itor’s note: The following letter from John R. Messer, Minister of Mineral Resources of Saskatchewan, is in res- rs ‘ponse to the accompanying article by Regional President Jack Munro which appeared in the December 1978 issue of “Pulp and Paper Canada”. Mr. J. J. Munro, President Dear Jack: Jam writing to offer comments on your interesting article published in the December issue of ‘‘Pulp and Paper Canada’’. The article deals with many important issues which confront the forest industry today and in many respects, the Government of Saskatchewan, accepts a number of the principles described therein. For example, we in Saskatchewan also view Cana- dian forests to be in a precarious state. As a result, we have moved in the direction of implementing more intensive forest management practices: Our actions in 1977-78 demonstrate this. We have considerably increased seedling production for re- forestation, whereby total seedling production has reached 12 million. As well, we have initiated pilot — We aa ‘THE WESTERN CANADIAN LUMBER WORKER TCHEWAN MINISTER PRAISES — — projects which include the development of seed orchards, seed stock, site preparation, planting, fertilization and commercial thinning. As you are undoubtedly aware, through these types of management activities fibre production can be more than doubled; and this is our aim. : The doubling of fibre production is becoming essential, as incursions into forest areas due to recreation and northern development, are in- creasing. This leads to your point concerning security of tenure. I agree with the fact that commercial forest zones should be secured, simply because refores- tation is a long-term process. However, competing interests must be balanced, as well as more intensive forest management practices implemented. The concept of tripartism may lend itself well to the establishing of the aforementioned. Total co- operation by government, labour and industry is however, a difficult pursuit. Though all three groups have the same goal —i.e. assuring forest resources for the future — it must be acknowledged that each to a degree will have divergent loyalties. Industry will be responsible for assuring profit margins, labour 11 will be responsible for assuring employment and security; and government will be responsible for assuring in the long run that both industry and labour fulfil their responsibilities and obligations. _ Thus, I think you will agree that tripartism, will be difficult to realize. The question of bringing public pressure to bear on government, is not the ready solution to forestry problems in the case of Saskatchewan. The Govern- ment of Sakatchewan is very much aware of the issues which confront the forest industry in all areas, and as such are seriously attempting to alleviate them. Rather, pressure must be brought to bear on the private sector in order that it accept a larger role in the sustaining of our forests. In conclusion, I basically agree with your synopsis on the ‘forest dilemma’’ and your proposals to remedy the situation; and may I congratulate you and the IWA for your forward looking approach. I anticipate continued communication and co- operation. Yours sincerely, . John R. Messer Minister of Mineral Resources — — MUNRO’S FORESTRY ARTICLE By J. J. MUNRO Our primary concern in our role as the major union in the forest industries of Western Canada (the Inter- national Woodworkers of America has over 50,000 members) is to ensure that woodworkers win the best wages and working conditions obtainable. How- ever, we do recognize our social responsibilities to the country and our neighbours, and we take con- siderable pride in the fact that our actions indicate our concern for the welfare of those in need. Although we have not shown any great visible Signs over the years of being overly interested in for- est management problems, I can assure you that we will become much more involved in the future. It is our conclusion that the whole matter and practice of forestry is far too important to be left to just fores- ters alone. There are few other organized groups within Canada that recognize the importance of the forests and forest renewal to the economic, recrea- tional, and social well being of Canadians as well as the IWA. Canadian forests in precarious state When I make the statement that forestry is too im- portant to be left to foresters alone, it is not meant as a criticism even though it is not difficult to hold up examples of past mistakes. What we must do now is to rectify past errors and ensure that future errors will be held to a minimum. I use the term “future errors’’ because I am not naive enough (nor do I be- ~ lieve any of you are) to consider the state of the art of forestry perfected to the extent that all forestry deci- Sions of the future will be correct: Literature review and years of observation by the IWA have led us to the conclusion that Canada’s most important renewable resource is in a petentially precarious state. Our belief in that statement was reinforced after listening to the papers and sum- maries given at the October 1977 Forest Renewal Conference held in Quebec City. Subsequent to that Meeting, disturbing reports on timber supply prob- lems keep appearing in newspapers. Despite our efforts at reforestation, we continue to harvest more acres per year than are regenerated. The net result is that our forests are becoming depleted, particular- our more economic timber stands. This fact alone create considerable alarm for a nation so ingely dependent upon its forest resources and its lity to export forest products on a competitive td market. ding foresters from universities, government have all recognized the serious implica- tions of inadequate forest renewal and have from ime to time sounded the alarm. But despite the $ of well-meaning dedicated professionals the ponse from their employer, whether industry or vernment, has been at best inadequate. ‘is because of the response by both industry and rnment that the IWA felt that it must become in- 1 this most important Canadian problem. VA acting alone can do little to accomplish ust be done in Canada. Our political influence ) limited to create the necessary