Challenges facing theNorth American forest sector
and boundary-spanning opportunities
Tat Smith and Guy Smith
Faculty of ForestryUniversity of Toronto
&Natural Resources Canada (NRCan)
Canadian Forest ServiceSault Ste. Marie, Ontario
North American Natural Resources Extension ForumCanadian Ecology Centre, Mattawa, Ontario
10 April 2006
Objectives --
• Major challenges facing NA forest sector
• Canadian and U.S. context
• Roles and responsibilities to address issues
• Models for natural resource extension programs
• Cross-border opportunities
Stimulate discussion and questions…
Major challenges facing NA forest sector:
• Survive!
• Demonstrate relevance to increasingly urban society• Resource access & availability• Social license for land managers• Visibility of our profession
• Maintain resources to address key issues• Human capital• Financial• Infrastructure
Major challenges facing NA forest sector:
Demonstrate relevance to the public by… e.g.
Achieving values of sustainable resource management:• Environmental – incl. ecological services• Economic
• Global competitiveness, including new product development• Rural economic development
• Social• Rural communities• Aboriginal and First Nations
Consider internationally accepted standards definingSustainable Forest Management (SFM)
SFM applies to land base, production systems and end-products.
Eastern forest types
13 Southern states
Geographic regionand dominant forest types
U.S. context --Southern example
Situation in the rural South
Forces of change described in the Southern Forest Resource AssessmentWear and Greis, 2002 -- http://www.srs.fs.usda.gov/sustain/
Five forces are reshaping forests:• Land markets – losses to urbanization• Timber markets – increased Southern production• Social institutions – increasing regulations• Biological factors – spread of native and exotic pests• Physical factors – increased pollution and catastrophic disturbance
Predicted change in forest area (1992-2020)
Wear & Greis, 2002
Wear & Greis, 2002
A 40-year summary of Southern Pine Beetle outbreaks
Hurricane Katrina19:15 UTC (3:15 p.m. EDT) on 29 August 2005
Source: MODIS-NASA
Hurricane Rita1:01 p.m. EDT on 23 September 2005
Hurricane RitaTexas Forest Service Timber Damage Assessment
http://texasforestservice.tamu.edu/pdf/forest/ritaassessment.pdf
Landownership Patterns in East Texas
Historical
Industry
32%
Public
7% NIPF
61%
2003
NIPF
61%
Public
7%
Industry
17%
Investors
15%
Darwin Foster, Texas A&M
Virginia 2001
NIPF66%
Forest Industry
7%
Public14%
Other Corporate
13%
Land ownership in Virginia
Jim Johnson, Virginia Tech, 2006
Oregon 2006
Public61%
Forest Industry
22%
Tribal1%
NIPF16%
Jim Reeb, Oregon State, 2006
Land ownership in Oregon
Michigan 1993
Forest Industry
8%Other
Corporate11%
Public35%NIPF
46%
Land ownership in Michigan
Peg Gale, Michigan Tech, 2006
Maine 2003
Public6%
Forest Industry31%
Other Corporate31%
NIPF32%
Land ownership in Maine
Jim Philp, University of Maine, 2006
9 forested ecozones
Geographic regionand dominant forest types
Canadian context
British Columbia
Provincial96%
Federal1%
Private3%
Paula Konka, NRCan-CFS, 2006
Alberta
Provincial89%
Federal8%
Private3%
British Columbia and AlbertaLand ownership and tenure
Ontario
Provincial91%
Federal1%
Private8%
Quebec
Provincial89%
Private11%
