U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE

WASHINGTON : 

For sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Printing Office

Internet: bookstore.gpo.gov Phone: toll free (866) 512–1800; DC area (202) 512–1800

Fax: (202) 512–2250 Mail: Stop SSOP, Washington, DC 20402–0001

37–274 PDF 2007

S. HRG. 110–119

IMPACTS OF THE CHINESE HARDWOOD

PLYWOOD TRADE

HEARING

BEFORE THE

SUBCOMMITTEE ON PUBLIC LANDS AND FORESTS

OF THE

COMMITTEE ON 

ENERGY AND NATURAL RESOURCES 

UNITED STATES SENATE

ONE HUNDRED TENTH CONGRESS

FIRST SESSION

TO

RECEIVE TESTIMONY ON THE IMPACTS OF THE CHINESE HARDWOOD 

PLYWOOD TRADE ON THE NATIONAL FOREST SYSTEM AND OTHER 

PUBLIC LANDS, AND THE COMMUNITIES THAT DEPEND ON THEM

MEDFORD, OR, MAY 30, 2007

(

Printed for the use of the 

Committee on Energy and Natural Resources 
(II)

COMMITTEE ON ENERGY AND NATURAL RESOURCES 

JEFF BINGAMAN, New Mexico, Chairman

DANIEL K. AKAKA, Hawaii 

BYRON L. DORGAN, North Dakota 

RON WYDEN, Oregon 

TIM JOHNSON, South Dakota 

MARY L. LANDRIEU, Louisiana 

MARIA CANTWELL, Washington 

KEN SALAZAR, Colorado 

ROBERT MENENDEZ, New Jersey 

BLANCHE L. LINCOLN, Arkansas 

BERNARD SANDERS, Vermont 

JON TESTER, Montana 

PETE V. DOMENICI, New Mexico 

LARRY E. CRAIG, Idaho 

CRAIG THOMAS, Wyoming 

LISA MURKOWSKI, Alaska 

RICHARD BURR, North Carolina 

JIM DEMINT, South Carolina 

BOB CORKER, Tennessee 

JEFF SESSIONS, Alabama 

GORDON H. SMITH, Oregon 

JIM BUNNING, Kentucky 

MEL MARTINEZ, Florida

ROBERT M. SIMON, Staff Director 

SAM E. FOWLER, Chief Counsel 

FRANK MACCHIAROLA, Republican Staff Director 

JUDITH K. PENSABENE, Republican Chief Counsel 

SUBCOMMITTEE ON PUBLIC LANDS AND FORESTS

RON WYDEN, Oregon, Chairman

DANIEL K. AKAKA, Hawaii 

TIM JOHNSON, South Dakota 

MARY L. LANDRIEU, Louisiana 

MARIA CANTWELL, Washington 

KEN SALAZAR, Colorado 

ROBERT MENENDEZ, New Jersey 

BLANCHE L. LINCOLN, Arkansas 

BERNARD SANDERS, Vermont 

RICHARD BURR, North Carolina 

LARRY E. CRAIG, Idaho 

CRAIG THOMAS, Wyoming 

LISA MURKOWSKI, Alaska 

JIM DEMINT, South Carolina 

JEFF SESSIONS, Alabama 

GORDON H. SMITH, Oregon 

JIM BUNNING, Kentucky

JEFF BINGAMAN and PETE V. DOMENICI are Ex Officio Members of the Subcommittee 
(III)

C O N T E N T S 

STATEMENTS 

Page

Adams, Vera, Executive Director, Commercial Targeting and Enforcement, 

Office of International Trade, Department of Homeland Security, Customs 

and Border Protection .......................................................................................... 35

Chamberlain, Tom, President, Oregon AFL–CIO, Salem, OR ............................. 12 

Daly, Edward J., Chief Operating Officer, Forest Stewardship Council—US .... 16

Gonyea, Joseph J., III, Chief Operating Officer, Timber Products Company, 

Springfield, OR ..................................................................................................... 3

Guay, Phill, Vice-President of Corporate Strategy and Marketing, Columbia 

Forest Products, Portland, OR ............................................................................ 8

Wineland, Tim, Senior Director, Office of China Affairs, Office of the United 

States Trade Representative ............................................................................... 38

Wyden, Hon. Ron, U.S. Senator From Oregon ...................................................... 1 

APPENDIX 

Additional material submitted for the record ........................................................ 49

(1)

IMPACTS OF THE CHINESE HARDWOOD 

PLYWOOD TRADE 

WEDNESDAY, MAY 30, 2007 

U.S. SENATE, SUBCOMMITTEE ON PUBLIC LANDS AND FORESTS, COMMITTEE ON ENERGY AND NATURAL RESOURCES, Medford, OR. 

The subcommittee met, pursuant to notice, at 12 p.m., in Medford City Council Chambers, Medford, Oregon, Hon. Ron Wyden 

presiding. 

OPENING STATEMENT OF HON. RON WYDEN, U.S. SENATOR

FROM OREGON 

Senator WYDEN. The Subcommittee on Public Lands and Forests 

will come to order. Today we are going to consider the impacts of 

the Chinese hardwood plywood trade on the National Forest System and other public lands, and the communities that depend on 

them. 

As chairman of this subcommittee, it is especially important for 

me to hold this hearing in Oregon because it is an issue of particular importance to many of our communities here at home. 

Last fall, a group of Oregon hardwood plywood manufacturers 

asked to meet with me to discuss problems concerning hardwood 

plywood imports that they felt were threatening their businesses. 

Some of those folks are here today. 

The numbers struck me as shocking. Over the past few years, 

U.S. hardwood plywood sector has experienced a dramatic downturn. Since at least 2003, U.S. production shipment volume, production capacity, and market share have all declined. At the same 

time, the Chinese hardwood plywood sector has clearly been surging. In fact, from 2004 to 2006, Chinese hardwood plywood exports 

to our country increased from $463 million to $1.02 billion. 

