Moving from Conflict to Collaboration

Consider the following:


(1) “Timber theft is a problem across (fill in the blank)”

(2) “As the value of forest products increase, so does timber theft. (Fill in the blank)’s high percentage of absentee forest ownership, especially in (fill in the blank), makes this area particularly vulnerable to scams and theft.

(3) “Timber theft continues in (fill in the blank) despite tougher law.

What first comes to mind? I suspect your initial guess at filling in the blanks would be names of foreign countries. Turns out you’d be wrong. All of the above involve U.S. activity. The first example is from the Virginia Department of Forestry Web site. The second is found on the Oklahoma State Forestry Web site. Number three was reported in the Syracuse Post Standard regarding timber theft in central New York state.

Despite what you read in the promotional material from U.S. flooring and other domestic wood industry publications, and a seemingly growing number of their advertisers, timber theft and illegal logging isn’t just a problem in developing countries. It happens here -- along with land ownership disputes, controversial clear-cutting and environmental law violations. The point of this article is not to target the problem of illegal logging in the U.S. but rather put into perspective that the constant controversy over wood that is in many cases generated by our own folks, is claiming victims on both sides of the borders.

The overwhelming majority of wood products manufactured in the U.S. and abroad come from responsibly managed forests. Furthermore, study after study has shown that wood of suspicious origin is likely to be consumed within the country of its harvest, and therefore does not enter into global trade.

Imports are legal, responsible, beautiful, durable and here to stay. Consumers vote with their checkbooks and they are voting for ipe decking, jatoba flooring, mahogany doors and anigre cabinets. At this point, all involved in the wood industry should welcome consumer acceptance of ANY wood.

The entire wood industry both domestic and imported is in jeopardy of losing market share to alternative materials. Recycled plastic lumber is growing in market share for decking and fencing applications. Interior steel doors are finished to look like wood. Concrete is being offered as framing material. Vinyl overlays look just like wood veneer. These and other substitutes are being offered as “green” alternatives to chopping down trees!

We need to leave behind old beliefs and battles and instead focus on the future of wood consumption by creating closer bonds of coordination between trade associations and industry colleagues.

Company advertisements and trade association publications that continue to raise the specter of illegality of imports do the entire industry a disservice. Domestic industry lobbied hard for Lacey, they got what they wanted – a level playing field.

Imported wood products are now “de facto” certified as legal and sustainable under Lacey. It is ironic that likely the best thing for imports is the Lacey Act. Imports now come in with the seal of approval from U.S. officials and are helping architects and designers increasingly specify imported wood products.

Although domestic wood has no such certification process via Lacey, we strongly believe the sustainable argument for industry should be that all wood is good.

It’s time to call an end to the trade skirmishes and get back to selling and promoting wood as the most environmentally friendly and sustainable resource.