Greenpeace the reason for logging industry decline????

[thumperjack]

I had found the Greenpeace face book page and I was just curious if they might had a hand in this decline? My (uncle,dad and brother)Family hasn't logged a stick in 3 months or better and I'm worried that Timber market as we know and depend upon,want make a comeback in the first quarter of 2011' as I hoped it would. I have a friend here in Palestine,Texas that has 250 acres of mostly pulpwood(Hardwood/Pine),that they want to clearcut it all and replant with pine, but the Timber market and the fact that the mills aren't taking is the reason it still stands. Any thoughts about this Greenpeace ordeal?     ....  Tommy

[Gary_C]

Supply and demand is what drives the markets. When demand comes back, they will need more supply.

Greenpeace just makes noise.

[Jeff]

If you are a fisherman, and you are cleaning your fish, and flies start buzzing about, do you quit cleaning and forsake your catch? Even if it was bees, you would take the measures you need to take and continue.

[thumperjack]

It'll be great to see logging make a comeback and the mills start taking timber again! There are so many family's that has relied on this industry for their livelihood for generations.   .... Tommy

[Autocar]

One company I sell to has so much inventory that the price keeps slipping. And probably won't rebound till there inventory is reduced. A fellow just has to hang on, I guess the old saying about laying something back for a rainy day is here we just hope it dosen't last to long.

[Trailer Builder]

Thumperjack, i am looking at this from a different point of view we build logging trailers in australia and so far this year we have ONE ordered! Usually we work two months ahead... its quite scary. Last year we built roughly 55 trailers the year before we built 78 the year before we built 99 see the decline. Just thought i'd add a little bit of in put.
Cheers

[thumperjack]

Those Hurricanes that we had back to back didn't help neither! I was cutting busted,twisted and broken timber thru Rita, but was injured before Ike hit.   ....  Tommy

[thumperjack]

Thumperjack, i am looking at this from a different point of view we build logging trailers in Australia and so far this year we have ONE ordered! Usually we work two months ahead... its quite scary. Last year we built roughly 55 trailers the year before we built 78 the year before we built 99 see the decline. Just thought I'd add a little bit of in put.
Cheers

''Wow'',that is bad. You actually saw this coming before most! My Dad and Uncle said that those fancy high dollar saw head shears would be the death of logging as we know it,when they first started to appear on the market but I'd never guessed it would've gotten this bad.    ....   Tommy   

[beenthere]

thumperjack
Re-read what Gary_C wrote.

I don't think it was Greenpeace nor was it saw-head shears in the woods.   
 

[tjdub]

As Gary said, it's lack of demand.  Check out this chart:

http://www.nahb.org/generic.aspx?genericContentID=45409

1.7 million homes were being built in 2006 then only about one third that many over each of the years since.

[thumperjack]

thumperjack
Re-read what Gary_C wrote.

I don't think it was Greenpeace nor was it saw-head shears in the woods.   
 

I understand Gary's view very well, and did a little research on that and found The Draft USDA Forest Service Strategic Plan (2000 Revision) as well as other interesting topics. I was just merely asking a question and getting everybody's input on that subject!    .....  Tommy

[Just Me]

 I just read this morning on one of the builders new services that we lost 95,000 construction jobs last year.That doesn't take into account people like me with their own companys that can't sign up for unemployment or the ones that found a job doing something else. {Hello and welcome to Walmart}   One of my friends sells log cabin kits that he mills out, used to do twenty a year minimum, has not done one in two years. those are logs that some logger is not hauling.

Thats part of where the logging went, but this economic funk is worldwide, so exports are down as well. Grade lumber and such are affected as well, because people are not buying secondary items. My own shop is basically idle, and I for years had several projects going on at any given time.

 But the trees are getting bigger, and the demand is pent up, so hopefully one day there will be a flood of activity. And unlike the last boom, this time I am going to save every penny. No more race trucks!

 

[Just Me]

One company I sell to has so much inventory that the price keeps slipping. And probably won't rebound till there inventory is reduced. A fellow just has to hang on, I guess the old saying about laying something back for a rainy day is here we just hope it dosen't last to long.

On this......