changes in n and phi required both at the niosopn levels. We can only accom- plish our industry goals with respect to forest re- newal in Canada by having the diverse industrial groups working together. There is aneed for a more mature attitude towards labor-management relations in Canada’s forest industries. Periodically, contract negotiations between labor and forest companies are conducted. Included in contract negotiations are such diverse items as safety, working conditions, wages, pen- sions, and so forth. This aspect of labor-management relations is extensively and comprehensively re- ported by the press. Reports tend to concentrate on the confrontation aspect and, in particular, those issues or items that are in dispute. The image that the public has of our relationship (and this includes many members of both management and unions) be- cause of the nature of reporting, tends to cloud reasonable mature thought and hinders healthy liai- son and cooperation among diverse gorups within the industry and society. It is not only in the interest of the direct partici- pants in the industry, but also the rest of society, to ensure that our forest industries remain healthy and viable. This fact becomes readily apparent when it is realized that for every direct job created or lost in the forest industries, there are an additional three jobs created or lost in the overall economy. However, viability for the industry. can only be achieved through cooperation and understanding of the very important issues at hand. The primary participants in a cooperative approach are, of course, govern- ment, industry and labor acting and being treated as equal partners in serious decision-making roles. In a recent speech to the Canadian Forestry Association, I stated that our trade union is prepared to cooperate with government and business. How- ever, I want to make it clear that cooperation is a three-way street and must be reciprocated. I want to make it clear the IWA looks on it as a three-way split, and that means just that — with us having a one-third input. Our move towards tripartism does not meet with the approval of many other unions, and does estab- lish a break from our traditional role. We do not ex- pect immediate spectacular results because of our new policy, but we do expect cooperaton from indus- try in deed as well as word. Do not on the one hand profess cooperation and with the other take advan- tage of us. Incidents of that nature could set back by years what can and should result in a healthier and more positive approach to the solution of economic and social problems in Canadian society. In order to achieve the desired results from this co- operative approach, an improvement in communica- tions among the various sectors of the industry is re- quired. Improved communications will not resolve all issues, for in many instances, a real difference in philosophy does exist. However, a forthright and honest difference of opinion can and does lead to a sense of trust. I am certain that with improved com- munications will come.an identification of numerous issues of common concern that will result in joint labor-industry action. We in the union can see a number of instances where joint labor-industry action is required. This action is required if we are to halt further erosion of industry viability. Our position is for multiple use forests i Our position with respect to managing and use of the forest has always been one of multiple use. Our definition of multiple use does not preclude the with- drawal of localized areas for single use purpose. It does demand, however, the classification of rela- tively large areas of the forest into various primary use zones. Primary use categories such as timber production, protective forest, recreational and multiple use, to name a few, must be established to create security of tenure. The phrase ‘‘security of tenure”’ is normally associated with the rights of industry to large tracts of forest land for a particular period of time. Our first basic concern is that security of tenure be established for: © the total forest estate. © theprimary use that is to be made of particular areas of the forest. One of the most critical concerns across Canada in the current land base supply picture is the severe pressure being exerted to: © Remove land from the forest timber producing land base for other more single use purposes (e.g., parks, agriculture, transmission -corridors, pipe- lines, urban expansion, etc.) - © To place severe constraints on forest manage- ment programs to meet other resource objectives or environmental and social demands. Once security of tenure is established for the forest and forest uses, then land managers from the vari- ous government agencies and industry will be able to develop long-term secure investment and manage- ment strategies. Security of tenure can now become a reality for industry, whether it is for the wood- using primary industries, or for the tourism and recreational oriented service industry. Security of tenure is a prime necessity for industry as well as the industry’s associated labor force. Security of tenure is equally as important for the healthy development of the economic and social infrastructure of com- munities that are or will be largely dependent upon forest resources. Security of tenure; ‘‘no free lunch” We in the IWA are very much aware of the hard- ships that are placed upon people who are forced to relocate. There are numerous instances where couples have built homes and established families in communities, hoping to remain there for life, only to be forced to move because the resource base upon which they were dependent was removed from a particular use. In some cases, parks were estab- lished or wilderness areas proclaimed. A park or wilderness area does not have to be established in the immediate area where industry is located to affect that industry. If the growing base of the forest is reduced, then it is only natural that the annual allowable harvest from the forest must be reduced. There are cases where the reduction in the annual allowable harvest of the forest has been severe enough to make inoper- See “MUNRO” — page 12