Ontario and QuebecLand ownership and tenure
Paula Konka, NRCan-CFS, 2006
New Brunswick
Provincial48%
Federal2%
Private50%
Nova Scotia
Provincial29%
Federal3%Private
68%
Paula Konka, NRCan-CFS, 2006
New Brunswick and Nova Scotia land ownership and tenure
Prince Edward Island
Provincial8%
Federal1%
Private91%
Newfoundland and Labrador
Provincial99%
Private1%
PEI and Newfoundland & LabradorLand ownership and tenure
Paula Konka, NRCan-CFS, 2006
Canada - U.S. Comparison
29%94%Public timberland
71%6%Private timberland
747 million acres
1.033 billion acres
ForestlandUnited StatesCanada
Autos #1, Wood
Products#18
Aerospace #1Wood Products #5
Petroleum #1,Wood
Products #2
BC AB
ON QC NB
Wood Products
#1
Oil & Gas #1 Wood
Products #5
Wood Products Manufacturing as a
Percentage of Total Merchandise
Exports
# = Importance of industry, ranked by 1st two quarters (Jan. – Jun.) of
2005 value of exports to U.S.34%
3%
2%7%
11%
x%
Importance of Wood Products“competitiveness is critical to the B.C. economy”
Peter Woodbridge, 2006
Canadian headline news
Daily News Friday, April 07, 2006
Former Tembec mill to be converted into co-gen plant
Daily News Tuesday, March 28, 2006Environmental concerns halt pulp mill construction
Thursday January 26, 6:33 am ET
Bowater Announces Fourth Quarter and Full Year 2005 Financial Results
…the company will permanently close the Thunder Bay "A" kraft mill
in the second quarter of 2006.
News Release: February 21, 2006Graduates of Forestry Programs Needed and In Demand
…the large number of retirements in the forest sector coincidental with lowered enrollment has created an employment gap.
Major challenges facing NA forest sector:
Ontario forest industry competitive positionaffected by:• U.S. dollar exchange rate• Cost of energy – e.g. 3X Quebec electricity cost• Price of delivered wood
Hard lessons:• It’s tough to survive in commodity markets• Urgent need to develop new business plans
• North vs. South issues in province• Energy policy hinders investment in renewable energy• Province owns the forest… has not grasped biomass concepts
Canada - U.S. Trade
USA 97%
European Union 1%
Other countries 2%
Ontario: destination of exports (2002)
Major challenges facing NA forest sector:
Policy opportunity for Canadian and U.S.…• Develop renewable energy sector
• Technology developed in IEA Bioenergy collaboration
IEA Bioenergy Task 31
Recoverable forest biomass (106 dry tons/yr)41 Logging & other residue60 Fuel treatments35 Fuel wood106 Forest products industry waste37 Urban wood residues89 Forest growth
368 Total
DOE/USDA Billion Ton Vision Paper
Annual biomass resource potential (106 dry tons/yr)
368 Forest resources998 Agricultural resources
1366 Total resource potential
DOE/USDA Billion Ton Vision Paper
Pathway Link to Resource Base
DOE/USDA Billion Ton
Vision Paper
1,2
3
4
5
6,7
“Pathway”Identification Numbers
Source: Russo
U.S. Department of EnergyEnergy Efficiency and Renewable Energy
Office of the Biomass Program
Thermochemical Platform
Sugar Platform
FuelsChemicals & MaterialsBiomass
Combined Heat & Power
Residues
Clean Gas
Conditioned GasBio-oils
Sugar Feedstocks, Lignin Intermediates
Advanced Biomass R&D
Systems Integration = BiorefineriesSource: Russo
Forest Sector Biorefinery PathwaysNote DOE “partner” opportunities!
