By MAURICE RUSH
B.C. Leader
Communist Party

he new forest legislation
brought down by the Socred
government is a “pernicious bill’
which if adopted would give all of
B.C.’s timber and forest industries
to large firms and international

. corporations within a decade. This

is the view of the B.C. Independent
Logging Association, which
represents about 1,000. small
logging companies. In a_ public
statement the association said this
legislation is “the most lavish
giveaway in this province’s
history.”

A study of the new forest act (Bill
14), and the other two pieces of
legislation which accompany it,
confirms the charges made by the
association. It is much worse than
the public realizes, and if passed,
would mark a gigantic step
towards handing over B.C.’s public
forest lands to a few large cor-
porations for generations to come.
This must not be allowed to hap-
pen.

So much is riding on _ this
legislation that the government
should not be allowed to p: sh it
through the legislature in the next
few weeks as it plans to do, without
adequate public discussion and
input. On it rides not only control of
our forests, but also jobs for
thousands of woodworkers and
workers in related industries now
and in the future. It is no
exaggeration to say that this is the
most far-reaching legislation af-
fecting B.C.’s most important
resource industry since the end of
World War II.

Shortly after the end of the war,
in 1947, the provincial government
amended the forest act to make
possible the granting of forest
management licences, now
renamed tree farm licences
(TFL). That legislation opened the
way for a new type of forest tenure
which saw the unprecedented
giveaway of the province’s forest
resources to a few big companies.
It also opened the way for the large
scale takeover of public forest

lands by a few foreign-owned
multinationals, who bought up
Canadian companies’ which
acquired a forest licence.

The extent of monopoly control
of the forest industry was brought
out in the Pearce Royal Com-
mission report of 1976. Here is what
it showed: The largest ten com-
panies hold rights under tree farm
licences to 85.7 percent of the
committed allowable cut on the
coast and 57.4 percent in the Public
Sustained Yield Units. The PSYU
were originally set aside to provide
forest lands for small independent
companies. Most of the best stands
in the PSYU have over the years
been acquired by some of the top
10.

The 10 companies listed in the
Pearse report are: MacMillan
Bloedel, B.C. Forest Products,
Rayonier, Crown Zellerbach,
Canadian Forest Products, Tahsis,
Weldwood, Eurocan, Bay Forest
Products and B.C. Cellulose. (The
latter was placed under public
ownership by the NDP government
but has since been returned to
private control by the Socred
government. )

Pointing out that this situation
has given “rise to concern in
several quarters,’’ Pearse said
that five companies. control a
quarter of the lumber production;
that half of the pulp capacity in
B.C. is controlled by three com-
panies — MacMillan Bloedel, B.C.
Forest Products and Canadian
Forest Products; and that over
half of paper production is con-
trolled by MacMillan Bloedel,
which along with Crown Zellerbach
and B.C. Forest Products, control
84 percent of total capacity.

The extent of foreign domination
of the forest industry is shown by
the following companies which are
among the big 10: Crown Zeller-
bach, which is owned 88 percent by
Crown Zellerbach Corp., of San
Francisco; B.C. Forest Products,
which is owned 41.7 percent by U.S.
Mead Corp., and Scott Paper;
Weldwood of Canada, which is
owned 73.6 percent by Champion
International Corp; and Rayonier
Canada Ltd. which is owned 96
percent by ITT of New York.

The new forest legislation is
aimed at perpetuating and
strengthening control of the forest
industry by Canadian and foreign
monopolies. This aim is to be
achieved by rewriting some of the
legislation concerning forest
tenure in B.C., and particularly by
the new forest act. Three types of
licences are involved: the tree
farm licence, a new ‘‘forest
licence,’’ and the pulpwood
agreements.

The most important of these is
the tree farm licence. These
licences have become the major
vehicle through which the
government has alienated nearly
all the best and prime forest lands
on the B.C. coast, Vancouver
Island and Queen Charlottes to the
10 companies named by Pearse.
Many of these licences are for
more than a million acres, and one
is for six million acres — half the
size of Nova Scotia. There are 34 of
these licences, 20 of which are due
to expire in 1979 after a 21-year
tenure. It is reported that the
government has already approved
another TFL to ITT-owned

Rayonier Corp., in the southern tip
of the Queen Charlottes, which is
considered an Heritage park site,
and is only awaiting adoption of the
new legislation to make the an-
nouncement.

As well as handing over millions
of acres of Crown forest lands to
the holders of the TFLs, the
provincial government has been
more than generous in its tax
concessions to the big cor-
porations. In fact, it borders on
being a scandal. Under the terms
of the licences, companies can
deduct from stumpage payments
to the government the cost of
building and maintenance of roads
and the cost of reforestation for
which purpose the provincial
government also provides young
trees free of charge. Yet stumpage
rates are now only one-fifth of what
they are in the U.S. Pacific Nor-
thwest.

