lumber duties of 14.4%, which are expected to double mid-next year will bring the BC forest sector to a stop. …One of the most painful aspects of this proposed review is that it implies more uncertainty as the outcome(s) of a review are awaited. If there is one thing the BC forest sector most definitely does not need is more uncertainty, in fact, it is the absolute worst idea at this moment in time. …Putting aside my grumblings about this pending review, and in support of Minister Parmar’s “getting to work” attitude, the following ideas are suggested for the Minister to explore as solutions in anticipation of tough times ahead in 2025. …I agree with Minister Parmar on getting to work because it is immediate action that is needed now.

Linda Coady

VANCOUVER – Linda Coady, President & Chief Executive Officer of the BC Council of Forest Industries (COFI), issued the following statement in response to a commitment to undertake a “review of BC forests” that is part of the cooperation agreement announced by the BC NDP and the BC Green Party. “Another review of forest policy in BC should not be a priority right now”. “Premier Eby has already publicly acknowledged that rising US duties and tariffs on forest products would have a ‘devastating’ impact on thousands of jobs in resource communities across the province. In light of this very real threat, now is the time for urgent action on the commitments the government has already made to maintaining a competitive and sustainable forest products manufacturing sector in BC. In recent years, several major reviews, reports, and new initiatives have already focused on forestry in BC.

Last week, the new BC Forests Minister Ravi Parmar said that “now is the time to be bold…you are not going to see a bunch of frameworks and vision statements and grandiose plans. I think we’ve done all of that work and am very thankful to my colleagues for getting us to this place. For me, it’s now (about) focusing on those clear objectives on what we need to accomplish to have a robust, sustainable industry for the next decades.” Before yet another review is launched, Minister Parmar should be given time to put forward his plan for the completion and implementation of existing initiatives before any more new ones are introduced. …Forestry is at the forefront of advancing Indigenous reconciliation through real, on-the-ground practices and partnerships. Implementation of new land use planning processes and initiatives on conservation financing have been at least two years in the making, and are still not happening at scale. 

The list of British Columbia forest product companies in financial trouble grows. San Industries and associated companies have sought financial restructuring under CCAA, according to a court filing on November 29, 2024. …San Industries Ltd. et al, otherwise known as the San Group, have a reputation for pushing the envelope on the value-added manufacturing file, attempting to change the conventional approach to forest products manufacturing in coastal BC. …The San Group has no forest tenure of its own and relies on BCTS timber sales and commercial agreements to source its logs.

Regardless of the management decisions of this company and others that have contributed to their financial troubles, the trend is nonetheless alarming. When combined with the knowledge that companies like Interfor have made the strategic decision to exit the BC coastal forest sector, while Canfor and others are closing sawmills in the interior – there is an undeniable reality that what is occurring is unique to British Columbia – there is a common thread underlying all of this.

Is it best to let sawmills and other manufacturing plants fall to the wayside, and let our forests go unharvested? Should British Columbians including those in rural communities continue to tolerate deteriorating investment conditions for BC’s forest products manufacturing sector, or for that matter, the natural resources sector, in general? Absolutely no! The trick is to find the balanced solutions needed to generate prosperity while achieving other values. Unfortunately, efforts by the provincial government of the last few years have failed as this dismal trend continues. Immediate and meaningful action is needed. More troubles are coming.

Linda Coady

Much of the commentary since B.C.’s split election result has focused on how divides between political parties in the next B.C. legislature could result in nothing getting done. When it comes to addressing the urgent challenges now facing the province’s forest sector, doing nothing would be a prescription for disaster. There is a pressing need to move beyond differences and focus on building on the things that most British Columbians already agree are critical to a successful reboot of this vital sector. …The B.C. forest sector is no stranger to political debates and conflict. But history shows that starting from points of agreement is the most proven path to lasting solutions. So, what are those points of common ground right now? Here are three: Indigenous stewardship and reconciliation, innovative practices for forest management and conservation, and predictable access to fibre supply. 

The best news is that movement in any or all these areas does not require radical change. Many of the meetings, consultations, reviews, checklists and frameworks required to initiate action have already been completed. The challenge that remains is to actually make things happen on the ground. …Each major party in the recent B.C. election put forward a detailed plan on forestry. And each forestry platform made tangible commitments to support manufacturing, community well-being and biodiversity. While there are some ideological divides in the approaches, there is also a lot of common ground. Moving quickly and applying every tool in the implementation toolkit—targets, metrics, funding and new partnerships—the incoming government in B.C. has an unprecedented opportunity to secure a future for working families, communities and businesses—and for the forests themselves.

