wood
A Story of Wood
Wood has played an important role in the history of civilization. Humans
have used it for fuel, building materials, furniture, paper, tools,
weapons, and more. And demand for wood continues to increase annually,
spurring conflicts between neighboring states over control of shared
resources. Our relationship to this resource has remained relatively
unchanged over time, and our methods of developing and managing
woodlands continue to rely on tried and true techniques established by
early civilizations. So perhaps this is why we take it for granted: wood
has long been a part of our lives, and we probably can't really imagine
it not being there.
The DIY movement has firmly established itself, particularly when it
comes to home improvement. On cable television, HGTV and the DIY Network
feature non-stop programming on renovations that cover a range of
projects and budgets. A common element in many of the renovations is
wood. People want it in their homes whether in the form of hardwood
floors, high end kitchen cabinets, or a durable table. In my own home,
we have a coffee table that we've had for 15 years. The wood bears the
marks of the lives that have been lived around it—including a few
watermarks since I am terrible about using coasters—and occasionally we
talk about replacing it, but we never do. It has character. And it's a
solid wooden table—we'd be crazy to give it up.
Anyone who has ever tried to light a fire knows that there are two types
of wood: softwoods and hardwoods. For fires, hardwoods will burn hotter
and longer—important factors when you're trying to ward off the
chill—while softwoods will ignite more easily so it makes excellent
kindling. Softwoods are the source of about 80% of the world’s lumber so
when we talk about wood, more often than not, we're talking about
softwoods. These woods include cedars, Douglas firs, cypresses, firs,
junipers, kauris, larches, pines, hemlocks, redwoods, spruces, and yews.
The wood from these trees tends to be more malleable. However, the
softwood/hardwood division is not concrete: some softwoods are harder
than some hardwoods. The Douglas fir and the yew listed above, for
example, are actually mechanically harder than several hardwoods. In
general, softwoods tend to be far less expensive in comparison to
hardwoods and are used more frequently in construction.
Wood has played an important role in the history of civilization.
Humans have used it for fuel, building materials, furniture, paper,
tools, weapons, and more. And demand for wood continues to increase
annually, spurring conflicts between neighboring states over control of
shared resources. Our relationship to this resource has remained
relatively unchanged over time, and our methods of developing and
managing woodlands continue to rely on tried and true techniques
established by early civilizations. So perhaps this is why we take it
for granted: wood has long been a part of our lives, and we probably
can't really imagine it not being there.
Strong states and nations have typically had access to a generous timber
supply that they draw upon liberally to further their own development.
These fortunate states have followed a similar pattern in the treatment
of their lumber resources. First, they use their own virgin forests.
Then they begin to barter with neighbors, and trade relations may be
established for that purpose. Finally, they manage to cultivate timber
for consumption, but may continue to import materials to supplement
their stores from countries still possessing a lumber surplus. This is
the story in the lumber trade that echoes over centuries, from India to
the Americas. It perpetuates a cycle of diminished resources that often
leaves behind a trail of disenchantment and bitterness between industry
and the citizens of the state or nation.
The United States is still able to harvest timber from its own supply,
but these resources are quickly being exhausted. To initial settlers in
the seventeenth century, America seemed to be an endless forest—820
million acres to be exact. The export of timber products began in the
early days of the Atlantic colonies, for several generations the forest
was a barrier to settlement and migration rather than an economic
resource. A timber shortage seemed impossible.
Lumber was chiefly transported by water: Logs moved down the Atlantic
Coast from Maine to Boston, from the upper Hudson to New York, and from
the shores of the Great Lakes into Buffalo and Chicago. With Maine, New
York, and Pennsylvania leading lumber production and waterways being
used to transport materials, lumber was cheap in the major markets of
the country. Softwoods were used for picket fences, boardwalks, paving
blocks, windmills, pails, tubs, farm implements, and furniture. However,
once these stores were depleted, and lumber manufacturing moved first
to the Lake States and then to the South and then to the Pacific Coast,
railways and trucks were increasingly required which increased the costs
for the manufacturers and the consumers. The rise of overland transport
also increased competition for the foresters and lumber processors
because it opened the markets to each other—eastern lumber markets were
made available to western producers, and vice versa. The lumber market
appeared to be expanding.
Following World War II, the Assistant Chief of the U.S. Forest Service
E.I. Kotok suggested that America would be viewed as a source of timber
for those European and Asian countries damaged by the war. He cautioned
against accepting this responsibility and drew attention that American
consumption of softwoods had been dampened by the war efforts and would
quickly rebound as the nation looked toward development once more.