Arrangements have also been
made through B.C. Hydro to
deliver electric city and gas at
rates only slightly higher than cost,
with the result that companies
have failed to use wood waste as an
energy source. The forest industry
is a prime user of electricity and
gas even though studies have.
shown that if the forest companies
used wood waste, it would supply
nearly all of the energy needs of
the industry. Not satisfied with
this, the provincial government
has now declared that, under the
new legislation, the B.C. Forest
Tax would be cut from 15 to 10
percent, which would mean a
further -tax concession of $14
million.

The TFLs became such a hot
issue a few years ago that the

provincial government stopped

issuing them and none have been
granted since 1966. In his report,
Pearse pointed to the large
holdings the companies had been
given and suggested that licences
be granted for 15 years, renewable
at five-year-intervals and _ that
their size be reduced by 10 percent
at the five-year renewal point.

What has the Socred government
written into the new legislation
concerning the TFL? It provides
that the licences be issued for 25
years, renewed for their whole
period again after 10 years.

It completely drops Pearse’s
suggestion that 10 percent be taken
from the TFL area. It also provides
that new TFLs be issued after
public hearings are held. But this is
mostly window-dressing since
most of the prime forest land has
already been alienated. It would
have had some meaning if all TFL
up for renewal required public
hearings. This is not to be the case,
however, since the minister has the
power to renew TFLs_ without
recourse to public hearings.

The other two forms of tenure —
forest licences and pulpwood
agreements — represent a further
giveaway to the big monopolies.
When the public sustained yield
units were established to provide
for the needs of small forest
companies, the big 10 moved in to
the PSYU and soon acquired
licences which gave them the lion’s
share of the forests. Now the
government intends to make the
monopoly holdings in PSYU areas
permanent in that the new act will
give them legislative recognition.

The ‘‘forest licence’? named in
the act is an entirely new form of
tenure. It replaces the timber sale
harvesting licence, which had a
less permanent tenure, with the
new forest licence which will be
granted for 20 years, renewable for
its whole term, after five years.

Pulpwood agreements were
granted the big corporations to
enable them to establish pulp
operations in many parts of B.C. in
forest lands covered by the PSYU.
They were another massive in-

cursion by some of the big 10 into.

the PSYU areas. Now the new
Forest Act will perpetuate and
extend this form of tenure. Under
Bill 14, pulpwood agreements for
the big pulp and paper companies
will be for a term of 25 years,
renewable after ten years for the
duration.

Taken together, these three
forms of tenure will strengthen and
ensure monopoly domination of
tens of millions of public owned
forests for at least the next 35
years. It will ensure that the forest
industry remains primarily a raw
material industry since the major
monopolies are not interested in
manufacturing and processing in
B.C., but are more concerned with
the profits to be made by exporting
raw and semi-processed wood
products.

The passage of the new forest
legislation will be a major blow
against any plans to expand B.C.’s
economic base through increased
manufacturing and processing.
Along with it will go tens of
thousands of permanent jobs
secondary forest industries could
provide. The provisions in the
legislation for the setting up of a
forest research council and a 10-
year inventory as well as a five-
year review of harvesting policies
are so much window dressing to
make the legislation more ac-
ceptable to the public and the
forest unions. They will not alter
the main thrust of the legislation
which is to ensure a tighter grip by
the big 10 on the forest resources of
B.C.

old one, discourages’ the

development of
manufacuring. Since the
legislation was: first adopt
1947, there has hardly been
change in forest industry bas
remains at the raw material
semi-processed stage. A & tf
released by the B.C. Departmen?
Industrial Development shows

in 1973, lumber accounted |
percent of total forest producu®
pulp and newsprint, 40 percv:
and plywood, seven percent. —

The only change over the y@
has been the growth of the pulp#
newsprint industry and val!
types of plywood and boards.
despite the fact that the 5!
commission following World 7
II included an extensive se@
pointing to the hundreds’
manufactured wood products ¥
could be produced in B.C. #)
made important recommendatil™g
urging that the province dev™
manufacturing and processin&: t¢

That section of the Sloan Te}
has never been implemel
because the multinational 4,
porations which dominate ‘,,
industry have a vested interest
extracting raw materials an®
impeding the development 1
manufacturing and process
which would compete with pl.
they own in other parts of ©,
world. Now the new fof

2 f}*

legislation opens the way to int
creased exports of logs 4)

especially wood chips. Now “4
export of wood chips is to stand'

its own as a major B.C. expo!”
large facility is planned of iP
north side of Burrard Inlet 4)
handle what is expected to be

highly profitable raw mate"),
export.

A most serious aspect of the net
legislation is that it will lead |°
further denuding of the provine
forests rather than to a proF
forest management policy ba®°
on perpetual yield policies.
original tree farm licence systé’
was sold to the public in 1947 on™
pretext that by giving forest la”
to large companies under lic’
for long periods of time,
government could ensure that ©)

~ forests were adequately refores” 3!
The new forest act, just like the 1

to provide for future growth.
This is now proven to have bee!

PACIFIC. TRIBUNE+June 16,A978+Page-6 a