Mackcanuck Posted November 30, 2020 Share Posted November 30, 2020 Reduced from 22% to 9% Should be 0% but it is still good news https://www.bnnbloomberg.ca/video/there-should-be-zero-u-s-tariffs-on-softwood-b-c-lumber-trade-council-ceo~2084869 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Warhippy Posted November 30, 2020 Share Posted November 30, 2020 [Insert Trudeau hate here] 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Roger Neilsons Towel Posted November 30, 2020 Share Posted November 30, 2020 Good news for the BC forestry industry. Like the tweet says, it should be 0%, but 9% is a hell of a lot better than 22%. At least now we should be able to compete. 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RUPERTKBD Posted November 30, 2020 Share Posted November 30, 2020 I hate to be cynical, but it strikes me as just another way for the Trump administration to make themselves look better on the way out and make Biden have to deal with US companies that will no doubt be complaining about it.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Violator Posted December 1, 2020 Share Posted December 1, 2020 1 hour ago, RUPERTKBD said: I hate to be cynical, but it strikes me as just another way for the Trump administration to make themselves look better on the way out and make Biden have to deal with US companies that will no doubt be complaining about it.... When it comes to the resource industry he's been pretty decent.He know he gets stuff cheaper than what he has to pay other industries. American presidents have never been decent especially the way it relates to soft wood. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Warhippy Posted December 1, 2020 Share Posted December 1, 2020 All jokes aside, if I recall there IS something about this regarding a future ruling that is set to come sometime very early 2021 triggered by the new NAFTA agreement. Will be interesting to know if this is because of that Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
#Canucks Posted December 1, 2020 Share Posted December 1, 2020 5 hours ago, RUPERTKBD said: I hate to be cynical, but it strikes me as just another way for the Trump administration to make themselves look better on the way out and make Biden have to deal with US companies that will no doubt be complaining about it.... We will see what happens. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Russ Posted December 1, 2020 Share Posted December 1, 2020 7 hours ago, Warhippy said: All jokes aside, if I recall there IS something about this regarding a future ruling that is set to come sometime very early 2021 triggered by the new NAFTA agreement. Will be interesting to know if this is because of that Wasn't it the world trade council came and said it was wrong or something like that a while back? I probably should know since this is my industry lol Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Warhippy Posted December 1, 2020 Share Posted December 1, 2020 5 hours ago, Russ said: Wasn't it the world trade council came and said it was wrong or something like that a while back? I probably should know since this is my industry lol If I recall, the US has lost every challenge. I remember reading that there's a trigger in the event of another loss on the softwood file if the US doesn't just play nice. I'll try to find it, but trade law isn't my forte so I'm probably on a limb right now 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Boudrias Posted December 1, 2020 Share Posted December 1, 2020 2 hours ago, Warhippy said: If I recall, the US has lost every challenge. I remember reading that there's a trigger in the event of another loss on the softwood file if the US doesn't just play nice. I'll try to find it, but trade law isn't my forte so I'm probably on a limb right now Softwood Lumber tariff all during the Trump and Obama admins. IMHO one of these first chips the feds throw on the table when dealing with the Americans. It only cost jobs and corporate sales revenue in BC. Eastern Canada is rarely impacted since Maritimes is private wood. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ghostsof1915 Posted December 1, 2020 Share Posted December 1, 2020 I'm sure things have changed but I remember reading Sweden cuts down half the lumber that we do, but employs twice the number of people in forestry. Maybe we should look at selective logging, aggressive reforestation, using every scrap of fibre in the tree. And look at forestry as the renewable and very manageable resource it should be. Sort of like fishing and farming. We should be trying to manage fish stocks, and help grow our fisheries. And make sure our fisheries and farms can last for generations to come. There is probably going to have to be a price on preventing development on land that we need for other resources. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
UKNuck96 Posted December 2, 2020 Share Posted December 2, 2020 8 hours ago, Ghostsof1915 said: I'm sure things have changed but I remember reading Sweden cuts down half the lumber that we do, but employs twice the number of people in forestry. Maybe we should look at selective logging, aggressive reforestation, using every scrap of fibre in the tree. And look at forestry as the renewable and very manageable resource it should be. Sort of like fishing and farming. We should be trying to manage fish stocks, and help grow our fisheries. And make sure our fisheries and farms can last for generations to come. There is probably going to have to be a price on preventing development on land that we need for other resources. If you want forestry management Norway is the model to follow http://www.bbc.co.uk/earth/story/20151104-discover-how-norway-saved-its-vanishing-forests 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
UKNuck96 Posted December 2, 2020 Share Posted December 2, 2020 1 hour ago, 6of1_halfdozenofother said: Not a bad approach, but not entirely feasible here in BC (or Canada, for that matter), given that Norway's footprint is about a third of BC's, and much of our land is rocky a.f. and extremely remote. The biodiversity part is also an issue, but I'm sure it's the same issue if we were to re-plant to replace forest fire damaged stands as well. Yeah I agree it couldn’t be replicated directly in BC or Canada but the overarching principle of it could be 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Please sign in to comment
You will be able to leave a comment after signing in
Sign In Now