Propos sur la Rentabilité des Plantations

This paper was presented at a regional forestry association meeting to a large audience of woodlot owners, small forest entrepreneurs and marketing board representatives. Its first purpose was to demonstrate that reforestation of isolated and abandoned agricultural fields is seldom economical when viewed as a stand-alone activity, because the man planting trees can seldom live long enough to harvest the crop, thus failing to recuperate any return on his investment. This is a widely accepted view.The second purpose of the paper however was to demonstrate that forestation of a management unit (which is done either to hasten the renewal of cutovers, to put back into full production the productive acres struck by natural accidents, or to enlarge the management unit) is always a highly economical activity. It is so mainly because it allows the owner to increase immediately the harvest of mature timber on his property (Intensive Management Effect or Allowable Cut Effect), and to no longer consider the cost of plantation as a long-term investment but as a logging cost.In such a case, a substantial portion of the money needed to finance such a desirable activity does not come from a saving account or from borrowed capital but from the realized stumpage value itself, which owner should see as a profit only after the forest has been renewed, tended and managed properly. This is not a widely known nor a widely accepted concept in Canada, but it is in Europe.Plainly stated, it means that the forest should pay for its management. It also means that forestation is a highly economical activity not only for the owner but for the community as a whole because, on most properties, it should allow for an immediate increase in harvest, transportation, conversion and services, thus bringing more revenues and benefits to owners, entrepreneurs and governments