During the war, lumber had been designated a “critical” war material,
and was consigned to cantonments, crating, dunnage, pallets, and general
wartime construction. He estimated that Europe may need as much as six
to ten billion board feet per year, and stressed that in the United
States, millions of houses and farm buildings needed to be built and/or
renovated.
But the needs of the war-worn nations bore consideration. Who did the
North American forests belong to? Were they the sole possession of North
America? Or were they a world resource that was meant to be shared with
those countries in need? Kotok stressed the need to manage the forest
resources so that all could benefit. Healthy forest economies could
provide more than timber products—for example, if foreign nations needed
agricultural products, the United States could provide these
commodities as well. Kotok could see little that the United States would
not be able to provide to the redeveloping world that could not be
aided by the management of the North American lumber supply.
This strategy contributed to the position of the United States as a
powerful leader following World War II. In emphasizing end-use forest
products, manufacturers increased their offerings beyond lumber—both at
home and abroad—to include beams, arches, prefinished paneling,
insulation board, pre-primed siding, and precut pieces for furniture and
toys. Kotok’s caution seems well advised in light of the experience of
developing nations like Haiti and much of Southeastern Asia. These areas
have harvested their forests to meet the demands of external countries
to the detriment of the forest industry and development within the
nation, reaping devastating ecological change in the process.
The impact of deforestation
Even as developing nations cut the softwoods under their control to
participate in the global trade of this resource, it should be noted
that the areas where these trees grow would be cleared in the course of
development. In an ideal relationship, lumber trade should feed capital
back into the nation to assist in sustained-yield practices. However,
demand usually outstrips production—both internally and externally.
For example, growing populations need expanded areas for food activities, so forests are cleared for crops and ranching. Annual burnings often prevent forest regrowth, as does grazing by sheep, goats, and cattle. Wood fuels still remain widely used for domestic cooking and heating, brewing, baking, and brick making. And as oil prices rise, more people may be inclined to look to wood for fuel.
Logging itself depletes forest stocks before they can be replenished. Regulated timber harvesting should not permanently damage the forest, but in many smaller nations, timber extraction is not monitored. And as mentioned previously, without proper support any state management program is bound to fail—sustained-yield practices require support from local groups to be effective.
Supply and demand
Though forests are widely distributed, they are not equitably
distributed, and this has caused some dispute over the management,
availability, and trade concerning forest resources. As evidenced by the
case of the Indian forests under colonial rule, conflicts concerning
these resources have long been a part of the history of lumber trade.
The most recent and influential concerns the trade dispute between the
United States and Canada.
As the North American timber supplies diminish, the nation has turned
increasingly to British Columbia for wood. North American foresters have
argued that the Canadian lumber industry is unfairly subsidized by the
federal and provincial governments. This allows the price charged to
harvest timber to be set by legislation rather than competitively, and
in 1982 the U.S. claimed these practices undermined the market prices
which tipped the scales commercially to Canada.
This trade dispute has lingered for 24 years. In 1996, the United States
and Canada reached a five year trade agreement called the Softwood
Lumber Agreement (SLA). The SLA limited Canadian exports to 14.7 billion
board feet per year. The agreement expired on April 2, 2001 and neither
party was able to reach an agreement for renewal. In fact, the United
States renewed its request for tariffs, maintaining the United States
lumber industry was under threat from the subsidized Canadian industry.
The dispute continued anew until February 2009 when the London Court of
International Arbitration ruled that Canada was in breach of the SLA
because quotas had not been calculated properly during January-June
2007. The London Court of International Arbitration ordered sawmills in
the provinces of Ontario, Quebec, Manitoba, and Saskatchewan to pay an
additional 10 per cent export charge.
The future of softwoods
Given the dwindling reserves of softwoods, it is imperative the
alternatives be found to meet our needs and further development. One
potential answer to an alternative has been found by working with more
abundant materials previously regarded as unusable, or as “weed” species
to create structural particle board (SPB). SPB is a reconstituted wood
panel that is suitable for structural and exterior construction, which
means it can be substituted for construction-grade plywood. It can be
made from soft or low density hardwoods instead of the greatly
diminished softwood supplies.
It’s possible that the growth of SPB may help reinvigorate lumber
industries in places that have had to extensively rely on imports to
sustain their lumber needs. In fact, though the early development and
distribution of SPB has largely been controlled by the United States and
Canada, SPB production has spread to other countries in Europe and
Asia. SPB has a low density and is resistant to damage, which may help
nations that can acquire a surplus achieve an influential trade status.
At the same time, the focus on SPB may allow depleted woodlands to make a
recovery if they are managed properly.
Comments
Post a Comment