I have worked all over the state this past couple of years out of necessity, and I have noticed that almost every lumber supply is carring just the bare minimum of stock. If things do pick up it wont take long to deplete whats on hand, so for you loggers the response should be quick I would think. Interestingly, you would think pricing would be going down with the lack of demand, but that is not the case. I think there are too few companys controlling the building market at this time.

[SwampDonkey]

Greenpeace, what a joke. Even it's cofounder woke up some years ago. Every one of those people are using forest products like the rest of us. Sure, most anything can be done with a different approach to management of the resource and things continue to evolve. Some old habits are hard to break, and the $$green stuff tends to fog the mind at times. We have to move ahead, not slide backwards. 

[Meadows Miller]

Gday

They and other gorups have been at this for the last 40 years they are a parasite that at each little win for them makes the native forestry industries  a little weaker with each bite they have  taken over all those years  their world view is backwards and they wont be happy untill everything is locked away as they have lied cheated and misinformed the general public for far too long and have created a view that all forest industries are not friendly to the enviroment  and there for should be eradicated they are over educated idiots who dont have a clue what their actions are doing to the enviroment as we speak these are the same people who would have people believe that is better to build houses out of concrete and steel or most likely imported timber from a lot less well managed resource from a third world country  I Dont Think So  
 

This is coming to you all from the state in the world that has (I think )the highest % of forests locked up in reserves  86% the industry has only acess to 14% of the natural productive  forests in the state and dont worry they will be back to collect the rest in the next few years  

Thats what I think of em anyone can find the true facts about this industry  if the took the time and did some research we do not have anything to hide as it would be counter productive for us to cut ourselfs out of timber wouldn't it   So are groups like this the reason for decline in our industry In our part of the world Bloody Oth they are them the people the misinform which are usually city dwellers without a bloody clue who inturn form a general view of things then the Gov't who is stupid enough to go along with it to keep the voters happy and to stay in power  


Regards Chris

[Ron Wenrich]

Now, for a different point of view.  Do you know what it was like prior to any environmental groups?  Cut and run forestry was the norm, and this was way before there were large impacts of demand on world forest reserves.  We didn't really care about the health of the forest or any management techniques since there was always another forest beyond the next ridge.

My state's forestry department was started by one of those environmental nuts way back when.  His name was Gifford Pinchot.  He also started the US Forest Service and the Society of American Foresters.  The thinking way back then was that they weren't even sure that the state forests would actually grow a trees anymore.  They thought the woods were reduced to saplings and the reason for the forest service was to put out fires that were rampant thanks to railroads.  Just think how things would have been different had we not listened to these early environmentalists.

Every time we go into the woods, we have to ask ourselves if what we're doing is the right thing.  There are a lot of different objectives in the management of a forest.  We need wilderness areas, we need managed forests, and we need forest products.  Not all products are in the form of cellulose.  There's a balancing act there.

Questions we should be asking ourselves concern much more than the forest.  But, without an opposing view, we probably wouldn't ask the questions.  We would be content to sit down and do what we do and justify whatever we do as correct, since we're the professionals.  But, mistakes have been made in the past, as they are right now.  In forestry, it takes decades or more before we realize that we have made a mistake.  Scotch pine, multiflora rose, and a whole host of nonnative plants are good examples.  Not to mention the practice of monoculture.  It has its place, just not everyplace.

Greenpeace or any other environmental group has its place.  I don't think it would be good to manage all our forestlands under their schemes, but I also think its good to listen to the other side. 

Just when you think you have all the answers, they change the questions.   

[Bandmill Bandit]

Green Peace is any thing but "peacefull" and it should be spelled "Greene Piece"! would be a more accurate rendering of what they stand for. And yes they are mostly a bunch over grown babies with a rattle. (attached to their shoulders)   

[SwampDonkey]