BC’s forest industry stands at an important juncture and crossroads of its future prosperity and the high standard of living it imparts to individuals, communities, and society. Much has been written, documented and analyzed about its massive contribution to the gross domestic product, taxes and revenues to all levels of government, the 100,000 jobs dependent on its success, and the absolute reliance for so many of BC’s resource communities. In fact, BC’s forest sector is one of a few “profitable” job segments that drive our economy and government services through above average wages and consequential higher tax revenues. …Today we find a forest sector under significant (or severe) stress with uncertainty being the predominant constant from initiatives at the federal and provincial levels. This uncertainty arises from the flood of programs, policies, and initiatives each arising without any apparent consistency, coordination, or weighing of economic impacts among them.

As British Columbians, we must recognize the importance of a viable resource industry in our province and must demand clear and consistent objectives when new land use, environmental, and Indigenous reconciliation policies are undertaken. …As all these considerations are being examined, there needs to be a concurrent process that dramatically reduces the regulatory complexity and delays we currently face in running our businesses. The permitting processes must be straightforward, timely, predictable and fair. Obviously, we are biased towards the success of BC’s forest sector given we have a vested interest in its prosperity and hopefully a continued standard of living in BC. I encourage you to ask the right questions and be informed on voting day. Look for the answers from all candidates that will lead to the success of our forest sector and towards the general prosperity of our communities and province.

BRITISH COLUMBIA — It’s not just the water, trees, and mountains that make B.C. special—it’s our ability to experience and benefit from them. The minerals in the ground don’t just create well paying and sustainable jobs—they helped build this province, starting with the gold rush. B.C. stands at a crucial crossroads. The federal and provincial governments have introduced a myriad of complex and overlapping policies affecting the natural resource sector, including the B.C. Old Growth Strategy, Biodiversity and Ecosystem Health Framework, Clean BC, Marine Protected Areas, the Watershed Security Strategy, Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples Act, the plan to “conserve 30 per cent of Canada’s land and water by 2030”, modernizing land-use plans and forest landscape planning. Taken together, these initiatives are cumbersome and create significant challenges to investment and job creation in British Columbia.

…To be clear, the need for Indigenous reconciliation and environmental stewardship are widely accepted and necessary. However, British Columbia now has a growing, overlapping patchwork of heavy-handed and top-down policies. …The potential consequences are severe: Lost jobs, reduced economic activity, decimated small towns and less tax revenue to fund vital infrastructure and social programs. And the effects won’t be confined to rural areas—urban centres like Metro Vancouver and Victoria will also feel the impacts, with fewer jobs, strained services, higher costs and a greater reliance on imports. …The issues surrounding this tangled web of policy initiatives may be out of sight for most British Columbians, but their repercussions will be felt soon enough if we don’t address them. B.C. can renew our economic prosperity in a socially responsible manner, but it requires careful planning and foresight.

Those who work in the woods know all too well that wildfires are undiscerning in what they burn: working forest, parks, old growth forests, wildlife habitat—if there is fuel, it will burn. No matter what your view on how our forests should be managed, it is hard to avoid the reality that wildfire is a threat to our businesses, our livelihoods, as well as to our health and well-being. …To gain a better sense of community perspectives regarding wildfire resiliency, the BC Council of Forest Industries worked with Abacus Data to survey 1,500 British Columbians last spring. The survey found the public perceives wildfires as a problem that is getting worse. Polling showed that 75% of the public follows the news about wildfires closely; in other words, it is a top-of-mind subject; 35% reported that wildfires have already had a large impact on their lives with 74% having experienced smoke from wildfires. 

Fortunately, for a province covered in forests, we are not without options. A recent study from the USDA Forest Service reviewed scientific literature from over 40 studies and concluded “proactive ecological forest management can change how fires behave and reduce wildfire severity, under a wide range of conditions and forest types… in reducing surface and ladder fuels and tree density through thinning, coupled with prescribed burning or pile burning could reduce future wildfire severity by more than 60%, relative to untreated areas.” The good news is that public opinion is aligned with the science. The polling showed almost everyone thinks forest fire severity can be reduced, that proper forest management is a good idea and that there is an acceptable solution available. …So let’s get busy and make the necessary investments and collaborations to turn that public support for forest management solutions for forest fuel reduction into reality!

