The Falldown Effect

“Most harvesting takes place in original forests, as commercial harvesting is relatively recent in much of the province, and most second-growth forests are not yet ready for harvest.”  British Columbia Ministry of Forests website

Advertising and promotion efforts by government and the forest industry create the impression that logging in BC mainly happens in second-growth forests. In fact, there are only a few areas in the province where any second-growth is being harvested. In fact, the government is only able to keep the AAC high because almost all logging operations occur in original old-growth forests.

The Ministry of Forests uses the term falldown to describe the drop in harvested timber volume caused by the transition from old-growth to second-growth.

Falldown happens for two reasons:

1. Second-growth forests, which are planted to be logged in 50-70 year rotations, do not attain the timber volume of ancient trees dating from hundreds to over a thousand years.

2. Because old-growth forests are cut at unsustainable rates, second-growth cannot regenerate fast enough to replace the original forests. Therefore, once the old-growth has been liquidated, the AAC must drop to a level that the second-growth forests alone can attain.

Decades of overcutting have created scarcity in the timber supply so that falldown is now a reality in several management units.

In 1996 the Chief Forester said, "the analysis shows that the original abundance of mature forests, which historically allowed harvest levels well above the LTHL, no longer exists. In this situation, harvest levels must decline to avoid serious timber supply shortfalls in the near future.”

But nothing has been done. In fact, the Chief Forester has consistently raised the AAC over the past 25 years with a peak of 90 million cubic meters in the late eighties.

Cut the best and leave the rest

While not surprising from a bottomline perspective, timber companies have targeted the most accessible areas with the highest value trees. As a result, what remains are the trees of poorer quality and difficult to access areas. Therefore, from an economic viewpoint, the remaining forests have higher production costs and/or lower value.

In 1998, Reid Carter, a forestry analyst and director of the pro-industry Forest Alliance, said: “We are now in the guts and feathers. We are in the back of the valleys and the tops of the mountains. These are the more expensive areas to operate in.”

Ecologically and visually it is clear that not all forests are of equal value. The structure, composition and function of a recently established plantation cannot compare to nor compete with the values found in centuries-old original forest. Ancient forests provide climate-moderating, air-purifying and wildlife-habitat values that cannot be replaced in second-growth forests. The forest types differ in the species they can support, their ability to clean water and provide habitat for BC's six salmon species, and the recreation and spiritual values they provide.

Aside from the ecological issues, there are glaring problems with BC's present forestry system even when considered solely from the perspective of timber output. For every hectare cut, an old-growth forest will produce on average 800 cubic meters of merchantable timber. By comparison, a second-growth stand will produce on average about 500 cubic cubic meters per hectare. 

 

 

 

 

 

Reduced quality and quantity Coupled with the decline in quantity, the quality of second-growth is significantly inferior to the current over-harvest of old-growth. The Ministry of Forests’ most recent determination of coast-average log values shows that second-growth timber is worth a fraction of old-growth timber from the same area. For example, a premium saw log of second-growth coastal fir has one quarter the value per cubic meter of an old-growth log, and second-growth spruce has only one-sixth.

Historically, BC has been one of the world's leading pulp producers. Recent trends in plantation forestry in tropical regions, however, mean BC cannot compete with countries that produce marketable trees in 7-25 years. It takes a minimum of 50 years for pulp-quality trees to mature in BC.

Clearly British Columbia cannot compete in the world market given such inequities. This reality is understood by the Ministry of Forests staff: “One cannot be optimistic about planning silvicultural regimes to produce small diameter fibre logs for the purpose of expanding pulp production. There are too many other cheap potential sources of fibre furnish available at the global level. Technological developments and foreign exchange also pose threats.” (Ministry of Forests, 1999)