Alternative harvesting method provides foundation for Wyden O&C plan

Alternative harvesting method provides foundation for Wyden O&C plan: Guest opinion

Print

By Guest Columnist 
Follow on Twitter 
on November 30, 2013 at 9:00 AM, updated November 30, 2013 at 9:04 AM

By Jerry F. Franklin
and K. Norman Johnson

Variable retention harvesting is prescribed in Sen. Ron Wyden's proposed legislation for harvesting in younger highly-productive Douglas fir and Western hemlock forests (the "moist forests") on the O&C lands of western Oregon. Understanding the forestry technique is critical to understanding the senator's plan.

View full sizeIn variable retention forestry, portions of forest are retained throughout the harvest. area providing "lifeboats" for ecosystems. (Computer simulation by Laura Hardin, OSU)

Variable retention harvesting is modeled on patterns of natural disturbances, such as wildfire.  In contrast to clear-cutting, where essentially all of the trees are removed, significant amounts (about 1/3 in the proposed legislation) of the pre-harvest forest are retained throughout the harvest area (see top photo). The retention would typically include unlogged forest patches up to several acres in size well distributed through the harvest area – "aggregated retention" -- as well as individual or small clusters of live and dead trees and down logs, distributed over logged portions of the harvest area -- "dispersed retention." Some of the aggregated retention will be along streams within the harvest area.

One important objective of variable retention harvesting is to "lifeboat" many of the forest-related plant and animal species, sustaining them within the harvest area until the new forest becomes established. For example, forest-dwelling small mammals and amphibians can be sustained by retaining heavily rotted logs that provide critical habitat for them. 

Variable retention also provides for continuity in life-sustaining flows of energy into the soil from trees. In addition, the un-harvested forest patches or aggregates have special ecological value since they include undisturbed forest floors, a full range of tree sizes and mellow microclimates.

View full sizeThe openings created in variable retention forestry aid development of highly bio-diverse ecosystems. (Photo by Jerry Franklin)

Variable retention harvesting is being widely applied globally as a versatile and effective silvicultural approach, particularly where management goals require integration of ecological, economic, and cultural objectives. It is currently being used on five continents in countries as diverse as Sweden, Canada, Australia, Argentina and Chile. It also is being used on a diversity of forest ownerships including federal, state, and local public lands, trust lands, and private forest lands. Hundreds of peer-reviewed publications document the scientific underpinnings and the ecological benefits of variable retention harvesting.

Of course, a key question is what stands would receive variable retention harvesting in Sen. Wyden's proposed legislation. Harvesting would occur only in moist forest stands designated for sustained yield management. All of these would be stands currently less than 120 years of age and most would be stands that originated after previous harvests (usually clear-cutting) 60-90 years ago. No old-growth forests or trees would be harvested.

As proposed for the Bureau of Land Management lands, variable retention harvesting has the additional major ecological benefit of providing the significant openings needed for development of the highly bio-diverse "early successional ecosystems." These are the ecosystems that initially develop on forest sites after a harvest or other major disturbance, such as wildfire. They are biologically rich communities of herbs, shrubs and trees that, in turn, support an immense variety of animal life because of the abundant and diverse sources of food – herbage, nectar, fruits, nuts, seeds and prey. (See bottom photo.)

Many of the species found in these early successional ecosystems are habitat specialists that require early successional habitats. These include many songbirds and butterflies. Also, as hunters know, they are favored and critical habitat for deer and elk, because there is food for them to eat. Research at Mount St. Helens – the biodiversity hotspot of the Cascade Range -- has been critical in helping us to understand the ecological importance of early successional ecosystems.

While private forest lands might be expected to provide for biologically rich early successional ecosystems, they generally do not. Production forestry on industrial lands -- the source of most private harvest in Western Oregon -- seeks to maximize economic returns with intensive practices, such as intensive site preparation, dense tree planting, and control of shrubs and herbs with herbicides. Encouraging shrub-dominated communities and gradual re-establishment of tree cover is not consistent with such goals.

In summary, variable retention harvesting proposed in Sen. Wyden's legislation is fundamentally different from clear-cutting and associated practices. Variable retention is grounded in principles derived from natural forest ecosystems. As proposed it will provide for both continuity in forest biota and creation of openings needed for early successional species and processes.