Even more troubling were allegations made by a number of people in the industry suggesting that this dramatic growth in the 

Chinese hardwood plywood export area was coming at the expense 

of our key industries and was based on a number of unfair and illegal practices, including illegal dumping, illegal subsidies, tariff 

misclassification, fraudulent stamping, and illegal logging. 

Here in Oregon, hardwood plywood employs about 2,000 persons 

directly and many more indirectly. Those jobs are here in southern 

Oregon, Medford, and Grants Pass, and Klamath Falls, and 

Roseburg, Eugene, and across the southern part of our State. They 

are good paying family wage jobs. They are jobs I am not going to 

let go by the boards, and we are going to examine today what 
2

needs to be done to protect those good paying jobs that are the 

foundation of the well-being of Oregon families. These jobs are obviously jobs that Oregon wants to protect, and the kind of jobs that 

we need more of. 

The surge of low priced Chinese hardwood and plywood imports 

is a threat to long term health of the U.S. hardwood plywood industry. That, in turn, can have serious consequences for communities 

in southern Oregon and the families that rely on these good paying 

jobs. 

The Chinese hardwood plywood imports could also hurt Federal 

hardwood and softwood timber receipts. In manufacturing plywood, 

hardwoods are used for the face and the backs. Softwoods are used 

for the inner plies. The Chinese hardwood plywood imports can adversely affect both Federal hardwood and softwood timber receipts. 

Were the domestic hardwood plywood industry to continue to contract in response to the Chinese hardwood plywood surge, so would 

those receipts, and those receipts are of great importance to our 

State. 

The decline of the domestic hardwood plywood industry caused 

by the unfair and illegal Chinese hardwood plywood trade practice 

can also adversely impact Oregon and the Nation’s salvage capacity, and this has great implications for forest health and for safety 

in our forest. 

So when the timber folks brought these serious hardwood plywood concerns to me, it was clear to me that something had to be 

done. Not tomorrow, not next week, but quickly. Since that time I 

have been working to investigate the troubling allegations and take 

steps to address them. 

As many of you know, I was the author of the original county 

payments legislation. That law brought to our State more than $1.5 

billion and it has expired this year. 

For a number of years now, I have been working on a regular 

basis to get the law reauthorized because I realize how important 

these funds are to Oregon communities and in particular our rural 

sector. We were able to get a short-term extension, but it is absolutely key that Congress continue to work on this issue until there 

is a multi-year long-term county payments program. 

I am pleased to be able to report to folks here at home that your 

Congressman, Congressman Walden, has been very helpful to me 

in working for the multi-year reauthorization. In fact, he tried to 

offer the legislation that would have brought 5 years of relief to 

southern Oregon, the measure that I was able to get 74 votes for 

in the Senate, Congressman Walden tried to offer it in the House 

of Representatives and was denied that opportunity. 

But in my view, county payments and Chinese hardwood plywood are interconnected—both involve the role and responsibility 

of the Federal Government to ensure that the timber dependent 

communities have the opportunity to thrive and to prosper in the 

years ahead. 

Today’s hearing will give us an opportunity to get an update 

from folks affected by Chinese hardwood plywood imports, and to 

get a sense of the progress that is being made in investigating and 

addressing these unfair and illegal trade practices. 
3

We have a number of witnesses and folks from the public here. 

I also want to thank the Mayor and the Medford City Council for 

hosting us. 

So let us go to our first panel, Mr. Joe Gonyea, Chief Operating 

Officer at Timber Products in Springfield, Oregon; Phill Guay, 

Vice-President of Marketing and Strategic Planning for Columbia 

Forest Products in Portland; Tom Chamberlain, President of the 

Oregon AFL–CIO in Salem, Oregon; and Ned Daly, Vice President 

of Operations of the Forest Stewardship Council in Washington, 

DC. 

Gentleman, we welcome you. We thank you for coming and appreciate the chance to work with you. We will make your prepared 

remarks a part of our hearing record in their entirety. Why don’t 

you just hold forth with your comments this afternoon. 

Mr. Gonyea, welcome. 

STATEMENT OF JOSEPH J. GONYEA, III, CHIEF OPERATING 

OFFICER, TIMBER PRODUCTS COMPANY, SPRINGFIELD, OR 

Mr. GONYEA. Thank you, Senator. We appreciate you holding 

these hearings today. 

I am representing Timber Products Company in my capacity as 

Chief Operating Officer, which is owned by my family. I am the 

fourth generation of my family to work in the wood products industry. I am testifying to represent the views of our ownership, our 

management and 1,400 team members, some of whom are here 

today. 

We have nine manufacturing facilities located around the Nation, 

most of which are right here in Southern Oregon. We operate an 

International Division that imports wood products from around the 

globe, including China, to complement our domestic production. Imported products account for approximately 12 percent of our annual 

sales. We are proud owners and stewards of 118,000 acres of 

forestland that are third-party certified under the standards of the 

Sustainable Forestry Initiative. In Oregon alone we have 834 employees and an annual payroll of $38 million. Our largest product 

line, as you know, is hardwood plywood, which is used in the manufacturing of fine cabinets and furniture alike. 

Senator, I want to thank you. Thank you for your leadership in 

Congress and thank you for being our champion for free trade that 

is fair trade. I also want to thank you, your colleagues for their assistance in moving this investigation forward and their interest, 

Senator Baucus, Senator Bingaman, and Senator Gordon Smith. 

As you know, this is not a red or blue state issue. This is a red, 

white and blue issue for our industry and for our country. We hope 

your ongoing investigation will address these unfair trade practices 

and environmental discrepancies that give the Chinese hardwood 

plywood manufactures an advantage today. 

