Forest industry pays for many services

NOTE: The following letter to the editor by Dave Lewis of the Truck Loggers Association, who support raw log exports and apparently the demise of union jobs in the forest service, fails to mention that the long-term decline in the coastal forest industry over the span of 20 years is due to the depletion of the old-growth resource (the biggest, best, and most accessible trees in the lower elevations), that ancient forests are worth more standing economically when factoring in tourism, hunting, angling, non-timber forest products, and carbon storage (according to a 2007 SFU study on the Fraser TSA), and that the government’s elimination of processing requirements without any incentives to stimulate investment in second-growth processing and value-added manufacturing has contributed greatly to the demise of a huge section of the industry and the workforce (ie. manufacturing – which Dave Lewis cares little about it seems…) – Ken Wu

 

No one wants to see others lose their jobs. However, it is a reality in tough times.

Politicians and unions cannot hide from the pain of a shrinking forest industry and it seems that those who oppose activities that would increase forest revenues also oppose cuts to that budget.

It wasn’t long ago that the forest industry contributed over $2 billion in direct annual revenues to the government but this year the government will have a deficit of about $300 million from declining forest revenues.

You cannot spend what you don’t have and you should not spend money on what you don’t need. It is the forest industry that provides the money for not only Ministry of Forests staff but also for schools, health care and a myriad of social programs.

Without forest revenues, Ken Wu and Carole James can expect a lot more losses than simply forest service jobs.

Dave Lewis, executive director

Truck Loggers Association

Vancouver