Debunking the seven great myths of industrial clearcut forestry
Myth 1: In these difficult economic times, the big forestry corporations barely break even. Their cost cutting measures are justified even if they mean increased job loss for wood workers. If we don't do what the big companies want, they will fold their operations here and take their business and jobs elsewhere.
Reality: The major forest companies are doing very well. MacMilllan Bloedel, for instance, netted profits of $1.03 billion over the last 10 years. In 1993 this company became involved in joint ventures worth $1.5 billion - all in US. If big companies did vacate BC, small business forest enterprises-which are currently limited by wood availability-could fill the gap. Right now, demand outstrips wood supply to small operators by four to one! These smaller companies, in proportion to the big companies, currently pay more stumpage, employ more people and add more value to BC wood products.
Myth 2: Our labour costs are too high for us to compete in value-added markets. Therefore, we must continue to produce in bulk raw commodities like pulp, cants and dimensional construction lumber and leave the finer manufacturing to others.
Reality: The key consideration in value added markets is a reliable supply of high quality raw material. We still have it. Foreign customers will pay premium prices for high quality wood products if we produce them in BC and do not allow the export of minimally manufactured wood products for remanufacture elsewhere.
Myth 3: It would cost too much to switch the industry over to high value added production.
Reality: A recent government report estimates that by switching to specialty products, BC manufacturers could capture $1.2 billion in added revenue with a negligible investment. With a $600 million dollar investment, a fraction of the money that is lost due to low stumpage payments from the big companies, $1.7 billion in added revenue could be generated. This would generate direct added employment of nearly 4,000 jobs.
Myth 4: There is nothing unusual about clearcutting. It mimics natural forest fires. Now that three trees are replanted on average for every one cut down, within a few years the ugly clearcuts "green up" and in fifty years no one can tell the difference.
Reality: Wild-grown, self-regenerating ancient temperate rainforests are exceedingly complex. They include snags (dead standing trees where many birds and animals live), thick mosses, lichens and insects high up in the canopy and a diversity of tree ages, including ancient veterans over a thousand years old. All are vital to the long term health of the forest. They make the forest self-sustaining. Forest fires were exceedingly rare in the coastal rainforest. When they occurred they consumed only a small area, leaving many trees alive and lots of standing snags. Clearcuts do not mimic fires. Human planted forests of trees with similar genetic material, allowed to grow only 80 years before they are clearcut again, reduce biodiversity and in the long run are unsustainable.
Myth 5: It is impossible to selectively log coastal old growth forests safely. Even if clearcutting causes some environmental damage, we have no choice because of worker safety.
Reality: There are examples of economically successful, safe oldgrowth selection logging. But the industrial mode of forestry is so dominant that most loggers today only know of one way to log-clearcut. Even 20 years ago, however, selection logging was far more common- it was done as high-grading, taking the best and not bothering to cut the rest down. As our market demands clearcutfree wood we will have to respond. It is best to set a date to end clearcut logging in the coastal forest and work cooperatively to develop safe ways to do it.
Myth 6: Lots of small reserves will work better than large wilderness areas in protecting biodiversity.
Reality: It is absolutely necessary to have very large natural areas to protect over time the complete range of species in a complex natural ecosystem, especially given variations in climate and the random occurrence of natural disasters which might wipe out a small reserve. Scientists believe that whole interconnected ecological units like watersheds make the best reserves. Therefore it is absolutely necessary to save the last 9 pristine watersheds (out of 170 primary and secondary watersheds over 5,000 hectares in size)now left on Vancouver Island. The CORE proposal areas, along with the 1993 Clayoquot decision, only protects 3 of them. Left out are the Sydney, Ursus, CLayoquot, Klaskish, Power and East.
Myth 7: We used to build roads and log in ways that caused damage to salmon streams and unleashed mass erosion. But we don't anymore. Now we build roads better, never clearcut more than 40 hectares and ensure that trees grow back.
Reality: This is a big lie. Despite claims to the contrary, on-the-ground improvements in logging are not yet visible. This is because clearcut logging, no matter how well done, is inherently destructive in the coastal temperate rainforest zone.
