2007-09-19
Authentic partnership?

According to the Webster dictionary… Partner: one associated with another especially in an action Partnership: a relationship involving close cooperation between parties having specified and joint rights and responsibilities What beautiful words often used in the last few years when speaking of the private forest and its landowners. The industry and the municipalities are partners with the landowners in regional forestry agencies, the Ressources naturelles et de la Faune minister is a partner in the development of the private forest, the forest contractors and other groups are economic partners in the private forest sector, etc. Let us discuss partnership! While referring to the definitions found in the Webster dictionary, one would be led to believe that partnerships are the best thing. But for that, it is necessary that the partners respect each other. However, for some time now, partnerships with the private woodland owners have been in free fall. The industry that claims it is a highly valuable partner of the forest landowners announces mill and plant closures without warning the producers that they are suspending purchases. For example, in August 2006, the company Louisiana Pacific announced the closure of its installations in Saint Michel des Saints without warning. This left the Lanaudière producers with an inventory of wood whose dimensions were solely fit for this company. The company did not offer the producers any support; the losses were worth thousands of dollars. More recently, certain companies who were supplied by private producers placed themselves under the protection of the Bankruptcy and Insolvency Act leaving many producers unpaid for wood volumes collected and delivered in good faith. Others like Abitibi Consolidated completely stopped buying wood from private producers under the pretext that the wood was too expensive. The same phenomenon is occurring in eastern Quebec with the company Uniboard who has decided to buy wood from New Brunswick leaving the producers from this area of the province without a market. Similarly in the non-woody products, the company Bioxel Pharma is acquiring its supply from elsewhere in the world after having obtained financial help from the provincial government and after having promised nice projects for Quebec. And these are called partnerships… Oh no, the municipal sector is not free of blame either. In the rush of creating forestry agencies in 1996, municipalities were given the mandate of assuring the protection of the forest cover. They were to develop a regulatory framework that would reassure the population of the forest’s sustainability and the forest landowners of their right to produce. What of it today? Several municipalities have done nothing. Others have exaggerated in their adoption of regulations to the point where cutting trees is so complicated administratively that forest landowners are not active in their woodlots. Obviously, these municipal decisions are not without consequence. The forest does not always naturally regenerate well. If regular harvest interventions were executed according to good practice, we would have a healthy forest capable of sequestering greenhouse gases in substantial quantities, a very interesting landscape, better-filtered water, stable economic activity and competitive mills and plants. Hence, the transformation industry that uses logs harvested from our forests would have a normal and stable supply near their installations as well as quality wood at competitive prices. The thousands of jobs being lost in the last months would probably be saved by activity in the private forest sector. In short, municipal regulation must encourage improvement in the forest, not impede interventions. And what of the other so-called economic partners? Are they really partners? It is doubtful in certain cases. In fact, some forest contractors see no problem in harvesting the forest without any consideration of the interventions’ different impacts, such as those related to large clear cut areas. Although there are less and less of these, there are still too many fueling the images of unhealthy forestry practices. Unfortunately, I have yet to see a municipality or an environmentalist cite a quality intervention in the forest. We know of thousands of high-quality hectares because forest consultants support the landowners in their efforts to improve their woodlots. We have never seen an elected official show us silviculture interventions carried out in its regional park in affirmation of the validity of true forestry practice or a green militant affirm that good foresters are more numerous than the plunderers. We prefer sensationalism to the forestry reality. Authentic partnerships will result when all people and the sector’s industries understand its real sense. The day when the industries will share their real problems with their private wood suppliers will be the day sustainable and long-term economic development will be made possible. The day a municipality will consult with its taxpayers to elaborate a protection and forest improvement strategy will be the day sustainable development will be made possible. The day forest contractors adopt an attitude respectful of the forest, the animals that live in it, the people that make a living from it and the people that benefit from it will equally be a day where sustainable development will be made possible. Until then, it is the law of the jungle. In the hopes of gaining a few points, those believing themselves to be the strongest automatically hurt their associates, but this leaves them so weakened that everyone ends up dying a slow death. And, it will be the foreigners that will end up pocketing the benefits. Armand Plourde General Manager