Community Forests: Backgrounder for the Select Committee on Wood Supply

1
Community Forests Backgrounder for the Select
Committee on Wood Supply

• Dr. Tom Beckley
• University of New Brunswick
• 19 February 2004

2
Presentation Overview

• Statement of interest, experience and biases
• Why the demand for community forests?
• What the proponents say
• Definitions What is a community forest?
• CF in principle, CF in practice (two different
  things)
• The question
• What the critics say

3
Why am I here?

• Professor at UNB, Faculty of Forestry and
  Environmental Management since 2000.
• Trained as a rural sociologist (rural
  communities, community development, public
  involvement in resource management, non-timber
  forest use)
• Previous experience 7 years with Canadian
  forest service in NB (1998-2000), and Alberta
  (1993-1998)
• Student of community forests and the concept of
  community forestry for 10 years
• Have toured community forests and interviewed
  community forest managers in BC, Ontario, Quebec,
  and Wisconsin.
• CF Feasibility study in 2000 (YSC, CFS UNB
  partnership)
• Two PhD students working on the topic currently.

4
A skeptical optimist

• My interest in community forestry and community
  forests comes from my sociological and rural
  development background.
• Would like to see thriving and empowered rural
  communities that rely on their natural resources
  to create wealth and well-being
• Many advocates think community forests are just
  the path to such an end.
• I am willing to entertain that as a working
  hypothesis

5
Policy as Experimentation

• Strong proponent of adaptive management in
  natural resources.
• Subject all management to scrutiny and strive for
  continuous improvement
• Treat policies as natural experiments
• Current system is a control, but there is no
  test
• We usually compare current practice to history
  and pat ourselves on the back for doing such a
  great job.
• Would be interested in seeing some
  experimentation in CF done on a small scale and
  subjected to close scrutiny. (Speculation wont
  end until we try!)
• I am here not as an advocate, but as a resource
  person for the Committee.

6
Why community forestry and why now?

• If community forests represent change and reform,
  what is it about the present system of forest
  tenure and forest management that people dont
  like?
• Perceived ecological degradation
• Perceived loss of local benefits (Fraser Valley
  ex.)
• Wide perception that we consider a narrow range
  of values in the management mix (fiber emphasis
  and not much else)
• Feelings of disempowerment and disenfranchisement
  from Crown land

7
No timber objective on Crown land, but
8
Why community forestry and why now?

• Proponents of community forests say
• It will deliver better environmental stewardship
• The benefits will accrue locally (not Toronto
  Finland)
• All forest values will be given consideration in
  the management mix
• It will be more democratic people will have a
  chance to take a more active role and/or be
  sincerely listened to with respect to their
  preferences for management objectives for Crown
  land.

9
What is a community forest?

• Academic definitions
• Duinker et al. (1994) A tree dominated
  ecosystem managed for multiple community values
  and benefits by the community.
• MGonigle (1998) Three essential features
  define a community forest 1) the community makes
  management decisions, 2) the community benefits,
  and 3) the forest is managed for multiple values
• Most definitions have these three elements
• Community making management decisions
• Community benefitting from management (more than
  status quo)
• Forest is managed for multiple values (assumption
  more balance and/or more environmental values)

10
What is a community forest?

• The empirical reality
• Forest tenant farming Quebec
• Individuals on large woodlot sized parcels (26
  X1000ha)
• Westwind Stewardship, Inc. Ontario
• 540,000 ha area near Parry Sound (Crown license)
• BC Community Forest Pilots
• 8 to 11 pilots from 400 60,000ha
• First Nations Reserves
• Eel Ground, Pictou Landing, Menominee
  Reservation, WI
• Municipal forests
• Moncton, St. John, Halifax RM, Ottawa, Mission,
  North Cowichan
• Community buy-outs
• Pine Falls, Kapuskasing, Temiskaming, Meadow Lake

11
What is a community forest?

• It is an umbrella term
• Tremendous diversity in
• Size (400-540,000 ha)
• Degree of oversight
• By Model Forest, Prov. Govts, Municipal Councils,
  INAC
• Property rights and conditions (simply an AAC or
  more?)
• Management structure (elected boards to appt.
  foresters)
• Management objectives (broad scope to fiber
  dominated)
• So there is no one model
• This is why it can be a vague, ambiguous, and
  loaded term
• Difficult to know what people are thinking when
  they use the term

12
What a community forest is NOT

• A return to pre-Crown Lands and Forest Act
  patronage system (death by a thousand cuts)
• Fee simple ownership by communities (e.g. no
  government or broader public oversight)
• These are some of the main things that opponents
  fear.

