Natural Resources Committee on Jan. 29th, 2015

[Pat Perkins, Conservative, Whitby—Oshawa, ON]

I think you're correct. Yes.

[The Chair, Conservative, Leon Benoit]

It's great to have you here. You will be followed by Monsieur Caron and Mr. Trost.

Go ahead, please, for up to five minutes.

[Pat Perkins, Conservative, Whitby—Oshawa, ON]

My first question is a very strange question, but I saw this in your slide so I have to ask it because I certainly don't know the answer.

When you talk about the U.S. subsidies and then in brackets, black liquor, what are you talking about? I need an education on this; I don't understand it.

[Glenn Mason]

Thank you for that question.

It is an interesting term, and as somebody coming new to the forest sector, I had to ask the same question.

Black liquor is a residue produced by the kraft pulping process. There's a chemical kraft pulping process that creates the pulp, and there's kind of a nasty stew that comes out at the end called black liquor. A large proportion of that is lignin, which is kind of the other part of...trees are made of cellulose and lignin, so it's lignin, and then depending on the chemicals that are used, there might be some other things, like sulphur. It's a residue which historically has been burned as fuel back into the boilers. That's how it was used, but we now know we can get much higher value out of that, for instance, by extracting the lignin.

What happened in the United States was they had a biofuel-type subsidy. What folks were doing, as I understood it, was basically mixing this stuff with diesel fuel and getting a subsidy. It was a complete misuse of the tax system, but it worked, and it was worth about $25 billion to the American industry.

[Pat Perkins, Conservative, Whitby—Oshawa, ON]

Okay.

I have a couple more questions.

There has been some discussion about the building materials aspect. I do come from the municipal sector, so I find that one rather intriguing. You talk about the fire safety ratings. You talk about laminated products, and so on.

I understand when you're talking about the building code, and structurally it might be fine, and the rating might work in terms of fire safety rating, but when you start getting into something like laminated products, and so on, how will that translate into toxicity? What is it that's going to come out of that which could actually be harmful to someone over and above the smoke being harmful? Has that been part of the process you have been undertaking to understand?

[Robert Jones]

Well, there's been quite a bit of research, too, on ensuring that all of the resins that are used for these panel products are within the acceptable limits that Health Canada or any of the other regulatory bodies have governed to be safe. Everything that goes into the material has been approved. Whether it's the type of resin and those sorts of materials or the glues, they've all been assured as being non-toxic materials that go into the panels.

[Pat Perkins, Conservative, Whitby—Oshawa, ON]

Okay.

We were talking about the pine beetle, the emerald ash borer, and the spruce budworm. All of these things tend to originate from offshore. There's been a tremendous amount of dialogue over the years about the wooden pallets that bring product in. They're importing goods, they come off of a ship, they're on the wooden pallets, and lo and behold, sometimes these wooden pallets bring in these beetles and bugs which then infest our forests at a major cost.

Who or where does that dialogue happen? Who happens to discuss whether or not we want those pallets actually coming in, and what kind of protection to our forestry could be attained by dealing with them? Is that dialogue under way, and by whom?

[Glenn Mason]

Thank you for that question, and it's a very good question.

In fact, just the other day I was listening to one of my scientists talking about this, Eric Allen from Victoria. He's a world-leading expert, and I think he chairs the international committee.

As you can imagine, there's an international committee of countries that sets the standards for these things. Scientists from the CFS work very closely with folks from CFIA in setting these rules, and so on. Now there is a standard for wooden pallets, and basically they have to be heat treated. Heat treating kills bugs. But it was interesting; he said that if we had had that standard 20 years ago, we probably would not have the emerald ash borer.

In terms of the world that they talk about, it's very much about identifying the vectors, the ways that these bugs transmit themselves, and then regulating those, as opposed to focusing on a specific bug.

[Pat Perkins, Conservative, Whitby—Oshawa, ON]

I'm just trying to get at the fact that the protection of our forests is a huge thing. It's something that you've been undertaking vigorously, obviously.

[Glenn Mason]

Absolutely, and we also work closely with the Americans, and increasingly with the Mexicans, in terms of thinking about a kind of fortress America. If you take Seattle and you take Vancouver, for example, the Asian gypsy moth is a nasty little bug that wants to come from Asia. If Vancouver applies restrictions that are very expensive for ships, but Seattle doesn't, those ships could just go down to Seattle. Then the bugs would get into Seattle and then they'd come up north. It's very important that we work together on a kind of continent-wide basis.

[Pat Perkins, Conservative, Whitby—Oshawa, ON]

Border security....

[Glenn Mason]

Absolutely.

[Pat Perkins, Conservative, Whitby—Oshawa, ON]

Right, and my last—

[The Chair, Conservative, Leon Benoit]

Thank you, Ms. Perkins. Your time is up.

We go now to Monsieur Caron, followed by Mr. Trost.

Go ahead, please, for up to five minutes.

[Guy Caron, NDP, Rimouski-Neigette—Témiscouata—Les Basques, QC]

Thank you very much.

