quote: There is no way single tree select can generate the employment indicated above or generate the volume required to attract the interest of a Weyerhauser or Interfor.

I agree with the second thought here, but not the first.

I have read about logging operations in Europe, specifically Scandinavia, that are primarily based on selective harvest and sustained yield methods. Can't remember the link now, but I will try dig it up.

I do remember the stats quoted as getting about 5 full-time equivalent jobs per board foot. That's about 2.5 times better than we get in BC.

And all of these jobs are union, with employee ownership and worker co-ops and other democratic or community based business playing a huge role.

add to this, that the selective harvest methods are complimented by huge value-added provisions and massive investment into reforestation and maintenance.

Obviously, you can't just blindly compare what goes on in Scandinavia to BC, since there are huge biological, climate, market conditions, political status, terrain and other differences to consider.

But there are clearly some similarities where, if we had the democratic forum in which to discuss these, we could look at.

It's true, though--and this related to the above--that there's no way a major multi-national corporation, unless it is under the control of labour or progressive governments (and those are few and far between), would be interested in such practices, especially when compared to what they get away with in other parts of the globe.

Selective harvest and similar sustainable practices are labour intensive and require the re-investment of capital wealth generated back into the industry. That means lower returns for major shareholder cliques and snior executives that control these firms.