The domestic hardwood plywood industry, like others in North 

America wood products industry such as furniture, cabinets and 

flooring, is facing an onslaught of unfairly trade imports from 

China. The continued survival of our industry is at risk. It does not 

have to be so. 

As you know, our corporate headquarters are in Springfield. My 

family has lived in the Eugene/Springfield area for years. Our com-
4

* Charts have been retained in subcommittee files. 

munity is proudly known as Track Capital, USA. Hayward Field at 

the University of Oregon is the center of activity. A group of elite 

runners is now preparing for 2008 Olympics in Beijing. When they 

get to China, there is one thing they can be assured of—a level 

playing field. For all the competitors, the track surface will be the 

same, the weather will be the same, and given a fair set of rules 

for each sport, history has shown that hard-working American athletes can compete with the best of the best from around the world, 

including the Chinese. 

When it comes to hardwood plywood business and China, the 

playing field is far from fair. The field is, is far from level and the 

competition is far from fair. Official U.S. Government import statistics from the Commerce Department, as seen on the charts* behind 

us. 

Senator WYDEN. I had a feeling those weren’t protestors. 

[Laughter.] 

Mr. GONYEA. Thank goodness, not. 

These charts offer a glaring evidence of these inequities. Between 

2002 and 2006, the dollar valve of U.S. imports of non-tropical 

hardwood plywood from China rose by more than 1,000 percent. 

That trend continues, as a value of such imports in the first quarter of 2007 was 35 percent higher than the first quarter of 2006. 

In 2002, China accounted for roughly 10 percent of non-tropical 

hardwood plywood imports into the United States. In the first 

quarter of 2007, China accounted for a staggering 54 percent of all 

such imports into the United States. 

How has this happened? Let’s look at the facts. The Chinese government provides direct subsidies to hardwood plywood manufacturers which export their products to the United States. We have 

learned that the Chinese hardwood plywood importers have been 

trying to avoid tariffs by misclassifying their hardwood plywood 

and we appreciate your work with Customs to look into this. We 

have also learned that the Chinese hardwood plywood is fraudulently labeled or stamped and we appreciate your investigation of 

this problem as well. At the end of the day, all these unfair practices lower the price of Chinese hardwood plywood, making it harder for companies like ours, Timber Products Company, to compete. 

Then there are the environmental issues. Independent studies 

state that some 30 to 50 percent of all the birch logs coming into 

China has either been stolen or are the result of illegal logging. 

Chinese manufacturers are not held to the environmental standards in their wood sourcing or in the manufacturing processes. Add 

up each of these factors, and it’s no wonder the Chinese can sell 

products at below cost of a vertically integrated, highly efficient 

company like ours. These activities find the face of international 

trade rules—rules that China agreed to accept and abide by when 

they joined the WTO. You have not heard us discuss today anything about currency valuations or labor conditions, but these, too, 

are factors. 

How does all of this impact the health and well-being of our local 

economy, Federal, State and BLM forests? As part of my testimony, 

I am providing you with data on the potential impacts of Chinese 
5

imports on public forestlands based solely on the impact to hardwood plywood manufacturers based in Oregon. As you know, 70 

percent of all hardwood plywood manufactured in North America 

is headquartered right here in Oregon. These companies employ 

over 2,600 Oregonians and have six manufacturing facilities, which 

have the potential to produce and process 165 million feet of logs 

a year, a portion of which comes from Federal forests. Over the last 

5 years, our company, Timber Products Company, has paid $6 million to purchase 38 million feet of standing timber from U.S. Forestry Region 5 and BLM from sales that required thinning and salvage logging. Additionally, during 2005 and 2006, Timber Products 

Michigan operations purchased 650,000 board feet of hardwood logs 

from USFS Region 9. All of this was done in compliance with the 

law of the land in the strictest of environmental standards. 

In this past year alone, two North American manufacturers of 

hardwood plywood closed, displacing 460 employees. If China is allowed to continue importing subsidized products made from illegally harvested logs, as they are today, it will undoubtedly lead to 

more mill closures in the United States, thereby making the job of 

thinning the forest health in National Forests even more difficult. 

What’s at stake here is significant. On the line are literally thousands of American jobs, closed mills, a further decline of local 

economies, and the degradation of forest health on public and private forestlands. The impact of Chinese hardwood plywood imports 

has the potential to exacerbate the situation. 

I want to touch just a moment on what’s happening on private 

forestlands in America. For four generations our family has owned 

and managed forestlands. I can assure you this forestry today is 

not my great-grandfather’s forestry. Today we have laws which 

govern management of private forestlands. Hard science, technology, and good old fashioned experience have taught us a lot. 

Timber Products forestlands are certified under the Sustainable 

Forest Initiative Program. We manage every aspect of the ecosystem. American forestry should be the poster child for forest 

health and good practices. Instead, we allow countries like China 

unfettered access to America’s wood products demand. By virtue of 

this, we condone their illegal and environmentally unsound practices while American managed public and private forestlands continue to be an underutilized asset. 

As you know, in 1994, President Clinton proposed the Northwest 

Forest Plan for U.S. Forest Service Regions 5 and 6 and BLM lands 

to preserve and protect the Northern Spotted Owl. The plan was 

to reduce the annual harvest an estimated 75 percent from 4.5 billion feet to 1.1 billion feet. Going on its 14th year, however, the 

Northwest Forest Plan has not met its goal. The cumulative harvest has only produced a woeful 24 percent of targeted harvest. 

Let’s utilize our Federal forests as they were intended! When it 

comes to buying wood products, we must work together to educate 

the consumer to buy American to encourage those who supply their 

wood to purchase sustainable wood products, like we produce. 

In summary, Senator, I want to thank you for taking the time 

to come to Medford, to investigate this issue. We appreciate your 

leadership on this so important trade issue. 
6

1 U.S. Census Bureau IM-145 (Document has been retained in subcommittee files). 

In closing, my primary message is that free trade must be fair 

trade. As you watch the American Olympians compete in Beijing, 

remember, each athlete can be assured the rules of sport will be 

applied equally to all. The best athletes will win. We at Timber 

Products Company can compete on a global scale. Help us ensure 

it’s a fair competition. 