Jerry Franklin is a professor in the School of Environmental and Forest Sciences at the University of Washington; K. Norman Johnson is  a professor in the Department of Forest Ecosystems and Society at Oregon State University. They each worked on development of the Northwest Forest Plan and on development of Sen. Ron Wyden's forest management plan unveiled this week.

Oregonians say Canadian logs are misclassified, undercutting U.S. mills and jobs

By Richard Read, The Oregonian 

Daniel Webster would instantly recognize the lumber trade dispute erupting once again between the United States and Canada. 

The legendary American statesman helped settle the Aroostook Lumber War, an 1842 skirmish in the same conflict. But the treaty he negotiated only briefly interrupted the strife that dates all the way back to 1789, when Congress passed a 5 percent tariff that included Canadian lumber. 

This time, the fisticuffs feature a cast of obstinate characters including hard-pressed Oregon mill owners, a renegade Canadian lumber baron and North America's most destructive bark beetle. 

The conflict entangles two nations that otherwise are the best of friends, with two-way trade exceeding $430 billion a year. 

U.S. industry leaders contend British Columbia misclassifies timber as salvage material so Canadian companies can bombard the United States with subsidized lumber, undercutting U.S. mills and jobs. 

Managers of southern Oregon's Swanson Group, for example, blame unfair Canadian competition, in large part, for continuing production cuts and the 2007 closure of their Glide mill that employed 100. 

Canadian government and industry leaders dispute the charges while bracing for the next U.S. legal salvo. Washington could haul Ottawa back to a London tribunal as soon as this week. 

Jeff Redd, associate editor at Eugene-based Random Lengths, which tracks the forest-products industry, says the housing crash has heightened tensions as companies fight for shares of a diminished $6 billion U.S. softwood lumber market. 

Randy L. Rassmussen/The OregonianA loader carries Douglas fir tree tops to the mill at Seneca Sawmill Co. in Eugene.

Redd expects the conflict to continue indefinitely, potentially raising prices. 

"It's very seldom there's been peace in this lumber war," Redd says. "I don't imagine either side's going to change its basic premise anytime soon." 

Northwest hard hit 
The dispute is crucial to the economies of Oregon, Washington and British Columbia, where forests contain vast stands of fir, pine and other softwoods.

The softwoods are milled into studs and beams for construction, in contrast to hardwood used for cabinetry and floors. Canada holds a 28 percent share of the U.S. softwood market. 

Timber was important in Daniel Webster's era, too, when Congress authorized 50,000 troops to mass on Maine's disputed border with New Brunswick. These days, lumber battles are mainly confined to courtrooms, but Congress remains involved. Rep. Peter DeFazio, D-Ore., and other Northwest delegation members want the Obama administration to fight what they consider illegal Canadian subsidies. 

Speaking for Canada, John Allan, president of the BC Lumber Trade Council, claims politics trumps common sense. "The U.S. lumber lobby is using U.S. senators, namely Max Baucus of Montana and Olympia Snowe of Maine, to press the administration to take us to the woodshed and beat the hell out of us," Allan says. 

Allan says his industry organization spent more than $100 million as litigation exploded between 2001 and 2006. "Once you get dug in on that stuff," he says, "surrender's impossible." 

The heart of the timber tussle is the U.S. claim that Canada maintains a government-controlled system that unfairly subsidizes the lumber industry while the United States uses a market-based approach. 

In Canada, officials set prices of timber, most of which is owned by provincial governments. In the United States, companies buy timber at auction. 

The Coalition for Fair Lumber Imports, a U.S. industry group based in Washington, D.C., claims British Columbia and other provinces provide timber at below-market costs, depressing lumber prices. 

"It allows Canadian companies to chase the lumber price down further and still make money," said Zoltan van Heyningen, the U.S. coalition's executive director. "U.S. lumber producers - who are, especially in the Northwest, the most efficient in the world - struggle to survive day-to-day while these guys in Canada make record profits and capital investments." 

Randy L. Rasmussen/The OregonianA rainbow forms above Douglas fir logs stacked at the Seneca Sawmill Co.'s yard in Eugene. Canadian lumber that is essentially subsidized is making it hard for the Oregon company to compete successfully.

