Letters to the Editor

I was shocked to read Mr. Bill Whalen’s letter to the Telegraph the other day concerning the Jaakko Pöyry report, and his belief that the report’s recommendations would actually benefit the people of New Brunswick. From my reading of the report, it is clear that Jaakko Pöyry is interested solely in supporting the wishes of the Forest Products Association – the very folks who paid the bulk of the report’s ½ million dollar cost.

I do believe, however, that the report does force New Brunswick to look seriously at the direction our forest industry will take over the next 50 years or so. The report points out, quite correctly, that decisions made now will affect our forest industry, and our collective quality of life, long into the future.

But I strongly disagree with the direction Jaakko Pöyry wants to send us: that is, down the path to intensive softwood fibre production over the majority of the public forest.  While growing more wood certainly sounds good, what really matters is the value of the products we produce, and their competitiveness on the world market.  And this is where intensive softwood fibre production doesn’t cut the mustard, at least in our climate: plantations in hot, southern countries can and are growing low quality fibre at a much lower cost than we will ever be able to, no matter how much we try to turn our forests into an agriculture crop.  Witness the massive layoffs and land sell-offs by pulp and paper companies in neighbouring Maine. Pulp and paper will hopefully remain a part of our forest industry for at least a few years to come, but we’d be fools to completely tie ourselves to its fate.

So what’s the solution?  I believe New Brunswick is in an excellent position to capitalize on what we have going for us: (1) a mix of hardwood and softwood tree species that can be made into a diversity of valuable products, and (2) a beautiful landscape capable of attracting visitors from far and wide.  We must start creating a more diversified forest industry, with a clear focus on growing large, high-value trees, making value-added forest products, and building our outdoor-based tourism, fishing and hunting industry.

As Mr. Whalen stated, the status quo is not acceptable: the New Brunswick forest industry produces the fewest jobs per unit of wood harvested in Canada , and this decline in jobs per wood harvested has been on-going for decades.  Our Department of Natural Resources and Energy continues to lose money on our public forest: it pays out more in maintaining and managing the public forest than the revenues received from the forest industry that uses this land.  I see continued loss of our natural, diverse forest to softwood fibre plantations.  I see continued decline in the value of products we are harvesting from our forests: we are trying to mill smaller and smaller trees.  No, this status quo is definitely not acceptable.

We certainly need a bold, new direction for our forest industry.  Jaakko Pöyry presents the easiest solution: grow more low-value fibre and hope for the best.  I suggest that this is a loser’s strategy.  Building a more diversified forest economy, based on value-added products and a diverse forest resource, may be more challenging, but I believe it is a challenge we cannot afford to shirk.