[The prepared statement of Mr. Gonyea follows:]

PREPARED STATEMENT OF JOSEPH J. GONYEA, III, CHIEF OPERATING OFFICER, TIMBER PRODUCTS COMPANY

Thank you for the opportunity to be a part of the field hearing in Medford, Oregon. I am the Chief Operating Officer/Partner of Timber Products Company, which 

is owned by my family. I am the fourth generation of my family to work in the wood 

products industry. I am testifying to represent the views of our ownership, our management and our one thousand four hundred team members. Timber Products Company is in the manufacturing, sales and marketing, transportation, and timberland 

management business. We have nine manufacturing facilities located around the nation, most of which are here in Southern Oregon. We operate an International Division that imports wood products from around the globe including South America, 

Africa, Russia, and, yes, China to complement our domestic production. Imported 

products from all of these countries account for approximately 12% of our annual 

sales. Further, it may be of interest and somewhat ironic to note that, in years past, 

we exported a greater percentage of our overall company sales to countries throughout Europe and the Far East than we now import. We are proud owners and stewards of 118,000 acres of forestlands that are third-party certified under the standards of the Sustainable Forestry Initiative. In Oregon alone we have 834 employees 

and an annual payroll of $38,000,000 (gross pay, not including benefits). Our largest 

product line is hardwood plywood, from which we produce panel products used in 

the manufacturing of fine cabinets, furniture, retail store fixtures, and decorative 

millwork products. 

I want to thank you for your leadership in Congress and for being our champion 

for free trade that is fair trade! Thank you for advancing this investigation. I would 

also like to thank Senator Max Baucus of Montana, Senator Jeff Bingaman of New 

Mexico and Oregon Senator Gordon Smith for their roles in bringing these important issues to light. This is not a red or blue state issue but a red, white, and blue 

issue for our industry and country. It is our time to act. We hope your ongoing investigation will address these unfair trade practices and environmental discrepancies that give the Chinese hardwood plywood manufacturers an advantage. The 

domestic hardwood plywood industry, like other North America wood products industries including furniture, cabinets, and flooring, is facing an onslaught of unfairly traded imports from China. The continued survival of our industry is at risk. 

It doesn’t have to be so! 

Our corporate headquarters are in Springfield and our family has been long-time 

residents of the Eugene-Springfield area. As you may know, we are proudly known 

as the Track Capital, USA and my family has been track fans for generations. Hayward Field at the University of Oregon is the center of this activity. A group of elite 

runners is here to prepare for the 2008 Olympics in Beijing and some are part of 

the U of O Pac 10 Championship team. When they get to China, there is one thing 

they can be assured of—a level playing field. For all competitors, the track surface 

will be the same and the weather will be the same. Given a fair set of rules for 

each sport, history has shown that hard-working American athletes can compete 

with the best of the best from around the world, including the Chinese. 

When it comes to the hardwood plywood business and China, the playing field is 

far from level and the competition is far from fair. Official U.S. Government import 

statistics from the Commerce Department offer glaring evidence of these inequities. 

Between 2002 and 2006, the dollar value of U.S. imports of non-tropical hardwood 

plywood from China rose by more than one-thousand percent, an increase of more 

than ten-fold. And that trend continues, as the value of such imports in the first 

quarter of 2007 was 35 percent higher than the value of such imports during the 

first quarter of 2006. In 2002, China accounted for roughly 10 percent of all nontropical hardwood plywood imports into the United States. In the first quarter of 

2007, China accounted for roughly 54 percent of all such imports into the United 

States.1
7

* Longlac and GP Savannah. 

How did this happen? Once again, look at the available facts. The Chinese government provides direct subsidies to hardwood plywood manufacturers which export 

their products to the United States. Many of these products are sold at below our 

cost, despite the distance they must travel. We have learned that Chinese hardwood 

plywood importers have been trying to avoid tariffs by misclassifying their hardwood plywood and we appreciate your work with Customs to look into this. We have 

also learned that some Chinese hardwood plywood is fraudulently labeled or 

stamped and we appreciate your investigation of this problem as well. At the end 

of the day, all of these practices lower the price of Chinese hardwood plywood, making it harder for companies, like Timber Products Company, that play by the rules 

to compete. 

And then there are the environmental issues. Independent studies state that some 

30-50% of the birch logs coming into China have either been stolen or are the result 

of illegal logging. Chinese manufacturers are not held to environmental standards 

in their wood sourcing or in the manufacturing process with use of resins and lack 

of controls on air and water emissions. Add up each of these factors and it is no 

wonder the Chinese can sell products at below the cost of a vertically-integrated, 

highly efficient company like Timber Products Company. These activities fly in the 

face of international trade rules—rules that China agreed to accept and abide by 

when it joined the World Trade Organization. As a result, private hardwood plywood 

producers in this country are competing not only with Chinese companies but also 

with the Chinese government and its distortive economic policies. Furthermore, in 

our statement, you have not heard us discuss currency valuation or labor conditions, 

but these, too, are factors. 

How does this impact the health and well being of our local economy and federal, 

state, and BLM forests? As part of my written testimony, I am providing you with 

data on the potential impacts of Chinese imports on public forestlands based solely 

on the impact to hardwood plywood manufacturers based in Oregon. These companies employ over 2,600 Oregonians. In addition to Timber Products Company’s two 

mills, the other hardwood plywood manufacturers are: Columbia Forest Products, 

States Industries, Murphy Plywood, and Roseburg Forest Products. 70% of all hardwood plywood manufactured in North America is headquartered in Oregon with this 

group of companies. These six manufacturing facilities have the potential to process 

approximately 165,000 MBF of logs or on average 28,000 MBF +/¥ per mill, a portion of which comes from federal forests. Over the last five years, Timber Products 

Company has paid $6MM to purchase 38,000 MBF of standing timber from the U.S. 