Multiple go-rounds 
Since 1982, the dispute has gone through four rounds, dubbed Lumber I, Lumber II and so on. Lumber IV culminated in a 2006 agreement. The United States agreed to stop collecting countervailing and anti-dumping duties. Canada committed to tax and limit lumber exports, and to introduce no new subsidies. 

"Almost immediately upon signing the agreement, we had violations occurring," says Steve Swanson, chief executive of Glendale-based Swanson Group. U.S. trade officials twice took Canada to the London Court of International Arbitration. 

Swanson, who chairs the Coalition for Fair Lumber Imports, says British Columbia came up with a way to circumvent the 2006 agreement, using a mountain-pine-beetle infestation as an excuse. 

Historically the B.C. government charged only 25 cents a cubic meter for pulp-quality logs, deeming them Grade 4 on a four-point scale. That's far below the normal stumpage price for lumber-grade logs, which average $12 a cubic meter, Swanson says. 

Grade 4 logs used to make up only 10 percent of timber from British Columbia's interior regions used for dimensional lumber. But van Heyningen says provincial officials have jacked up the share to almost 50 percent, citing bug kill. "If you look at the numbers," van Heyningen says, "it's impossible that such a vast amount of logs are correctly graded as Grade 4." 

So B.C. lumber mills enjoy cut-rate wood prices, based on falsely graded timber, van Heyningen says, while U.S. producers pay much higher market rates. 

Not true, says Pat Bell, British Columbia's minister of forests, mines and lands. Grading standards and enforcement haven't changed since 2006 when the agreement was signed, Bell says. Grade 4 timber volumes have increased legitimately because of widespread bug kills, he says, which were plainly evident in 2006. 

"I live in Prince George, at about the center of the province," Bell says. In 2006, "there were days when you could travel 50 miles in any direction and not see a live tree." 

View full size

Bell, who co-owned a logging company before entering politics, says most of the wood being sold for 25 cents is so badly degraded it has to be used for pulp or bioenergy. "This is just another tactic of the American coalition trying to provide a subsidy to their industry by putting tariffs on the Canadian forest-products industry," he says. 

Yet Bell's position is contested by an unlikely source: a fellow Canadian. Rick Doman, chief executive of Montreal-based Eacom Timber Corp., comes from a family that owned a wood-products business in coastal British Columbia. 

Doman says the U.S. coalition is right about falsified grading of timber. Despite being bug-killed, he says, the timber is good enough to be shown off by Canada as material for the gigantic roof of the Richmond Olympic Oval, built for the 2010 winter games in Vancouver. He says the 25-cent price enjoyed by interior-British Columbia mills forced his family's coastal company, which had to pay $20 a cubic meter, into creditor protection. 

"The losers were the B.C. taxpayers," whose timber assets were sold for a song, Doman says. 

Enter China 
Allan, the B.C. industry spokesman, dismisses Doman's comments as sour grapes. 

He says mills in British Columbia's interior have invested in optical scanners and other improvements so they can make lumber from beetle-killed timber. Van Heyningen says Allan disproves his own point, because Grade 4 timber is defined as wood so degraded that less than half of it can be sawed into lumber. 

Allan responds that B.C. companies shouldn't be penalized for innovating to handle salvaged logs. His industry group includes giants such as Canfor Corp. and West Fraser Timber Co., whose spokesmen decline to comment on the trade dispute. 

Allan says U.S. companies should stop spending money on lawyers and invest it instead, as British Columbia does, in promoting exports to China and other expanding markets. In October, Bell says, B.C. producers sold $144 million of lumber to China and Japan and only $124 million to the United States. 

Indeed China is breathing life into a Glendale mill owned by Swanson Group, the Oregon company that blamed Canadian competition, in part, for closing its Glide plant. The Glendale mill, which was to close as well, is working to fill the company's first Chinese contract. 

But Steve Swanson figures his mills, running at 50 percent capacity, would be operating at 75 or 80 percent if not for the competition from Canada. The company pays line workers $30,000 a year plus benefits. Salaries for electricians and other tradespeople reach $80,000. 

In Eugene, Rick Re, vice president and general manager of Seneca Sawmill Co., tells a similar story. 

"If subsidized lumber continues to come into the U.S., our wood-products industry is going to contract," Re says. "The Canadians are exporting their unemployment to the United States, and we're living with it." 

--Richard Read 
http://www.oregonlive.com/business/index.ssf/2011/01/oregonians_say_canadian_logs_a.html