13
The Question

• Could a homegrown version of community forestry
  (made in NB solution) perform better than status
  quo Crown land management on
• Economic criteria
• Value of total shipments, value-added,
  employment, value of residual stands
• Environmental criteria
• Forest health, biodiversity, water quality
• Social criteria
• Non-market forest values (recreation, tourism),
  quality of work, social cohesion, community
  development (through revenue capture,
  re-investment, spin-off employment, etc).

14
Why is there controversy over the concept of
community forestry?

• It threatens existing interests
• Redistribution of benefits
• including but not only profits
• Redistribution of rights
• Decision-making, objective setting
• Land already given up to Protected Areas
  Strategy, and to Natives.

15
What the critics want to know

• Who would decide which communities get the wood?
• What criteria would determine the best use of the
  wood?
• Could the wood leave the province to the highest
  bidder?
• How would you assure sustainability?
• Who would pay for fire protection, roads, pest
  management and other support services?
• How does a community get collateral or apply for
  loans?
• Who determines who does the work?
  (harvesting/silviculture)
• Could communities sustain a 2 billion dollar
  business?
• What is a community for the purpose of this
  discussion?
• How will urban residents still have a say on how
  CF are managed? After all, it is still public
  land.
• These are all legitimate questions that the
  public deserves answers to.

16
Much of this relates back to the bigger questions
about how we use Crown land.

• Who benefits?
• How are benefits distributed?
• Individual jobs and secondary spending or
  community dividends and tax relief?
• Who decides the objectives for which we manage?
• Who decides how we meet those objectives?
• Whose knowledge matters most?
• Scientific technical knowledge or local,
  traditional knowledge?

17
Are we absolutely certain that we are managing
our public forests the best way?

• If we are not sure, it might be worth
  experimenting with with different forms of tenure
  in an adaptive management framework
• If we decide to experiment, do so with adequate
  controls (oversight)
• Actually CF would likely have more controls.
• Communities would have less political power than
  current license holders.
• If we experiment, we must do so with adequate
  variation and we should study the various
  outcomes so that we learn what works and what
  doesnt. (BC pilots not doing this)

18
Questions, comments, discussion
Experience with existing CFs Community buy-outs
what we found Forest tenant farming feasibility
study for NB How to tailor a system to NB?

• ?

19
What does this imply?

• First, a forest
• Second multiple values defined by the community
  
• Third management by the community
• How is this different from what we have now?

20
This means that we have

• An ideal type of what a community forest is.
• That is, some people using the term to describe
  something in their imagination that doesnt exist
  in reality.
• And empirical examples of what a community
  forest is that do not measure up to the ideal.
• That is, institutions or experiments that meet
  some but not all the ideal criteria.

21
Who makes the decisions and who benefits?
Multiple scenarios
22
Hypothetical Decision-Making Dimensions of Three
Forest Management Systems     Industrial
Forest Community NIPF Locus of
International, Local Individual Decision-Ma
king National Household Control    
Structure of Hierarchical Consensual Individu
al Decision-making
Scope of Narrow Broad Broad Manage
ment Objectives  
23
Problems with definitions

• Cause and effect. Sometimes an implicit
  assumption that local control will lead to more
  jobs and income, better environmental
  stewardship, and a wider range of values in the
  management mix.
• MGonigle In Canada, community tenures are
  rare and none exists that combine these three
  components

24
Some Examples

• Westwind Forest Inc. Ontario
• Moncton Municipal Forest New Brunswick

25
Westwind Forest Stewardship Inc.
Westwind Forest Stewardship is a
multi-stakeholder not-for-profit forest
management company that in May 1998 became the
first such organisation to receive a Sustainable
Forest Licence (SFL) from the Ontario government.
The SFL puts Westwind in charge of timber
harvest, tree-planting, operations monitoring and
forest management planning for 540,000 ha of
public forests in Muskoka-Parry Sound, central
Ontario. The movement to form Westwind as a
non-profit corporation started in 1996, with the
objective of taking over responsibility for Crown
Land forest management. The wide variety of users
in the Muskoka-Parry Sound forests provided the
impetus to make Westwind a community-based
company, an innovative approach in Ontario. In
this community-based model, logging contractors
and forest companies still provide all of the
funding for forest management, but dont hold all
the decision-making power.
26
Westwind continued
Westwind is run by a board of seven directors
three representing the local forest industry and
four with no ties to the industry at all. The
community directors are selected through a public
advertisement and interviewed by a nomination
review committee. They require a good knowledge
of the forest, business acumen, dedication and
respect for forest users, all tempered with a
desire to maintain an active and sustainable
forest economy. Westwind is currently
progressing towards becoming a Forest Stewardship
Council (FSC) certified Forest, an achievement
targeted for summer 2001. It would be the first
large public forest to be FSC certified in
Ontario. Other activities include producing a
series of educational conferences called Your
Forest Your Choice, and twice annual meetings
with forest operators. High-grade logging in the
two districts was rampant from the mid-1800s for
some 60 or 70 years, first for white pine, then
for other species in succession. In the 1970s the
decline was halted with the implementation of a
careful multi-objective tree marking system. Now,
under the guidance of Westwind, forest operators
are committed to sustainable forest management.
27
Westwind Forest Stewardship Inc.