Forest Service and BLM from sales that required thinning and salvage logging. Additionally, during 2005 and 2006, Timber Products Michigan operations purchased 

650 MBF of hardwood logs from USFS Region Nine. All of this is done under strict 

U.S. environmental guidelines, both federal and state laws. 

In this past year alone, two North American manufacturers of hardwood plywood* 

closed, displacing 460 employees. If China is allowed to continue importing subsidized and illegally harvested logs as they are today, it will lead to more mill closures in the United States thereby making the job of thinning and forest health in 

National Forests even more difficult. An example of what can take place when we 

lose the balance of management of federal lands is USFS Region Three in Arizona 

and New Mexico. There, the U.S. Forest Service and environmental groups are finding it far more difficult to attract businesses needed to carry out important forest 

health projects back to the region, now that the infrastructure is gone. Obviously, 

this has had a large negative effect on the local rural communities which are surrounded by National Forests and BLM lands. We do not want to repeat the same 

mistakes in Oregon. 

The decline of domestic hardwood plywood manufacturing could also lead to a further reduction of U.S. thinning and salvage capacity on government lands. The financial impact would be substantial, but even more serious would be impacts on forest health and public safety. What’s at stake here is significant. On the line are literally thousands of American jobs, closed mills, a further decline of local economies, 

and the degradation of forest health on public and private forestlands. The impact 

of Chinese hardwood plywood imports has the potential to exacerbate this situation. 

I would like to touch on what is happening on private forestlands in America. For 

four generations, our family has owned and managed forestlands. I’ve been doing 

it for over twenty years. I can assure you this—forestry today is not my great-grandfather’s forestry. Today we have laws which govern management of public and private forestlands. Hard science, technology, and good old experience have taught us 

a lot. At Timber Products Company we are active participants in the Sustainable 

Forestry Initiative program, or SFI. We manage every aspect of the eco system on 
8

2 AFRC, ‘‘Actual Sawtimber Harvested From Sales Sold Under the Northwest Forest Plan’’, 

2006. 

our lands. We are not the only ones. Over 150 million acres of forestland in America 

have been audited by independent third parties to meet the SFI standards. American forestry should be the poster child for forest health and good practices. Instead, 

we allow countries like China unfettered access to America’s wood demand. By virtue of this, we condone their illegal and environmentally-unsound practices while 

American managed public and private forestlands continue to be an underutilized 

asset. 

As you know, Senator, in 1994, in an effort to preserve and protect the Northern 

Spotted Owl, President Clinton and his administration proposed the Northwest Forest Plan for U.S. Forest Service Regions 5 & 6 and BLM lands which was to reduce 

the annual harvest an estimated 75% in this area from 4.5 billion board feet to 1.1 

billion board feet. This figure is an achievable harvest. In its 14th year, however, 

the Northwest Forest Plan has not met its goal. The cumulative harvest has only 

produced 3.5 billion board feet versus a plan of 14.3 billion board feet—a woeful 24% 

of the targeted harvest.2

Those who are concerned about the environment need to come to the table to help 

achieve the Northwest Forest Plan and produce a stable, reliable harvest from federal lands, and to stop the demand for imported wood products from countries that 

do not have good forest practices or environmental and product quality laws. Let’s 

utilize the federal forests as they were intended. When it comes to buying wood 

products, let’s work to educate the consumer to buy American and to encourage 

those who supply the wood to the consumer—the ‘‘big box stores’’—to purchase sustainable wood products as they have advocated doing, but have failed to do at times 

with their purchasing practices. 

In summary, I want to again thank you for your leadership on this trade issue 

which is so very important to my company and to our state. Thank you also to everyone on the panel. In closing, my primary message is that free trade must be fair 

trade. As you watch American Olympians compete in Beijing next year, remember 

each athlete can be assured the rules of the sport will be applied equally to all, and 

that the best athlete will win. We at Timber Products can compete on a global scale. 

Just help us ensure that it is fair competition!

Senator WYDEN. Thank you very much. We’ll have some questions in a minute. 

Phill, Mr. Guay. 

STATEMENT OF PHILL GUAY, VICE PRESIDENT OF CORPORATE STRATEGY AND MARKETING, COLUMBIA FOREST 

PRODUCTS, PORTLAND, OR 

Mr. GUAY. First I’d like to thank Senator Wyden and his staff 

for the opportunity to be a part of this important hearing. The 

issues that we’re discussing here today are truly crucial to the survival of our domestic industry. 

Columbia Forest Products is one of the largest manufacturers of 

hardwood products in North America. Our four divisions; hardwood 

plywood, hardwood veneer, hardwood flooring, and international division, amount to over $1 billion in sales annually. We have more 

than 3,300 employee-owners in the United States. We have 11 domestic hardwood plywood and veneer manufacturing facilities. We 

are also a major importer, using offshore resources to complement 

our domestic product line. We are North America’s largest Russian 

Birch importer, and we contract-manufacture with suppliers in 

China, South America, and throughout the world. We are also the 

Nation’s second largest hardwood flooring manufacturer, with five 

plants in North America. 

As a major manufacturer and importer, we recognize ours is a 

global industry. In fact, we have seized the opportunity to be global, both in sales and manufacturing. We have two flooring plants 
9

in Malaysia and sell plywood manufactured in China, not only here 

in the United States but in the European Union as well. We sell 

flooring here as well as the in the E.U., the Middle East, and Australia. 