Mr. Mason, thank you for your presentation. I hope we will have an opportunity to see each other again—perhaps during the committee's study—so that we can talk specifically about the recommendations from the 2008 report.

I would like to ask you a few questions about that report, but the first question is about your presentation. On page 16, you talk about challenges the industry is facing. You mentioned the fibre quality issue, especially in eastern Canada. This surprises me, as I recall that, during the worst of the crisis, the industry took comfort in the high quality of fibre compared with our competitors, especially those from Central America.

What challenges stem from fibre quality today?

[Glenn Mason]

The eastern part of Canada is facing a number of challenges. One is that it takes a long time to grow a tree. In Chibougamau, it could take 150 to 200 years. You're faced with a different production challenge in terms of what you can get out of the trees, and it takes a lot longer to regrow.

There is also the challenge of the spruce budworm and what that's doing to the forest in Quebec and possibly into New Brunswick. Then, if you follow the nineties, a lot of the easy to cut wood has been cut, so the wood is farther and farther from the mills. You're seeing that play out around Lac-Saint-Jean and some of the other places there.

What we do have is fibre that's different from...you mentioned the Brazilians. The challenge there is that you can grow a genetically modified eucalyptus to pulping age in seven or eight years. It's almost impossible to compete with that on an economic basis.

[Guy Caron, NDP, Rimouski-Neigette—Témiscouata—Les Basques, QC]

That clarifies matters a bit. So the problem doesn't come from fibre quality. Our fibre may be of the highest quality, but the fact is that it takes much longer to develop than the fibre grown by our competitors from Asia, Central America and South America, in particular. This means we can no longer compete, especially when it comes to industries such as pulp and paper, and newsprint.

[Glenn Mason]

It means that it's a very big challenge.

[Guy Caron, NDP, Rimouski-Neigette—Témiscouata—Les Basques, QC]

I would like to come back to biomass. This industry could be significant for regions like mine. The fourth recommendation from the 2008 report was related to the impact more intensive use of biomass has on forest ecosystems and the environment. The recommendation was to conduct a study to analyze the possibility of increased production.

I know that establishments in the Lower St. Lawrence, in particular—the region I represent—are increasingly moving in that direction. A growing number of churches, community centres and schools are converting to biomass. Many maple stands are also converting. When it comes to development and environmental effects, we always ask what the dangers and risks associated with moving in that direction are.

Have you had an opportunity to look into this issue? If so, what were your summary conclusions?

[Glenn Mason]

Thank you for the question.

Mr. Chairman, if I understand the question, it's really about whether the increased use of biomass threatens the environmental sustainability of the forest. Would that be correct?

[Guy Caron, NDP, Rimouski-Neigette—Témiscouata—Les Basques, QC]

Yes, the fourth recommendation was about a study on this particular issue.

[Glenn Mason]

What I can say is we're very engaged in that. We're very engaged because, aside from our own issues, it's a big trade concern. As folks are making pellets and selling them into the European Union, the European Union is demanding that they come from sustainably sourced areas, etc. But you have a range of practices. If you go to Scandinavia, they actually go as far as ripping the trunks out of the ground. They have a complete 100% use of biomass. We're the complete opposite. In fact, our scientists believe that we can definitely use more biomass than we do. We have a number of science projects working right across the country—some of the experts at the Laurentian Forestry Centre in Quebec City are working with Laval University, etc., and we have some going on at Petawawa as well—to do long-term studies about how much more can you take out. How much more of the tree can you take out of the forest, while still leaving the nutrient base acceptable or reasonable for future regeneration of the forest? There's not a quick answer to that, because obviously you kind of look at some regeneration, but for certain, our scientists are showing that we can take out more than we have been.

[The Chair, Conservative, Leon Benoit]

Thank you, Mr. Caron.

We go finally to Mr. Trost, before we go to the in camera portion of the meeting, where we will discuss the future of the study.

Go ahead, please, Mr. Trost, for up to five minutes.

[Bradley Trost, Conservative, Saskatoon—Humboldt, SK]

I'm going to start with a bit of a broader question than you might be used to, but I suspect you do what I'm going to ask you about, maybe not quite as directly, but in your job all the time.

If we're starting a forestry study like we did back in 2008, I was wondering, if you were in our position here, what questions would you ask the players who are going to be coming to us, the regions, the industry, the other bodies, the unions, the aboriginal leaders, etc.? To some degree, I suspect that is partially what your department does: you're continuously working with these people and asking them these questions. We're not forestry professionals here on this committee. Some of us have almost no experience; others have minimal experience.

What questions...where should we start to steer our report? From your experience, what advice would you give?

[Glenn Mason]

Mr. Chairman, that is indeed a very good question, and one perhaps I wish I had thought longer about beforehand. I'd be happy to send you a written submission later on that. My quick off-the-cuff response to that is that I would, first of all, start by asking your witnesses what are the three biggest challenges they face in the forestry context from where they sit. I would then ask them what they think the role of government is, what they think the role of the private sector is, and what they think the role of the social sector is, communities.