• Is this a community?

28
Moncton Municipal Forest
  The Moncton Municipal Forests comprise 3 areas
totaling 6000 ha (15,000 ac), and are primarily
managed to protect the municipal water supply.
These areas include Irishtown, a 890 ha (2200
ac) forest which has been owned by the City since
the 1800's McLaughlin Forest, which is 400 ha
(3500 ac), bought in the 1960's and Turtle
Creek, which is 2800 ha (7000 ac) and was
purchased around 1970. Although the City of
Moncton is one of the partners with the Fundy
Model Forest, none of its forest lands are within
the Model Forest boundaries.  
29
Moncton Municipal Forest
An old sugar bush, which was operated in the
1950's and 60's was re-established last year,
with the long term goal of producing 400 gallons
of syrup annually. A local syrup producer
provided technical advice to help install
approximately 1200 taps in about 800 trees. The
primary purpose of starting the sugar bush is
part of the integrated public information and
education program the city is trying to initiate.
Successful, hands-on, school tours were carried
out to introduce city kids to maple syrup
production, from start to finish. The kids helped
collect the sap, boil it down and taste the final
product, and finally made maple candy in the
snow! The experiment was a resounding success,
and received rave reviews. Most of the current
forest is mature, with large sections of
overmature balsam fir, which are falling down and
are seen as a budworm and fire hazard. Efforts
are concentrated on keeping the forest diverse in
species and age structure, with a wide range of
hardwood and softwood species being managed for
long term forest health. Some sections of old
forest will be left to supply that habitat
component and for recreational opportunities in
the future. Most of the first interventions are
to remove overmature balsam fir which has begun
to blow down, as well as to decrease the risk of
future budworm epidemics.
30
Additional Examples

• Pictou Landing Nova Scotia
• Menominee Reservation Wisconsin
• North Cowichan Municipal Forest BC
• Mission Community Forest BC
• Community Forest Pilot Projects BC
• Community buyouts (Pine Falls, Kapuskasing,
  Temiskaming, Meadow Lake)
• Bas St. Laurent Model Forest
• None of these have all three criteria

31
Luckerts Critique of Community Forestry

• Would community forests create smaller operations
  that would be more labour intensive and thereby
  provide more jobs than large, industrial firms?
• Luckert says no, same global market pressures
  exist on community forests
• Rebuttal only if fiber is the primary
  management objective and creation of profit is
  the point of fiber management

32
Luckerts Critique continued

• Are the objectives of communities more in line
  with sustainable forest management than
  objectives of large industrial firms?
• Luckert says no. Rural communities with
  traditions of resource dependence may simply
  consume the fiber faster for shorter term returns
• Crown land belongs to the entire public, not just
  the rural public. Rural values are more
  utilitarian.
• Rebuttal no one really suggesting that
  Community tenures are fee simple ownership and
  free of any government control or regulation.

33
Luckerts Critique continued

• Are local communities the primary segment of
  society affected by forestry?
• Luckert says no. Canada is 80 urban. How would
  urban values be incorporated into management of
  community forests on Crown land?
• Rebuttal through the regulatory framework that
  puts some boundaries on what the things that
  matter most to people. (The irony of AAC).

34
Luckerts Critique continued

• Should sustainable communities be a key objective
  of sustainable forest management?
• Luckert says no. Other social units are equally
  as valid. Why not sustain households, or
  individuals, or regions? What is sacred about
  communities?
• Rebuttal Much of our identity is wrapped up in
  our communities, though our primary allegiances
  are probably to our families. Regions often lack
  strong identity and make face-to face relations
  difficult.
• Accountability issue more possible at community
  level

35
The politics of community forestry in New
Brunswick

• McAdam bid to obtain a community license for
  former Georgia Pacific Lands (400,000 acres in SW
  New Brunswick).
• Miramichi Woodlot Owners lobbying for access to
  individual, small parcels of Crown land for
  employment stability and income.
• YSC/CFS Forest Tenant Farmer project
• What do they all have in common?
• NBDNRE denied every one.