Every few years, we witness new vocabulary emerge into the BC forest sector’s world.  The most recent term to emerge is resilience. …The question is, will it become another passing buzzword, lead towards true, positive changes to advance our sector, or will it be a cloak for protectionism? BC’s forest sector has long been a cornerstone of the province’s economy and culture deeply intertwined with the natural environment, providing livelihoods for thousands and sustaining communities. However, the sector is currently facing unprecedented challenges that require innovative and resilient approaches. In this context, building multi-dimensional resilience means considering comprehensive environmental, economic, and social factors to ensure the forest sector can adapt and thrive in the face of these stresses.

…There are many things resilience cannot mean. It should not be a surrogate for even more protectionism or unreasonable constraints. The discussions leading to implementation of any forest management plans need to be objective and not subjectively guided. The prescriptions on a stand level must be achievable and financially viable. The moves toward their utilization cannot be abrupt or ignore the practical need for a real transition strategy. Uncertainty on interpreting the impacts of new policies cannot continue ad infinitum because tangible investment decisions will simply not happen. In the opinion of many, which we share, our forests need more management, not less to become more resilient on all fronts. By adopting a strategy addressing all necessary elements, BC can ensure that its forest sector remains a vital, prosperous, and sustainable part of its economy and heritage. The challenges are significant, but if environmental, economic and social resilience is properly considered, the BC forest sector can adopt a pathway to thrive amidst the complexities of the 21 century.

Linda Coady

Mill closures and curtailments in B.C. last year led to the loss of 5,000 direct jobs in the forest industry, and another 5,000 indirect jobs in supply chains and services that support the industry. Current conditions in the sector are not only negatively impacting jobs and operations, but also exports, government revenue, and investment in the province. Reasons for the historic level of disruption have been well-documented. Insects, fire, markets, and policy shifts figure among them. …But getting the sector back on track to deliver the benefits that communities across B.C. rely upon requires more than understanding what the problem is — it requires a willingness to do something about it. …Here are five [solutions] that would help create more predictable timber supply in B.C. while meeting other important goals for forest health and environmental protection, and First Nations reconciliation.

• Fix current permit development processes to ensure that an environmentally sustainable and economically viable harvest can be consistently achieved. 
• Secure agreements with First Nations that advance progress on critical issues. Embrace new approaches to consultation, forest tenure, revenue sharing, and First Nations land use planning.
• Expedite new regional tables for Forest Landscape Planning. 
• Establish new targets and financing strategies to expand the role that research and forest management can play in wildfire resilience, community and biodiversity protection, and fibre utilization.
• Develop a long-term roadmap or economic strategy for the B.C. forest sector. …The vision needs to drive stronger performance on carbon management, sustainability, and Indigenous-led forest management and conservation.

Consensus is growing on what can be done to reboot one of B.C.’s most important industries. The time to act on that consensus is now.

Alice Palmer

What industry provides 18% of BC’s economic base, $12-14 billion to its economy, and $4 billion in government revenues? Forestry, of course. Therefore, one might think British Columbians would want to safeguard it. Yet, over the past five years, BC’s forest industry—one of our province’s biggest economic drivers—has been under increasing pressure. …Some of the harvest declines have been due to natural factors. …The driving force behind the remaining harvest reductions? Forest policy. BC intends to increase its protection of old-growth forests and their associated biodiversity values and has committed to protecting or conserving 30 per cent of its land base by 2030. This represents a near-doubling of the current amount under protection (17%). But this is just the start.

…With its ecosystem-based approach to forest management, the draft BC Biodiversity and Ecosystem Health Framework philosophy appears to be that humankind should minimize its commercial use of forests. Forest-based activities should instead emphasize restoration activities. An alternative interpretation of “taking care of the land” could be “carrying out different management activities in different places.” For example, under the three-zone system recommended by the Old Growth Strategic Review (OGSR), the converted zone could include intensive silviculture. By zoning some of the land for industrial production and taking care of it for that specific purpose, British Columbians could continue to enjoy the economic benefits of logging, even while setting aside more land for conservation. Conservation of key ecosystem elements can also be achieved (and may be enhanced) while carrying out forest management activities on the land. …The OGSR’s recommended consistent zone—land managed to simulate the patterns of natural disturbance—could even count as part of the conserved and protected lands included in BC’s 30 per cent.

