Sustainability is Not Stupid
Americans use more wood than they can harvest sustainably. Canadians have lumber to sell. Why not buy it?
Over the past month, the US has taken its neighbours to task over their insistence on selling it stuff. President Trump believes Americans should make their own stuff instead. For example, consider his comments on softwood lumber:
“We don’t need their lumber. We have massive fields of lumber. We don’t need their lumber; we have to unrestrict them because stupid people put, you know, restrictions on, but I can do that with an executive order, we don’t need anything they have.”
-Donald Trump press conference, January 7, 2025.
Sorry, right wing Americans, I disagree with your president.
The overwhelming evidence is that the US actually does need Canadian lumber. America consumes a staggering 50 billion board feet (80 million m3 nominal)1 of softwood lumber per year, more than any other country by far. It makes only 36 billion board feet, and exports some of that, so it needs to fill the rest of its needs with wood from Canada and other countries.
Could the US meet its needs with domestic lumber? The experts say “no”. To make 30% more lumber, the US would need to greatly expand its logging and sawmilling infrastructure and train more people. This would take time.
What About All Those Trees?
Then, there are those “massive fields of lumber” that “stupid people put restrictions on.” Could the US National Forests (assuming this is what Mr. Trump meant with his comment) actually supply enough logs to make an additional 15.5 billion board feet of lumber? And could an executive order make this happen?
The answer to both questions is “no.”
Restoring the National Forests to their peak production levels of the 1980s (if this were even possible) would still not be nearly enough to fill the country’s needs. In the 1980s, the US National Forests sold the harvest rights to about 12 billion board feet of timber per year. Today they harvest closer to 2 billion board feet. So, if the National Forests were to return to historic logging rates, this would make an additional 10 billion board feet of logs available. At an aggressive conversion rate of 50%2, the maximum theoretical increase in US lumber production would be 5 billion board feet – not anywhere near the 15.5 billion board feet the country imports. (Plus, some of this would be hardwood, so the actual volume of framing lumber would be lower.)
Presidential orders lasts six months, which would not be long enough to plan the new logging. Any lasting changes would require an order in Congress, a process that can take 2-3 years.
As only 29% of US forest land is under federal jurisdiction, even our theoretical six-fold increase in log production would not be enough to replace Canadian imports3.
The majority of US forest land – 60% – is privately owned. And while analysts suggest that there is some potential for log production increases in the US Southeast, raising harvest levels, building more mills (a multi-year process), and running these mills at full capacity would still only raise production by about 5 billion board feet. (And this is way more than analysts are actually forecasting). Still not enough!
Sustainability Is Not a Left-Wing Conspiracy
Realistically, it’s crazy to be discussing a return to historic logging patterns, simply out of a desire to avoid imports. Yes, the US has more trees than it presently logs. But just because a county has trees doesn’t mean it should log them all. Saying “we have lots of trees, so therefore we should make 30% more lumber” is just as ludicrous as saying “we have lots of cows, so we should all eat 30% more steak!” Harvest levels depend not only on what we see today, but also on what will be standing here tomorrow and the next day.
In other words, forests must be managed sustainably. Sustainability is not a left-wing “woke” conspiracy; it’s a practical, necessary, and real-world approach. You can’t harvest trees faster than they grow.
Americans can’t sustainably produce enough lumber to meet their needs. Importing wood from Canada just makes sense.
A “nominal” board foot (the measure used in North America) is smaller than an actual board foot (12 inches x 12 inches x 1 inch). A “2 inch by 4 inch” board is actually 1.5 inches by 3.5 inches - the “2 by 4” refers to the volume of wood before it was planed.
Not all of a log becomes lumber, because logs are round and lumber is square.
A big thank-you goes to Sustainable Forests reader Bill Wagner for sharing his knowledge of the differences between Canadian and US forest policies.