Not all environmentalists are created equal.  We've had a forestry program in UNB for over 100 years now, the oldest in the country. I've also read old forestry reports that go back 80 years. At the time the industry, as far as being on an industrial scale, was just beginning. The government saw the opportunities in the resource and with so much of it that most was never even scratched. And this was true for decades until the mid 1980's. Sure the bigger trees were getting more scarce, but there was lots of undeveloped forest not even touched. They only worked the close stuff and near water. Look, I've drove on roads since the 1980's being built for forestry, before that, the area was hoofed and canoed into. I was there as the roads were being built literally in front of me. In 35 years, there has been more changes than the first 65 of forestry up here. The 1974 Forest Resources Study recommended a more sustainable approach to forest management. Silviculture was introduced to improve the growth of the new forest by the mid 70's. It wasn't until 1982 that we had a new forest act to wholly address forest management, it even addressed the issues of private wood sales where we didn't have to compete with crown wood. Still some things could be tweaked, especially the water issue and more stages of thinning to grow the next crop. Our Maritime Forest Technology College (forest ranger school) was formed in 1946, which began as a co-operative effort of the provincial governments of New Brunswick and Nova Scotia , and the wood-using industries of the two provinces. Basically, our industry was moulded by the wisdom of the people out their doing the work every day and seeing that things need to evolve, improve and be learned from as we go. It wasn't from a bunch of side liners yelling rape. 

The biggest impact on supply and demand in this country came when the logging industry took off in the west. It surpassed our lumber and pulp output by a long shot here in the Maritimes and Quebec. Also the wooden ship industry was lost to more modern ship building toward the end of the 19th C. That's what that wooden ship on our provincial flag is about, ship building. During the first world war, the biggest part of the merchant marine in this country was owned by the Hudson's Bay Company.

[Just Me]

Now, for a different point of view.  Do you know what it was like prior to any environmental groups?  Cut and run forestry was the norm, and this was way before there were large impacts of demand on world forest reserves.  We didn't really care about the health of the forest or any management techniques since there was always another forest beyond the next ridge.

My state's forestry department was started by one of those environmental nuts way back when.  His name was Gifford Pinchot.  He also started the US Forest Service and the Society of American Foresters.  The thinking way back then was that they weren't even sure that the state forests would actually grow a trees anymore.  They thought the woods were reduced to saplings and the reason for the forest service was to put out fires that were rampant thanks to railroads.  Just think how things would have been different had we not listened to these early environmentalists.

Every time we go into the woods, we have to ask ourselves if what we're doing is the right thing.  There are a lot of different objectives in the management of a forest.  We need wilderness areas, we need managed forests, and we need forest products.  Not all products are in the form of cellulose.  There's a balancing act there.

Questions we should be asking ourselves concern much more than the forest.  But, without an opposing view, we probably wouldn't ask the questions.  We would be content to sit down and do what we do and justify whatever we do as correct, since we're the professionals.  But, mistakes have been made in the past, as they are right now.  In forestry, it takes decades or more before we realize that we have made a mistake.  Scotch pine, multiflora rose, and a whole host of nonnative plants are good examples.  Not to mention the practice of monoculture.  It has its place, just not everyplace.

Greenpeace or any other environmental group has its place.  I don't think it would be good to manage all our forestlands under their schemes, but I also think its good to listen to the other side. 

Just when you think you have all the answers, they change the questions.   

Excellant response!

As much as I get POed at enviromentalists and some of their misguided efforts [green homes!] and upset every time they manage to close some section of single track I like to ride, I do know that they have a purpose.

 I spent several years in my youth in Idaho and Montana, went to high school in Missoula at Sentinal, and moved to Kalispell after graduating. I spent a lot of time up in the mountians where the logging was going on and the waste was astounding. There were many trees at each logging location that were 6' or better at the cut that were cut down and left to rot. This was back when often you would see just one log to a truck, so these were not considered big, but they were cut down because they were in the way. Left to rot. The clearcuts back then out there were ugly, and the industry was inviting trouble, giving the likes of the Sierra Club just the ammunition that they needed. They, the loggers, paid no attention to what would happen down the road with erosion, because they didn't have to, and the competition wouldn't do the any different so......

A couple of years ago I bought a car in California, flew out with my daughter and drove it back. I went up the coast through the Redwoods [Very Cool!]and over into Idaho and Montana so my daughter could see where I used to hang. I was shocked! There are no old growth trees left. I'm not sure what the enviromentalists are fighting for, looks to me like it is all gone. It did not look like the place I have pictures of. All at once, much as I hate people sticking their nose where it does not belong, I understood that it is a necessary evil.