David Elstone

By now most have heard that the proposed amendment to the Land Act was cancelled, at least until after the October provincial
election. …”For me, the proposed amendment to the Land Act itself was not the problem, rather it was what it represented – yet another proposed policy change without the operational details to understand what it meant. The constant flow of changing policy to meet aspirational intentions has been crushing the BC forest sector. …Unfortunately, the opposition rallied against this amendment by stoking fear the Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples Act would give a veto to First Nations on 95% of the province, despite the move towards shared decision-making not intended to be a blanket change. …Did anyone pause to think what the alternative to DRIPA could be? I would surmise it would likely mean even greater uncertainty for the forest industry!

With the amendment cancelled for now, it’s time to start figuring out answers to some of the tough questions on DRIPA, such as what happens when an impasse occurs? That’s the challenge with shared decision- making – one cannot really call it “shared” when one side always gets its way. Ironically, if the BC government can override opposition, which is actually a veto – something that First Nations have existed under for the last 150 years. …Obviously, there is much work to be done based on the recent polling that found seven-in-ten feel that the then pubic consultation was moving too quickly and that 94% of British Columbians see the proposed amendment as “a major transformation of the rules governing public land use…” The sooner we can collectively figure out operational level shared decision-making, in terms that the public can grasp, the sooner some of the current challenges facing the forest industry will likely find some relief.”

David Elstone

Will 2024 be another year of turmoil? It’s a provincial election year, which is typically when advocacy magic happens, but in the case of BC, will the politicians be listening more to the woes of the forest sector or that of the ENGOs? Here’s my quick prognostication on what to expect:

1. Softwood lumber trade agreement? – Given the distraction of the US election, do not hold your breath waiting.
2. Direction of North American markets in 2024? Market direction largely will depend on what the US Federal Reserve does with the federal funds rate. China does not look to be a major market mover. All in, we are likely to experience a sideways to modestly positive market.
3. BC forest policy will remain the slow-moving train wreck that it is. …If you thought the implementation of old growth deferrals has been disruptive, you had better buckle up given the Province’s Biodiversity and Ecosystem Health Framework (although implementation could come after the election).
4. BC’s Crown (public lands) timber harvest will continue to decline in 2024, although maybe not by as much as in 2023.
5. The BC forest sector will continue to shrink – Challenging economic availability of log supply (including lack of permits) will cause sawmills and other forest products manufacturers to curtail or outright close. Interior collective agreements expired in 2023 without much progress.
6. Will a new cross-laminated timber (CLT) type, value-added wood products mass timber plant be proposed? Probably not, but if there is, it will likely be in partnership with a First Nations.

David Eby

Forests are at the heart of our identity as British Columbians. All of us in the province depend on the forests to provide the materials to build homes and businesses. …Forests sustain people by providing good jobs for tens of thousands of us in the woods, in the mills, and on the roads as truck loggers. Others create products from forestry that we use every day. Those are jobs that sustain many families and sustain wood products that are part of how we will reduce carbon pollution and fight climate change. But there are real challenges. We know forestry operations are having trouble getting access to fibre. The allowable annual cut has significantly decreased in many regions owing to devastating wildfires and the end of the beetle-kill harvest. The unfair and unfounded imposition of a softwood lumber duty by the United States, as well as unfavourable market conditions, have also contributed to challenging times.

We need to build on our longstanding strengths if we’re to overcome these challenges. Forestry is a foundation of the BC economy. We will continue to make investments to ensure it remains a strong and sustainable industry. …We are helping to diversify local economies to make them more resilient through the transition from high-volume to high-value production. We introduced a $180-million BC Jobs Manufacturing Fund to do just that. …In September, I spoke at a Global Buyers Mission conference, the first premier of the province to do so. Among the attendees in Whistler were buyers from all over the world. The reason for the interest is clear—BC has world-class forests, a world-class forest sector, and produces world-class forest products. Our province has deep roots and a proud history in forestry. All British Columbians have benefitted from the bounty of this natural resource, and we intend to do all we can to ensure these benefits are long-lasting.