As a global company, we see the need for balance across all global regions. Balance is essential for the industry and consumers everywhere. Just as important, perhaps more so, is the global enforcement of logging rules. Such a practice would have an unbelievable impact on the environment by containing illegal logging, promoting sustainable practices, and curbing related pollution. So 

what we seek is not an advantage for any region but fairness 

across all regions, across all business functions, in raw materials, 

tax incentives, labor, and numerous others. What we seek is fair 

trade, and we believe free trade is fair. 

Joe just got done spending some time talking about China, and 

I cannot emphasize enough that we agree with everything that Joe 

has said. Let me give you our perspective on China with a bit more 

emphasis on the global logging trends. Speaking from a Columbia 

perspective, green initiatives and sustainability are most important 

to us. For 10 years, Columbia Forest Products has maintained a 

Forest Stewardship Council chain of custody certification and was 

one of the first in our industry to do so with Certificate Number 

65 out of 828 granted in the United States today. 

We recently introduced a revolutionary, urea formaldehyde-free 

adhesive system we call PureBond, for the manufacture of hardwood plywood flooring. Recently the California Air Resources 

Board, or CARB, concluded that the United States is a toxic dumping ground for excess urea-formaldehyde products manufactured 

worldwide. CARB took bold steps to eliminate that practice by 

passing new regulations that are the most stringent in the world. 

Similarly, and just as importantly, we have an opportunity here to 

stop the United States from becoming the world’s biggest consumer 

of illegal logging. In doing so, we can help the environment, our industries, domestic employment, and tax receipts simultaneously. 

Although there are several programs which certify that wood is 

being harvested sustainably, we use FSC. Joe recently mentioned 

SFI, which timber uses. Of the 84.3 million hectors of forest land 

that is certified worldwide by the Forest Stewardship Council, 49 

percent is located in Europe, 31 percent in North America, 3 percent in Africa, and 2 percent in Asia. 

Certification is a clear indication of sustainable forestry practices. Since it is nearly impossible to log illegally on certified land, 

you can see how easily it would be to log illegally in Asia and Africa where under 5 percent of their forest land is certified. While we 

believe certification and legally controlled logging are both good 

business and social practices, they are not free. North American industries’ commitment to these sustainable practices is expensive 

but the right thing to do. However, it puts us at a significant cost, 

and at times availability, disadvantage to most other areas of the 

world. 

I’ll give you some numbers to complement Joe’s. Let’s examine 

hardwood plywood first. When you look at the plywood imports in 

2002, 2.2 million cubic meters of hardwood plywood was imported. 

In 2006 that number was 4.4 million cubic meters, or up 93 per-
10

cent. At the same time, as you well know, domestic production actually declined. During that same period from 2002 to 2006, China’s share of imports increased from less than 10 percent to 54 percent, as Joe has just mentioned. Imports from other countries actually declined over that period as China entirely dominated growth. 

That trend has continued unabated. Despite a significant slowdown 

in the domestic housing industry, 2007 has seen an increase over 

2006 with regard to imports, almost all again from China. Imports 

are up 33 percent on a value basis and 6 percent on a volume 

basis, first quarter 2007 over first quarter 2006. All of that, despite 

the housing slump, a slump that has caused domestic production 

to decline in that same period. 

Although I know this hearing is on hardwood plywood, I’d like 

to mention hardwood flooring. The same logging and business practices that hurt domestic hardwood plywood are present in flooring 

as well. 

Hardwood flooring imports have soared from 75 million cubic meters in 2001 to 325 million cubic meters in 2006. The domestic 

hardwood flooring industry is carrying the same unfair burden as 

plywood. 

How does this affect our economy as well as Federal, State, BLM, 

and private landowners? The data in our submission provides a 

snapshot. Our plant in Klamath Falls, Oregon, 1 of 11, consumed 

46 million board feet of timber in 2003; by 2006 that declined 35 

million board feet. Admittedly, much of that timber is from private 

sources, but that decline clearly indicates a loss of revenue to various government entities, and landowners, and most importantly to 

us, job cuts at our Klamath Falls plant. 

The story of log purchases and job loss at our Klamath Falls 

plant is no different from our other plants nationwide. Our two 

largest plants are on the east coast, they consume about 80 million 

board feet per year. Once again, that volume is falling dramatically. 

So what do we want? Free and fair trade. Thanks to the effort 

of you, Senator Wyden, and your staff, an ITC 332 investigation is 

now underway for both hardwood plywood and hardwood flooring. 

That will address the unfair business practices negatively affecting 

our industry, tax receipts, and employment. 

Senator WYDEN. Might get another initiative or two out of the 

Administration on the next panel. 

Mr. GUAY. That’s good. We’re looking forward to that. 

Just as important, perhaps more so, is that we develop and enforce measures so that all wood products imported into the United 

States are legally logged and, ultimately, sustainable logged. It is 

the key, not just to a healthy environment, but to free and fair 

trade, tax receipts, and employment and truly the survival of our 

domestic industry. 

Global enforcement at the log level is the key to success. Clearly, 

most wood product manufacturing occurs in China, but most of the 

illegal logging undoubtedly occurs in Russia, elsewhere in Asia and 

Africa. While free and fair trade is essential, if logging practices 

are not controlled in the forest, we may improve our relationship 

between ourselves and China, but manufacturing will simply move 
11

somewhere else. Hence, neither our tax receipts, nor our industry, 

nor the environment will really be improved. 

So in summary, what we believe is that what is best for tax receipts is best for our industry. Free trade, fair trade, and legal logging everywhere. 

I’d like to thank you, your staff, for everything you’re doing on 

behalf of our industry. 

[The prepared statement of Mr. Guay follows:]

PREPARED STATEMENT OF PHILL GUAY, VICE PRESIDENT OF CORPORATE STRATEGY

AND MARKETING, COLUMBIA FOREST PRODUCTS

My name is Phill Guay and I’m the Vice President of Corporate Strategy and 

Marketing at Columbia Forest Products. I would like to thank you for the opportunity to be a part of this important hearing, and in turn, thank everyone who made 

it possible. 

