Cinda Jones, President of Amherst-based Cowls Lumber, told Murray that her sawmill production was down 43% and her planer mill production is down 19%. They’ve gone from 14 employees to 9.
It’s an issue that affects all of us across the Commonwealth.
Over 60% of the state is forested – greater than at any time since sheep farming peaked in the late nineteenth century. But the existing forests (close to 300,000 of which are on state-owned land) are poorly managed at best – crooked trees crowd out the better trees, fire hazards increase, there are too few reasonable harvest plans. Maybe most important of all, poorly managed forests don’t sequester carbon – a critical factor in global warming – the way that well-managed forests do.
The Massachusetts Woodlands Cooperative estimates that Massachusetts could sustainably harvest 41% of its own wood if – and there’s always an if – there was adequate government support for it. Between 1993 and 1998 only 6% of the wood used in Massachusetts came from within the state.
Most of the wood harvested in Massachusetts is trucked out-of-state to be processed. These value-added dollars could create jobs and revenue streams right here in state.
The consensus – and it’s hard to disagree – is that we can absolutely do better.
Loggers and sawyers alike loaded Murray with suggestions: decrease bureaucratic regulations, increase funding for biomass projects, use local lumber for state projects like bridges and schools, heat more state buildings with wood chips, create economic incentives for businesses to “buy local” or “heat local” when it comes to wood, educate people better about the benefits of responsible timber harvesting.
There are no easy answers. But Murray was a careful listener. And I think on balance, the Patrick administration’s commitment to governing the whole state has been sincere. The office in Springfield is good. The $25 million rural broadband plan is good.
“It’s immensely helpful when you go out and talk and listen first hand about what are the challenges and what are some of the solutions,” said Murray. “It makes it a lot easier to go back to Beacon Hill and put good ideas on the table.”
Near the middle of the day, while television crews interviewed Murray, I talked to a third generation logger who said now that his kids are almost ready to head off to college, he needs to find something to do in place of logging. He literally can’t support his family anymore.
When we lose the timber industry, we lose jobs, we lose beautiful forest, we lose renewable resources. When wood lots get sold off because they’re no longer valuable as wood lots, they get developed. I’m glad Lt. Gov. Murray stood with these men and women yesterday. And I hope it translates to more than just talk back in Boston.
<
p>In addition to the tough economic times for people in the industry, this is the big issue here.
<
p>Forests can be protected by either roping them off (public or private conservation), or by making them profitable (in a sustainable way). I’m not expert in forestry, but I do know that you can sustainably harvest a forest without harming its utility for wildlife, recreation, etc.- I’ve seen it in places like Dartmouth’s 2nd College Grant in way-northern NH.
<
p>I’d like to see more data around the claim that “poorly managed forests don’t sequester carbon – a critical factor in global warming – the way that well-managed forests do.” Why? How? How much?
<
p>I am cautiously optimistic about using wood (and fast-growing grasses) for fuel for e.g. space heating. I know that the EROEI (energy returned on energy invested) is fantastic for grass pellets as opposed to e.g. ethanol; I’d presume wood to be pretty good as well. Given that so many of us burn oil for heat here in the Northeast, using biomass for heating is a much more effective option (economically and environmentally) than trying to substitute transportation fuels (for the record, I currently heat my house with B-20 heating oil, as the natural gas main doesn’t make it to my house).
The New England Forestry Foundation, headquartered in Littleton, and the Manomet Center for Conservation Sciences, located in Manomet, are working on a project documenting the role of New England forests in sequestering carbon emissions. Both web sites have a lot of information about sustainable forestry particular to the forests in New England and Massachusetts. NEFF, in particular, is committed to sustainable forest uses in the 130 forests it manages and the 125 conservation easements (covering well more than a million acres) it holds. Both web sites are full of useful information about sustainable uses of the New England woods.
<
p>New England forests are part of the global economy in wood and paper products. I can’t speak for the Russian forests story, but I do know that since 1998, more than one-third of the land in Maine has changed ownership. Although some large purchases have come from conservation groups with a range of agendas, most of the land transactions have involved private equity firms or multinational forest products companies from other parts of the US, South Africa and Canada.
<
p>IMHO, it makes a lot of sense to develop a brand-identified, certified sustainable set of businesses. The only way I can think of to save the forests of Massachusetts and the rest of New England is to make sure that people can still make a living from the woods (and use them for recreation as well), and that those uses will still be available for their children and grandchildren. (Fair disclosure–I volunteer for NEFF,and think they’re a terrific organization).
<
p>I’ve never heard this. I’d like to read more. I also wonder if “well-managed” for profit, “well-managed” for species protection, and “well-managed” for sequestration result in the same amount of carbon sinking.
<
p>
<
p>By the way, loggers just got a break in SB 2338, which calls for requiring more efficient, lower polluting diesel engines for equipment weighing more than 14,000 pounds. Logging and chipping equipment is made exempt in the bill. There’s an example of loggers getting a break seemingly at the expense of asthmatics and global warming.
<
p>
<
p>Given that paper usage isn’t declining, which trees are making up the slack provided by MA lumber decline? Fuel prices are roughly equal throughout the US, and in general not any cheaper worldwide in places where trees grow. If the price of lumber isn’t increasing with the price of oil, somebody’s selling more wood than they used to to make up the difference? Where is it happening, and why?
Rumor, and it could be urban legend, among the local log mills is that Russia has flooded the market by harvesting some very large old-growth forests. Don’t know if true, but every logger has that story to explain the low prices.
but I can’t imagine that Russia has enough loggers to “flood the market” if by market you mean world market.
Siberia has hundreds of thousands if not millions of Chinese working there, many of them in the timber industry. My brother taught English in Inner Mongolia, (which is part of China), and some of his student’s fathers were working there.
<
p>Here’s a BBC article about illegal logging in Siberia:
<
p>http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/pro…