WSJ: Trade War - U.S. tariffs on Canadian lumber hurt American home buyers.

Wall Street Journal ^ | August 15, 2005 | Editorial

[Alberta's Child]

The point of my post was that lumber sales to the U.S. are not enough to keep the U.S. lumber industry afloat. Americans may not care much if Canada wants to sell its lumber to China, but U.S. lumber producers sure do -- since they can't compete with Canadian producers in this market.

I'd also mention that I don't think of Canadian lumber producers in terms of just British Columbia. Some of the largest pulp and paper mills in Canada are actually in Alberta, not BC -- and these mills are busier than ever because it's cheaper to do business in Alberta than in BC.

[concrete is my business]

It is largely the way the BC Ministry of Forests is structured that kept the Canadian forest industry out of the free trade agreement in the first place.

Ottawa sold out the forest industry (and the west...again) when they signed.

Ironically, lumber was always duty free before the free trade agreement.

But IMO, the free trade agreement was still a very good agreement for Canada.

And Ottawa has made the best use they can of the softwood problem. Since then it has been used as an election tool for the Liberals to bad mouth Americans with.

IMO Washington is not going to back down here either as it is one of the few things left to them with which to influence Ottawa.

[Alberta's Child]

I've suggested in the past that Ottawa has more leverage here than Washington.

"Sure, we'll sell you all the oil you need down there -- but for each barrel of oil you have to buy a load of (duty-free) lumber."

:-)

[MD_Willington_1976]

No mention of raw logs...just cut lumber...hmmm

[concrete is my business]

That would be a warning shot across the bow of the Americans OK.

And I would expect a hearty response.

I find it hard to believe an Albertan wants to link the two issues diplomatically though, as it will cost Alberta the most.

IMO Ottawa will not interfere in exports to the USA in any other of its life bread industrys, especially energy, to appease the softwood lumber industry.

Look for soft ball tactics, mostly aimed at farmers.

[Post-Neolithic]

Color me confused. Since hearing about this particular ruling I did a little investigating, maybe you can clear this up for me. Most of the Canadian Lumber producing forests are owned by the Canadian Government.

They charge what is known as a stump fee of around $200.00 per 1000 board feet to the Timber companies that do the logging (In the USA the timber companies get charged a fee by our Government of around $700.00 per 1000 board feet), this does not include all the regulations our Government imposes on timber companies here(Replants, emissions etc).

So wouldn't the best thing to do be to lower the Stump Fee here in the US to $200.00 and just lessen the Feds requirements to timber companies? Or do you just want to give the Canadians the upper hand in this without regard for our country?

[Alberta's Child]

Actually, most government-owned forests in Canada are owned by provincial governments, not the Canadian government. This is why there is a wide variety of forestry practices across the country -- with the lowest stumpage fees charged in British Columbia and higher fees charged in Alberta.

Or do you just want to give the Canadians the upper hand in this without regard for our country?

That's a very good question. One thing to remember here is that on a "level playing field" the Canadians will always have the upper hand in this industry simply because there are a lot more trees up there than down here in the U.S.