Bob Brash

Suffice it to say there is an abundance of headlines about the environmental climate challenges facing us. …However, there remains a chore in convincing policy decision- makers… to deal with the current climate of uncertainty, instability, and lack of investment facing our sector. Today’s forestry world in BC is encountering many storm clouds in terms of the volume of policy and legislative changes impacting our sector in such a short period of time. Adding to the concern are the many unknowns about how such changes will actually be implemented across the landscape and how decision-makers will interpret them. …When viewed cumulatively, the effects upon our forest sector and businesses are decidedly negative contrary to the many announcements spun to a different narrative than those working in the woods are dealing with daily. 

Our sector has evolved over time to be one that is highly efficient at ensuring the harvested logs are fully utilized in all the various manufacturing facilities. It is a complex and integrated system requiring all components to be working properly. …Today’s work environment is not functioning as such. Across all components, uncertainty and instability dominate both the discussions and reality. Business decision-makers are typically drifting towards not making or deferring those needed investments to improve their business to the detriment of all in the sector. …Solutions abound to manage our forests for various objectives, mitigate the risks from wildfires, tackle climate change, provide the most sustainable product in the world, and meet the general expectations of both society and government. A good starting point would be government’s recognition of the immediate need for a collaborative and endorsed road map and vision for where BC’s forest sector is headed, including definitive targets for the overall annual harvest and land base in which we can be assured of operating upon.

Joe Nemeth

When the wildfire season mercifully ended in November, 2,217 wildfires had been counted, 2.8 million hectares of land had been burned, including forested and non-forested land. …The premier has appointed a task force to study this year’s fire season and develop ideas about what can be done. The pulp and paper sector applauds the premier for making wildfire risk reduction and salvage a priority, but challenges the need for another task force to add recommendations to those of previous studies and analyses. We know what to do and we need to act now. The top four steps we can take include: Streamlining the cutting permit approval process for fire-damaged trees; Creating fire breaks with roads and small openings; Removing fuel sources around small communities through brushing and thinning; and Making better use of First Nations historical practices such as cultural burning.

What happens to the millions of fire-damaged trees left in the wake of these big fires? …There is a ready use for that burned fibre in the province’s pulp and paper mills and sawmills. In fact, the pulp and paper sector is keen to be part of the solution by taking up to five million cubic metres of burnt wood every year. …But the industry has a problem. We are currently operating at about 80 per cent capacity, mainly due to a fibre shortfall of about two million cubic metres annually — a tiny percentage of all that fire-damaged wood left across B.C. It shouldn’t be that hard to access that fibre and get it into these mills so that jobs and communities and international markets can be sustained. …We just need a little will from government to speed up permitting decisions, direct funding to allow the use of wood waste and fire damaged stands to continue and grow, and to introduce a program to support thinning around communities to safeguard them from fire risk.

Wildfires have laid siege to British Columbia in 2023. Residents outside the province’s Lower Mainland region have endured a prolonged and surreal environment of fear and uncertainty, filled with toxic smoke and flurries of evacuation alerts and orders. …Land lost to wildfires in 2017, 2018 and 2021 set records—but the terrible trio’s toll was eclipsed by July in 2023, the beginning of what is traditionally the start of the worst two forest fire months of the season. …The warming climate’s interconnected impacts on the forest industry are the focus of a new report by the B.C. Forest Practices Board. The report says there’s an urgent need for a different and coordinated approach to forest fire management on B.C.’s Crown land. It points out fire can be a friend and not always the wildfire foe. Fire, when used judiciously, can help sustain a productive and healthy B.C. forest landscape as it did historically.

The report noted the policies that were applied in B.C. during the 20th century resulted in densely forested areas and an increase in the amounts and distribution of forest fuels. …“There is an urgent need to shift forest and fire management, policies, objectives and policies toward co-existing with fire on the landscape,” says the report. “Restoring landscape resilience is required and the first step toward that is to introduce landscape fire management into the land management framework in B.C.” The report continues: “Bold and immediate action is required by the provincial government to align policies and programs across all levels of government with a vision of landscape resilience and human co-existence with fire.” …The document’s recommendations are pertinent and timely. Suggestions for working practically with nature can help restore a badly damaged landscape diversity in B.C. That in turn will indicate paths forward for the forest industry to continue its renewal and vigour.