Complete systems level demonstration and validation of
all technologies to improve corn wet mill facilities using
corn grain feedstock
ForestResidues
•Georgia-Pacific•Agenda 2020
• Wood• Mill
Wastes
• New Fractionation Process for Hemicellulose Removal
• Products from C 5/C6 Sugars• Black Liquor Gasification• Products from BLG Syn Gas
Program “A”MilestonesFeedstocksBiorefinery Pathway
Conversion Pathway Options Under
Consideration (each has a B Milestone - cost target ) Partners
•None• Wood• Mill
Wastes
• Pyrolysis Oil Upgrading
Complete systems level demonstration and validation of
all technologies to improve corn dry mill facilities using
corn (and other ) grain feedstock
•NoneComplete systems level
demonstration and validation of all technologies to improve
natural oil processing facilities using oil crop feedstock
• LoggingResidues
TreatmentsFuel•
• Biomass Sugar Production• Products from C 5/C6 Sugars• Products from Lignin • Biomass Gasification• Products from Synthesis Gas• New Fractionation Processes• Products from New Process
Intermediates
•None Complete systems level demonstration and validation of
all technologies to improve processing facilities using
agricultural residue feedstocks
• MSW &Urban
WastesWood
• Biomass Sugar Production• Products from C 5/C6 Sugars• Products from Lignin • Biomass Gasification• Products from Synthesis Gas• New Fractionation Processes• Products from New Process
Intermediates
Pulp and
Paper Mills
Forest Product
Mills
Non-ForestWood
Wastes
Source: Russo
Sustainable Production of
Biobased Products
Product Delivery Logistics
Rural Economic
Development
Manufacturing/Energy Production
Sustainable Forest
Operations
Consumer Demand
Environmental Sustainability
Critical Components of Sustainable Bioenergy Production Systems
Martin Holmer, 2001 IEA Bioenergy Task 31
Major challenges facing NA forest sector:
What renewable energy potential for Ontario?
What role for extension programs?
IEA Bioenergy Task 31
Major challenges facing NA forest sector:
British Columbia mountain pine beetle epidemic• What forecast for Alberta thru the Maritimes?!
What role for extension programs?
Mountain pine beetle outbreak in B.C. in 2003
Stennis & White, 2005
Mountain pine beetle mortality in B.C.
Stennis & White, 2005
Stennis & White, 2005
Stennis & White, 2005
Roles and responsibilities to address issues
Shared among public and private parties• Government
• Legislative• Federal, provincial, state• Management• Research
• Industry• Companies• Contractors
• Professional foresters• Woodlot owners• Aboriginal people• Academic institutions – incl. research, outreach & extension• NGOs• General public
Communities of interest for bioenergy and biobased products
Clearly an important role for natural resource extension programs…
How do Canadian and U.S. extension programs compare?
Can we do more together?
Where shall we focus?
Do our respective performance review protocols provide adequate incentive?
Founding principle and legislation for key partnershipsinvolved with U.S. extension programs
Federal-state partnership… created by• Smith-Lever Act of 1914• Renewable Resources Extension Act of 1978
• Formula funds administered by USDA-CSREES
• Land Grant Colleges and Universities involved at State level• 1862, 1887, 1890 and Tuskegee, and 1994 (tribal) legislation
The Texas Forestry Extension Model
Extension Program Council
People
Extension Education Programs
Science/ Research
Program Delivery
Forestry Extension Specialists
County Extension
Agents
Texas Forest Service
Coordinators
Darwin Foster, Texas A&M
The logic model: a framework for program performance evaluationapplied to bioenergy and bio-based products programs
Forestry Extension in Canada
Audience Profile
Private and public; small-scale and large-scale industrial operations
VariableContracts with woodlot owners; forest products companies
Contractors
First Nations; adjacent public and private lands
VariableFirst Nations organizations
Aboriginal
Private and public; industrial and small-scale and large scale
University;Community college
Provincial governments; forest products companies
Foresters and Technicians
Private and public; small-scale and large-scale industrial operations
VariableWork for contractors; forest products companies
Forestry workers
Private; small scale (non-industrial)
VariableSelf-employedWoodlot Owners
LandbaseEducationEmployerGroup
Client Profile
Woodlot Owners
Contractors
Engaged citizens
Foresters and Technicians
Forestry workers
Policy-makers
Public land-provincial licensees -forest industry -range, mining, energy,
water
Urban/Municipal
Private land-industrial -woodlots
First Nations lands
AssociationsProfessionalWoodlotsIndustry
GovernmentFederalProvincialMunicipal
IndustryForest ProductsContractorsSmall businessNon-timber products
PartnershipsNot-for-profitCooperativesCouncils
AcademicCollegesUniversities
Institutional context
Support & ExtensionPartnershipsAssociations
R & DGovernmentAcademia-via partnerships
Institutional Context
Regulation & PolicyProvincial government Federal government Programs
GovernmentInter-agency agreements
OperationsIndustryContractorsProvincial governmentFirst Nations
Roles and functions
Extension in Canadian Terms
Diversity of providers& users
What’s behind a name?