 Industry policing themselves is a falicy, won't happen. Greed is the common factor that plays to the lowest common denominator, and sorry to say, no matter what the business, most often those with the least scruples come out ahead. So there has to be some form of control, hence that battle that we [those of us that depend on wood to make a living]are often losing.

There are way too many people in this world, and that will only get worse. As we crowd in on ourselves we will see more and more problems as everyone wants the same piece of ground for their partcular passion.

 I don't have any answers, but I can see that the days of wood framed houses are drawing to a close. It is not sustainable if we keep growing the population at the rate we are. Population doubled in the last 50 years. The previous doubling took if I remember correctly, 800 years world wide. There are no more trees, so you see where this will be heading.

I would like to see some real efforts to get away from wood waste, keep the danG junk mail out of my box for starters! I think that some of the trees that they have been replanting are a bit short sighted, trees with little value, but fast growth rates. It would seem that as we swing away from paper products that are a waste, switch to building methods that use less wood structure and so froth that trees with higher value that can be cut for grade lumber would be a better bet, but I am just guessing. How many times can a forest grow fast grow trees before the soil is depleted? I know of several areas around here that after the second cutting have not been able to grow a tree over ten feet tall in 35-40 years.

By the way, I Do really think Greenpeace is a bunch of idiots.........

And I am not all that fond of the Seirra club either..

Still???

[Meadows Miller]

Gday

Don't get Me wrong I am prob one of the biggest tree hugger's going   and have a very well balanced view of things Im into green energy and doing things on a sustainable basis as most good people in this industry are I would like my great grand kids to work in this industry one day    
I do know what it was like overhere before at least here and to some extent the rest of the world   Balance is a good thing to have and We in Australia have one of the oldest and most regulated forestry reserve areas in the world  and set forest areas since the 1850s that was due to the request from industry mainly The Victorian Sawmiller's Association   that if agricultural and urban clearing for various reasons  continued as it was that we would not have any productive forests left to have an ongoing sustainable harvest of timber in the future It took the industry 20 years to achieve that   then the 60s hit and things started going way out of whack down here They the green movement will not be happy untill its all locked up their aim and I warn you is that theses shows you like over there like Axmen and American loggers is aimed to make Our industry look like a bunch of yahoos that only care about getting the logs out of the bush to the general public with the main goal being when it comes voting time down the track that when it looks like (to any party)  well it would get afew votes if we appeased the green voter by locking up some forest areas to harvesting we are not going to loose to many jobs in that rural area by doing that and whats left can be amalgamated into  a larger licence to keep one big mill that would gain better more profitable production it will be a no brainer to a polli to do that a small industry segment to grab a large number of popular votes  

In Victoria in the 80s we had over 250 small hardwood mills all with smaller licenses most around 1 to 2million bft sawn pa  dotted all over the countryside they where not big mills  but the made more than afew jobs in each little town they where in then the govt told all the mills that they had  to value add and the only way to do that was to amalgamate licenses so the bigger mills could value add on a larger scale, which is not realy true youcould value add on a small scale and sell direct and make a bloody good profit  and today we have under 25 large hardwood mills operating in the state today and they have trouble turning a profit at times  

What you will notice with the green movements selection of forest areas here in the past generally includes  large portions of productive forest that has been managed well and is producing a good crop of quality timber the aim there is to push producers into lower and variable quality forest to make things uneconomical to do at times its worked well here for them  I can tell you  

With GEED the Softwood plantation industry here  its about hit peak production in the large company  owned plantations  with most wood committed with there being a full on assalt on the smaller and large privately owned plantations at the moment in the state and over the last 20 years with any good wood in them for the export market to turn a quick buck the issue there is we are going to run out of logs to grow the industry on a sustainable level and we will still have a trade deficit in forest products of around 2 billion a year and have done for about the last 20 years  

I dont know sometimes     It makes a bloke look over the pond at the United States and think well it might be time to shift camp   which has been in the thought and planing process for a while now fellas   I have considered buying a complete mill here but I would be also buying someone elses problems too  or  NZ but I would have to export 100% of my production and I would prefer to setup in a place where I have contact with the whole chain from source to customer thats just how I would like set things up and to do things and there are lot's of oppertunitie's over there to setup lifestyle and a business  if you just look        


Regards Chris

[Ron Wenrich]

But, you're not talking about a green problem as much as you are a past practices problem and government interference in business.  The government went the value added route, which is what hurt your small businesses.  I'm convinced they want to get rid of small businesses since its easier to control a few large ones than several small ones.  This seems to happen in all governments, so its nothing new. 