Columbia Forest Products is one of the largest manufacturers of hardwood products in North America. Our four divisions: hardwood plywood, hardwood veneer, 

hardwood flooring and international division amount to $1 billion in sales, and we 

have more than 3,300 employee-owners. We are one of the largest Employee Stock 

Ownership Programs (ESOP) in the United States. We have 11 hardwood plywood 

and veneer manufacturing facilities and are the largest manufacturer in that industry. We are also a major importer, using offshore resources to complement our domestic product line. We are North America’s largest Russian Birch importer, and 

we contract-manufacture with suppliers in China, South America and throughout 

the world. We are also the nation’s second-largest hardwood flooring manufacturer, 

with five plants in North America. 

As a major manufacturer and importer we recognize ours is a global industry. In 

fact we have seized the opportunity to be global, both in sales and manufacturing. 

We have two flooring plants in Malaysia and sell plywood manufactured in China, 

not only in the United States but in the European Union also. We sell flooring here 

as well as the European Union, the Middle East and Australia. 

As a global company we see the need for balance across all global regions. Balance 

is essential for the industry and consumers everywhere. Just as important, perhaps 

more so, is the global enforcement of logging rules. Such a practice would have an 

unbelievable impact on the environment by containing illegal logging, promoting 

sustainable practices and curbing related pollution. So what we seek is not an advantage for any region but fairness across all regions, across all business functions, 

in raw materials, tax incentives, labor and numerous others. What we seek is fair 

trade, and we believe free trade is fair. 

Joe Gonyea has spent/will spend some time focusing on the issues in China. We 

agree with Joe. Let me give you our perspective not only on China but the overall 

global trends as well. Speaking from a Columbia perspective green initiatives and 

sustainability are most important to us. For 10 years, Columbia Forest Products has 

maintained a Forest Stewardship Council (FSC) chain of custody certification and 

was on of the first in our industry to do so with certificate number 65 out of 828 

granted to date in the United States. 

We recently introduced a revolutionary, urea formaldehyde-free adhesive system, 

PureBondTM, for the manufacture of hardwood plywood and flooring. Recently the 

California Air Resources Board (CARB) concluded that the United States is a toxic 

dumping ground for excess urea-formaldehyde products manufactured worldwide. 

CARB took bold steps to eliminate that practice by passing new regulations that are 

the most stringent in the world. Similarly we have an opportunity here to stop the 

United States from being the world’s biggest consumer of illegal logging. In doing 

so we can help the environment, our industries, domestic employment and tax receipts simultaneously. 

Although there are several programs which certify that wood is being harvested 

sustainably, we use FSC; others use Sustainable Forestry Initiative (SFI) as well 

as additional programs available. Of the 84.3 million hectors of forest land certified 

world wide by the Forest Stewardship council 49.7% is located in Europe, 31.5% in 

North America, 3.0% in Africa and 2.0% in Asia. 

Certification is a clear indication of sustainable forestry practices. Since it is nearly impossible to log illegally on certified land, you can see how easily it would be 

to log illegally in Asia and Africa where under 5% of their forest land is certified 

by the Forest Stewardship Council. While we believe certification and legally controlled logging are both good business and social practices, they are not free. North 
12

American industries’ commitment to these sustainable practices is expensive but the 

right thing to do. However, it puts us at a significant cost—and at times availability—disadvantage to most other areas in the world. 

Let’s examine hardwood plywood alone. When you look at plywood imports in 

2002, 2.2 million cubic meters of hardwood plywood was imported. In 2006 that 

number was 4.4 million cubic meters, up 93%. At the same time, domestic production declined. During that same period from 2002 to 2006 China’s share of imports 

increased from less than 10% to 50%. Imports from other countries actually declined 

over the period as China dominated growth. That trend has continued unabated. 

Despite a significant slowdown in the domestic housing industry (the primary consumer of hardwood plywood) generally every month, 2007 has seen an increase over 

2006 with regard to imports. Imports are up 33% on a value basis and 6% on a volume basis first quarter 2007 over 2006 despite the housing slump. Absolutely at this 

point we believe imports have done far more damage to our industry than the current housing slump. And many of those imports are subsidized by illegal logging as 

well as unfair trade practices. 

Although I know this is a hearing on hardwood plywood, I’d like to mention hardwood flooring as well. In part because some hardwood plywood is converted into 

hardwood flooring, and flooring is a much bigger industry. But also because the 

same logging and business practices that hurt domestic hardwood plywood manufacturing are present in flooring too. 

Hardwood flooring imports have soared from 75 million cubic meters in 2001 to 

325 million cubic meters in 2006. The domestic hardwood flooring industry is carrying the same unfair burden. 

How does this affect our economy as well as federal, state, BLM and private land 

owners? The data in our submission provides a snapshot. Our plant in Klamath 

Falls, Oregon, one of 11, consumed about 46 million board feet of timber in 2003; 

by 2006 that declined to 35 million board feet. Admittedly, much of that timber is 

from private sources, but the decline clearly indicates a loss of revenue to the various government entities and land owners, as well as job cuts at our Klamath Falls 

plant. The Northwest Forest Plan for United States Forest Service Regions 5 and 

6 and BLM lands are running at under 25% of the allowable harvest for many reasons. But had the allowable targets been achieved it would have had a significant 

positive affect on forest health, revenue as well as our global competitiveness. 

The story of log purchases and job loss at our Klamath Falls plant is no different 

at our other plants nationwide. Our two largest plants on the east coast consume 

about 80 million board feet per year. Once again that volume is falling and 98% of 

it comes from private land. 

So what do we want? Free and fair trade. Thanks to the effort of Senator Wyden 

and his staff, an ITC 332 investigation is now underway for both hardwood plywood 

and hardwood flooring industries. That will identify the unfair business practices 

negatively affecting our industry, tax receipts and employment. 