In Canada,
No national system of Land-Grant Universities & Cooperative Extension
Few providers, yet highly diverse partnerships
What’s behind a name?
Extension
- meeting the needs of:
•Public land managers•Private woodlot/woodIand owners
What’s behind a name?
Lack of value/recognition of extension as a professional discipline
Need broader recognition of the value of extension
TrendsReductions in government capacity
Increased demand from forest industry, with more focused learning objectives
- to meet regulatory expectations- heavy reliance on science
TrendsGovernment programs have encouraged the creation of partnerships.
Many partnerships depend on continued government support.
Trends
Creation of associations and partnerships to deliver extension services
TrendsChallenges:
- staying on mission
- maintaining capacity
- effectively meeting demands
Cross-country examples
•FERIC
•Forintek
Government-Provincial-Industry partnerships
British Columbia
FORREX Forest Research Extension Partnership (FORREX) is a British Columbia, Canada-based charitable non-share corporation, founded in 1998 to help people develop science and knowledge-based solutions to complex natural resource challenges.
AlbertaWoodlot Extension Program
SaskatchewanSaskatchewan Forest Centre
Ontario
QuebecForest Innovation Partnership
The Forest Innovation Partnership's mission is to answer the needs of Quebec's forest-dependent regions and their communities by promoting innovative forest management through more effective knowledge transfer between researchers and users. This strategic alliance stems from an agreement between the Canadian Forest Service (CFS), FERIC and Forintek Canada Corp. withfinancial support from Canada Economic Development.
New Brunswick
The NB Christmas Tree Growers Association, the NB Maple Syrup Producers Association and the NB Federation of Woodlot Owners joined forces with very strong support from the NB Department of Natural Resources in order to provide consulting services and promote the sustainable management of private woodlots.
National
During the Rio Earth Summit in 1992, Canada demonstrated international leadership in environmental stewardship by launching one of the world’s largest experiments in sustainable forest management. The Canadian Model Forest Network continues to bring together organizations with diverse views on how forests should be managed. With core funding and leadership from Natural Resources Canada’s Canadian Forest Service, this diversity of opinion and spirit of collaboration has advanced the knowledgeand practice of sustainable forest management. Model Forests include among their partners forest industry, environmental groups, woodlot owners,academics, Aboriginal communities, parks, government agencies, recreational groups, trappers and anyone who has an interest in sustainable forest management. Together, these partnerships address the challenge of balancing the extensive range of demands placed on forests today with theneeds of future generations.
Institutional linkages – rich relationships…•Great Lakes Forest Alliance
•Networking Across Borderse.g. Maritimes - New England
•Association of Natural Resource Extension Professionals
•IUFRO – Extension Working Party
•Heaps more…
What are the priority topics? Vehicles for interaction?
Cross-border opportunities
What are the priority topics?•Traditional forestry and natural resource areas
•Ongoing and/or new trans-national activity•SFM certification schemes
•E.g. SFI, FSC, ISO 14001•International Model Forest Network•Global climate change
•Carbon trading•Bioenergy
•IEA Bioenergy program•USDA funded forest encyclopedia
•www.forestencyclopedia.net•Ecological services
Consider point on diffusion-adoption curve…
Cross-border opportunities
Consider point on diffusion-adoption curve…
Priorities for cross-border collaboration?•Innovators or early adopters?•Early to late majority?
Consider program performance review metrics
Cross-border opportunities
Source: Jim Johnson, 2006
Thanks!
Questions?
Back to PRESENTATIONS page