Episode 017 - Arnie Dood

IlliniFIre said:

Good stuff as usual Fin. I'd have been happy to hear more detalis, namely who are the groups that treat wolves as bovine. Loved that line.

Click to expand...

Big Fin said:

...Arnie will make additional appearances on the podcast. But, I doubt we will ever get him to be "unfiltered."...

Click to expand...

GAbearclaw said:

Great podcast, you are a great ambassador to have on our side.

I wish I could find a way to lure you out to California as we need someone to help us get organized and take back our F&G. That is one of the worst things out here; we don't even have a state F&G group that works on behalf of hunters and fishermen...

Keep up the good work Randy.

Click to expand...

ORHunter said:

In this episode Randy talked briefly towards the end about the timber industry and the issues we have with it because of Canada. I'm interested in learning more about this. Can anyone point me in the right direction to read up on it?

Click to expand...

Big Fin said:

Canada does not force their timber companies to pay competitive stumpage rates, the price you pay per thousand board feet or per cord, for the timber you are harvesting. In some instances, there is no stumpage paid by Canadian companies. US companies have to pay either private landowners, state or county landowners, or the USFS for the price of the timber they harvest.

In addition to the stumpage subsidy and the weak Canadian dollar, Canadian timber companies get paid to build roads. Yeah, "The Crown" as it is called in Canada, pays them for roading highly erosive terrain. The Crown can keep loggers in business by paying them for road building as a way to offset the impacts of tariffs. A timber company in Canada can lose money in the logging business, but the Crown can offset that in payments for road building and it has no impact on the supposed protection provided by a tariff.

In addition, Canada does not have the equivalent of NEPA, ESA, Clean Water Act, or any of the other environmental regulations that American timber companies must operate under, whether on public or private lands. A frustration of many Canadians is that there are no mechanisms to account for fish and wildlife values once a timber sale is suggested.

So long as Canada is economically committed to keeping its timber industry afloat, the US producers will never be able to compete on any basis other than location to large markets.

As much as some want to blame the state of the timber industry on the USFS and the Feds, it is in large part Congress and their lopsided trade deals that have had the biggest impact on the timber industry. You cannot compete in the softwood (pine/fir/spruce) lumber market with companies who have the full faith and backing of the Canadian government.

And now that logging in the intermountain west has been hammered by "free markets" (complete tongue in cheek), the infrastructure of mills, railroad facilities, loggers, truckers, etc. has pretty much disappeared. I completely understand the frustration of the good operators who find it impossible to compete with Canadians. Once again, the frustration gets focused on the USFS, when it is really Congress who is to blame and who could fix the problem. Not holding my breath for that to happen.

It would be a much longer discussion to give full attention. It would include liberal application by Presidents of the Antiquities Act, other market forces, housing markets and interest rates, and a host of other items. One claim that is often used to advocate for the sale of Federal lands is the USFS supposedly being the reason for the loss of the softwood timber industry in the Northern Rockies. I bring that up in the sale/transfer/ESA discussion, as most of the knowledgeable folks would point north of the border as the biggest reason, of many reasons, for the dramatic constriction of that industry.

Click to expand...

Gerald Martin said:

Continuing my education on timber issues.... Senator Fielder is beating the drum that the reason loggers are having problems making a living is they can't get timber sales from the USFS and because of excessive regulations or red tape holding up sales until they are worthless.

Now I am no economic expert, but the only reason I have time to type this today is because some remodel projects I was doing at the local lumber mill fell through due to the owner being worried about the falling price of lumber. My understanding of economics says that when prices are too low and sales too weak to be profitable, increasing output doesn't help a bit.

I don't see how loggers who complain about not getting enough wood to send to the mill can be helped with more logs, when the mill can't afford to buy their logs because they aren't selling enough lumber at profitable margins. This is the same mill that has hundreds of thousands of logs laying in the yard waiting to be cut and sold when the markets are better.

In my simple way of thinking, should the transfer to state management occur and the logging industry is to benefit and grow, timber sales will have to be priced even lower than they currently are for loggers to be at all competitive with Canadian timber. Selling more timber at lower prices does nothing to help the newly transferred lands pay for their own maintenance and will only hasten the eventual sale of those lands as more roads are required to be built and maintained in order to sustain cheap timber sales to loggers.

Help me out here.... sometimes I think it's so absurdly simple that I must be missing something important in the equation.

My projection is until the housing market rebounds and demand raises lumber prices or Canadian subsidized lumber is restricted or tariffed to make it reflect the cost of American lumber production, the American logging industry is doomed to a continual reduction.

If I understand it properly, the USFS looks at logging as a way to maintain forest health rather than promote jobs in the logging industry. The added benefits of keeping the forest healthy offset the fact that managing logging projects costs more than it brings in to the treasury.

Click to expand...