36
YSC/CFS/UNB partnership proposal

• Interest in the possibilities of the Bas St.
  Laurent Model Forest tenant farming project as
  they relate to New Brunswick.
• CFS/YSC/NBDNRE/Fundy Model Forest
• Obtained funds from Canadian Rural Partnership
  program (federal) to do a feasibility study.
• Letter of support from the Minister, DNRE

37
Forest tenant farmer project

• Convened an expert skeptics panel
• Held focus groups/interviews with key informants
  from the forest sector
• Reviewed data from other experiments
• Field trip to Bas St. Laurent
• Regular steering committee meetings for a year
• Draft report and recommendations

38
Underlying philosophy Continuous improvement

• Intensifying the forest management effort
• Creating more equity in the benefit stream
• Diversifying the forest sector
• Promoting entrepreneurship and innovation in a
  controlled setting

39
Recommendations

• That a 5-year Crown Woodlot License Pilot Program
  be initiated, consisting of a minimum of 10
  licenses up to 600 ha. each

40
The Anticipated Benefits of a Crown Woodlot Pilot
Project

• Stand level benefits
• Firm level benefits
• Human resource benefits
• Social and economic benefits
• Political benefits

41
Improving the forest through intensive forest
management

• The pilot project will result in a greater
  intensity of management on the defined land base.
  
• More values managed for
• More interventions
• Greater incremental volume of wood available over
  a single rotation
• Resulting in a healthier, better stocked forest

42
Achieve greater wood volume through intensive
management

• Data from UNB Woodlot studies show that
  incremental gains in wood supply may be achieved
  through more harvest interventions.
• Data from UNB woodlot studies show that one can
  improve forest health, increase stocking rates,
  create greater value while harvesting more volume
  through low-grading, and partial cutting
  methods.

43
UNB Woodlot study comparing partial and clear-cut
methods
44
Firm level benefits (to Crown woodlot operators)

• Security of tenure
• helps in long term planning
• may help to secure financing
• promotes a stewardship ethic
• Encourages entrepreneurship
• non-timber products or specialized markets

45
Human Resource Benefits

• An improved forest workforce.
• Certified Forest Manager Training would help
  raise the bar. Top contractors are calling us
  because they feel this is an opportunity to gain
  access to Crown Land, but more importantly to
  practice stewardship.
• Not open access or political patronage, but
  rather a group of carefully selected experienced
  woods workers.

46
Selection criteria for woodlot license holders

• Applicant suitability, 55
• Education/training
• Forest Mgmt experience
• Logging experience
• Silviculture experience
• Entrepreneurship
• Other related experience
• Proximity of residence
• Business experience
• Community involvement

• Management intent, 45
• Management proposal and letter of intent
• Past management practices
• referrals from satisfied landowners, or
• demonstration of management on personal property

47
Social and economic benefits -Background

• Rural areas in NB depopulating
• youth, in particular, are leaving
• Employment instability and seasonality
• Lower average incomes
• Overcapacity in contracting labour force

48
Social and economic benefits

• Increasing wood volume per unit of land (UNB
  Woodlot study)
• Increase labour per unit of wood volume, and per
  unit of land area managed
• Resulting in more jobs
• All forestry dollars are not equal
• Payroll dollars (wages) get re-spent locally
• greater multiplier effect
• Dollars invested in equipment and machinery
  contribute to non-local banks and financial
  institutions
• Highly mechanized, low labour operations
  contribute to non-local large banks

49
Declining human resource inputs in forestry in
New Brunswick
50
YSC data on M3/Person/Year

• 400,000 M3 total
• 276 FTE operators
• 140 part-time _at_ 100-500 cord/yr
• 427 part-time _at_ gt 100 cord/yr
• An estimated 365 FTE/yr
• Average of 1100 M3/Person/Year

51
M3/Person/Year for 7 top YSC producers
52
Political benefits

• Crown Lands and Forest Act review never happened.
• Expectations were raised.
• Widespread perception that little guys have
  poor access to Crown timber, and that is where
  the best opportunities lie.
• Significant and growing interest in retaining
  benefits of local Crown forests locally (e.g.
  McAdam, Miramichi)

53
Political Benefits

• Proposed Crown woodlot model could be viewed as
  an experiment in community-based forestry.
• More jobs per unit of wood, unit of land
• Wood volumes guaranteed to licensees
• Would demonstrate a willingness to experiment and
  provide some access to small, community-based
  operators.
• Controlled environment, research component,
  strict guidelines.

54
Current situation

• Partnership is no longer active
• 2nd proposal to CRP program was successful
• Sent money back for lack of land base to work
  with
• At the request of the Department we havent
  promoted the idea widely, but through our
  interviews and focus groups there is growing
  interest in applying
• Jakko Poyry recommends an intensification of the
  management effort but with different benefit
  distribution scheme.