🚀 go-pugleaf

pope@cs.ubc.ca (Art Pope) writes:

>I perceive an effort on the part of both the BC government and Macmillan
>Bloedel to substantially misrepresent the government's Clayoquot Sound land
>use decision. Both have attempted to portray the decision as being more
>protective of the environment, and more costly to the forest industry, than
>evidence indicates. Below, I summarize a few examples.


>3.  ECONOMIC CONSEQUENCES OF DECISION

>The consequences to the forest industry are frequently overstated. MB
>states in "Clayoquot Sound Backgrounder" that

>Never mind for the moment that this simplistic analysis ignores many 
>factors, including the value of trees left standing and the relationship 
>between price and supply. In its "Response to the CORE Public Report and 
>Recommendations Regarding Issues Arising from the Clayoquot Land Use 
>Decision", June 1, 1993, the BC government states that

>  "The impact on the provincial economy is projected to be a $46 million 
>  per year reduction in Gross Domestic Product..."

>I've not yet located a justification for this figure. One might note, 
>however, that the decision represents about a 10% reduction in the Alberni 
>region's timber harvest, and that the region has a forest economy worth 
>about $136 million. One might expect, therefore, that the impact is 
>actually on the order of $14 million.

As I understand it, the annual cut will be 600,000 cf, worth 120
million dollars. The *estimated* value to governments is 42 million
dollars. [from todays Vancouver Sun]

Consideringing the multiplier effect as money moves from salaries and
taxes and profits through the various layers of the economy, I think a
46 million *drop* in the GDP is a good estimate, considering MB loses
60 million in sales revenue and the various governments lose 21
million in taxes [ assuming the loss of 300,000cf per year ]

I would hope that just because the number doesn't feel right to you,
you wouldn't accuse people of misrepresentation. But I'm sure that is
too much to ask for people who don't want to consider *any* of the
consequences of the Clayoquot decision.