But, you talk about being forced into lower quality wood, since the higher quality wood has been locked up.  I'm not sure of the specifics, but I have done work in an area where there was a high proportion of government owned wood and a good proportion of privately owned wood.  The talk amoung the loggers was the same 20 years ago as today.  All the good quality wood was on the government land, and they had it locked up.

That was true mainly due to the way that landowners used their land as an ATM, and the industry used mining techniques instead of management techniques in timber harvesting.  The selective logging was just a technique to get the best and leave the rest.  Its a practice that still goes on.

Meanwhile, the state has a lot of other products and issues to maintain.  I don't see our state being controlled or even influenced by green organizations, let alone extreme greenies.  They also aren't controlled by the whims of the industry.  They maintain sustainable management practices that insure good quality wood, provide habitat for a wide range of wildlife, protect scenic values, provide areas for recreation.  They also turn a profit.  They routinely take out pulpwood from species that won't make good products down the line.  That is almost non-existent in private sales.  I'm not seeing a downside in this.

Private lands continue to be logged in a "sustainable" manner with no checks on the management.  Logging practices have improved, and the loggers did this through state interference.  Greenie involvement?  I don't know, but it was a practice that was needed in some cases.  But, the cut the best and leave the rest practices still remain.  Even an industry led effort doesn't stem that since there are no checks or balances. 

As I said before, I don't think the green movement has all the answers, or that we should even follow any of their recommendations.  But, I don't think an industry led management scheme is the right road to go down, either. 

[SwampDonkey]

I don't think an industry led management scheme is the right road to go down, either. 

I agree, but it seems to be the way we are headed. A license holder of crown is looked at as if he owns my land and if you want any share of it you are told to deal with the license. When you go to the government, they say the license has the say in it's management. Maybe I want a share of the say. Too bad.  The licenses have preached for as long as I can remember, cheap wood, competition, most efficient way to harvest it (machines and clear cutting), maintain the jobs we have now (union and company, harvest and silviculture contractors your on your own), then the government is expected to pay for all the silviculture. Forestry department staff continue to be down sized and offices closed. And many seasonal employees, so they don't have to pay out benefits or future pensions.

[jim king]

Let me give you a preview of a show coming to the theater near you sooner than you think.

1:  Prohibited cutting on private land without a harvest plan.
2:  Enviornmental impact study on logging area.  Detailed bridge design and topography layout etc. with GPS points on each tree to be cut.
3:  GPS control on skidders and transport vehichles and indivual permits for each time a truck is loaded.
4:  Physical inspection of wood prior to leaving logging site for volume and verification of the stumps..
5:  Each log marked with logging permit number with 30 cm high letters and numbers prior to leaving logging site.
6:  Chainsaws registered with the DNR
7:  Carpenter shops and home workshops registered with the DNR with operating plan
8:  Permits for firewood cutting on private land
9:  Sawmill incoming and outgoing volumes controlled by the DNR and tax authority
10:  Any violations of about 60 steps are criminal and jail time

1a:  The "Lacy Act" governing trade of any wood coming into the US.  Fines , confiscation and jail time if the above is not perfect for importer and exporter.  This is in effect now but the govt does not yet have the staff to enforce it.  But several trial arrests have been made. 
http://www.eia-global.org/lacey/P6.EIA.LaceyReport.pdf

Criminal felony fine (up to $500,000 for corporation, $250,000 for individual, or twice maximum gain/loss from transaction). Possible prison for up to five years. Forfeiture of products.

This is just a summary and just the beginning.

[Meadows Miller]

Jim that sounds like the show we have running here atm it just has not finished yet Mate   Is it called "" The Destruction Of An Industry ""       If it is its gonna be a sad one