David Elstone

There has been plenty written on this year’s horrendous wildfire season. It’s justified, since it has been the worst year for hectares burnt, record value of insurance claims for destroyed property, and most sadly, the lives lost by those working to fight wildfire. Merchantable timber and non-timber natural values were burnt including old growth forests, wildlife habitat and parks – the fires were non-discerning to what we value. …The evidence is abundant that the status quo on wildfire management is no longer a viable path. In many respects, we may be quickly arriving at a pivot point on forest management driven by wildfire. The BC government recently announced a task force on emergency management during wildfire, but the task force will not address what is desperately needed. … BC has a long history of fire suppression [and] much of what we need to know has all been documented by successive reviewers, and yet not much has been done.

To substantially enhance the resilience of our forested landscapes to fire, it will require substantive change by government and by industry on how to manage our forests, and just as equally, it will require changes to our traditional notions of conservation. …This suggests areas we have protected from commercial timber harvesting will still need forest management if we want such areas to endure. …The provincial government hopefully will have the funding, but the industry is key to implementation. Unfortunately, industry capacity is shrinking and will continue to do so if something is not done to address this trend. …To some it may be counter-intuitive to believe that to promote and protect both conservation and economic values of our forested landscapes, intervention through more harvesting activities (thinning etc.), not less, will be the solution. The alternative is the status quo, no change nor action; we are already bearing witness as to how that’s working out.

David Elstone

To say that the BC forest industry has seen change over the past 20 years would be an understatement. There have been several editorials and analyses done quantifying how many mills have or will close; how many trees have been killed; and how many jobs have been lost. Interestingly, few have looked where the BC forest industry might end up as timber supply continues to decline. …In 2005, the forest industry was running on all cylinders with a Crown AAC of just under 86 million m3. …In the BC Interior, there were 14 veneer plants and 82 sawmills with a combined lumber production capacity of over 16 bbf operating, …On the coast, there were 3 veneer plants and 29 sawmills with a combined lumber production capacity of over 3 bbf operated. On the residual fibre/biomass side, the province had 16 pulp mills, 8 paper plants and the beginnings of pellet and biomass power businesses. The industry was flourishing with direct employment of close to 70,000 people.

When we look out to 2035, a full 30 years after the industry peak, the picture is sobering. Using a forecast for a province-wide Crown AAC of 38 million m3, only 33 or 40% of sawmills operating in the BC Interior in 2005 will remain and lumber production capacity will fall to a mere 38% of that peak. On the coast, 14 sawmills are expected to continue operating, with 56% of the capacity of 2005. On the pulp and paper side, more closures are forecast… with pulp capacity forecast to settle at 54% of that in 2005 with paper capacity at a mere 11%. For other forest products manufacturers there may be 10 veneer production facilities, 14 shake and shingle mills and potentially just a few specialty operations remaining. …Despite the ever-present prognostications of doom and gloom there are those still willing to invest in this province. Most recently, Canfor’s new state-of-the-art 350 million board feet sawmill in Houston. …The BC government wants more investment to transition the industry, and specifically to add more mass timber manufacturing. Unless a plan can be developed to cut short the current trends, a much smaller industry is forecast by 2035. 

David Elstone

Job losses and reductions in work have been confirmed as real consequences of BC’s initiatives on old growth forest policy. Spar Tree Group’s May 2023 BC forest sector survey found three quarters of timber harvesting and road building contractors were experiencing some amount of work reduction due to old growth deferrals. Furthermore, the survey results indicated at least 1,000 jobs may have been displaced because of the deferrals in timber harvesting alone (not including forest product manufacturers nor the other segments of the forest sector’s supply chain). …After a mild rebound from the start of the Covid-19 pandemic in 2020, the provincial Crown timber harvest has since decreased by 16 million cubic metres or over -30%. For 2023, timber harvesting is down -23% year-to-date to August. …Staying on this path will mean more closures. …To be fair, other factors such as the now-past mountain pine beetle epidemic and ongoing wildfires have definitely contributed to these decreases.

Anti-forestry advocates are calling for more and faster action on old growth forests. Giving into to such pressure is what got us into this trouble in the first place. It is incumbent on local governments and all members of the provincial government to ask what are the potential impacts of the next steps? Perhaps some analysis should actually be done on the outstanding fourteen recommendations of the A New Future For Older Forest report. …Yes – we should improve our efforts in managing for old growth, but it is a complete myth to believe we are harvesting the last of our old growth when at least 75% of the existing old growth forests in this province are not threatened by harvesting. We need to be open to new ways of managing forests in BC that are dynamic and active to promote forest resilience instead of creating static area set asides to achieve a target which meets some environmental or political agenda.