Just as important, perhaps more so, is that we develop and enforce measures so 

that all wood products imported into the United States are, first and foremost, legally logged and, ultimately, sustainably logged. It is the key, not just to a healthy 

environment, but to free and fair trade, healthy tax receipts, employment and the 

survival of our domestic industries. 

Global enforcement at the log level is the key to success. Clearly, most wood product manufacturing occurs in China, but most of the illegal logging undoubtedly occurs in Russia and Africa. While free and fair trade is essential, if logging practices 

are not controlled in the forest, we may improve the relationship between ourselves 

and China, but manufacturing will simply move elsewhere. Hence, neither our tax 

receipts, nor our industry, nor the environment will really be improved. 

So, in summary, what is best for tax receipts is best for our industry, free trade, 

fair trade and legal logging everywhere.

Senator WYDEN. Thank you very much. Tom, welcome. 

Mr. Chamberlain. 

STATEMENT OF TOM CHAMBERLAIN, PRESIDENT, OREGON 

AFL-CIO, SALEM, OR 

Mr. CHAMBERLAIN. Mr. Chair, I’d like to thank you for your leadership in addressing an issue that negatively impacts Oregon working families. 

For the record, my name is Tom Chamberlain. I’m the president 

of the Oregon AFL–CIO, and I have been such since 2005. 
13

The AFL–CIO represents 135,000 union members, supporting 

tens of thousand spouses and children, giving them a middle class 

lifestyle, which is the core of America. There are approximately 

20,000 union members in the wood forest products industry. The 

value of these 20,000 jobs impact our economy three ways. 

One, these are job creators. Depending on which economic setting 

you read, somewhere between four and six jobs are created for each 

manufacturing job in the woods product industry. So what we’re 

talking about is 80 to 100,000 jobs in the Oregon economy, primarily in rural areas of the State where forest products is the 

backbone of their individual economies. 

Second, these are manufacturing jobs. As I said earlier, they are 

the backbone of the middle class. They provide family wage jobs, 

health care, retirement benefits, and more importantly, an opportunity to achieve the American dream, which is that each generation is better than the last. We’re not doing very well right now. 

A recent story in the New York Times reported last week that the 

average 30 year old earns 12 percent less than the parents, 12 percent less. This is a reversal of a 40–year trend which each generation has out-earned the preceding generation. One of the causes 

noted was the loss of manufacturing jobs. We also have to maintain 

an increase, our local tax base, by maintaining these family wage 

job providing vital services like fire and education and police. 

Finally, the wood products industry is the key economic driver of 

rural Oregon, and keep many communities financially afloat. 

As stated earlier, 70 percent of all the companies in the hardwood industry, or hardwood plywood industry, are headquartered 

here in Oregon. The future of the hardwood plywood industry has 

a significant impact on Oregon’s economy. 

The timing of this hearing is very important. Last week’s Strategic Economic Dialogue talks in Washington, DC, addressed Chinese huge trade surpluses, unwillingness to float its currency, unwillingness or inability to protect America’s intellectual property. 

These topics seem to be the primary focus of those discussions, but 

China’s undermining of the forest products industry are just beginning to draw attention. That’s why these hearings are so important. 

Thanks to your efforts and a few of your congressional colleagues 

and a few news outlets, government and non-government organizations, its become very apparent that China are now, are not playing by the rules and will do whatever it takes to gain world domination, especially forest products industry. This, this strategy has 

been at play for years in Oregon, for years. 

It’s worrisome the length China will go to lure away well paying, 

highly skilled, unionized manufacturing jobs from Oregon and 

other places in the United States to China. China’s hardwood plywood industry threatens to destroy large portions of the global ecosystem in Asia, Africa, South America, in order to keep its mills 

running at full capacity. They are in search of low costs, illegally 

logged supplies of fiber. This is a short run, this is a short run 

strategy because in the long run, it’s going to damage our bio-systems. 
14

Rather than focus on recapping problems, I’d like to talk about 

other activities that they are engaged in, and what the consequences of those activities are. 

Illegal subsidies: Several studies have been documented that 

China spends over $2 billion a year, excuse me, $2 billion in the 

last 5 years in subsidizing their wood products industry. With the 

subsidies, China has constructed state-of-the-art mills while American workers are trying to compete in outdated mills that the industry can’t update to maintain their competitiveness. 

Now I’m not an economics major. I was a firefighter for 27 years, 

but even I can see where this is headed. We’re not going to like 

it. We’re not going to like the impacts it’s going to have on the middle class and rural families in Oregon. 

China’s practice of mislabeling exports to avoid duties is making 

it harder for American firms to compete. This practice makes it 

easier for U.S. resellers to choose Chinese products based on unfair 

advantage. It is impossible, impossible to buy American, if you 

can’t find American made products in stores. 

Fraudulent stamping and illegal logging: You know, we believe 

in sustainable yields in our forests in Oregon, but not so in China. 

They have over-harvested their forest land and this was revealed 

in the Washington Post article, Chicago Tribune article and a Popular Mechanics article. Not only have they over-harvested, now 

they are purchasing illegal logs from Indonesia, Burma, Russia, or 

any other company that will sell to them and then falsifying their 

certification papers. This undermines the certification systems that 

are designed to protect our global ecosystems. According to the 

OECD illegal logging results, illegal logging results in an annual 

loss of global economy of $15 billion a year, $1 billion in the United 

States. Just think about what those dollars would bring to Oregon, 

to the rural communities in education and health care and so on. 

But we’re losing those. 

The lack of access to markets. There’s a misconception that organized labor is against trade agreements. We’re not against trade 

agreements. What we are against are trade agreements that do not 

include international laboring organization standards or environmental standards, and don’t allow for access to other markets. 

Without that access, we cannot grow middle class or maintain it. 

What can we do? Well, first, we have to put U.S. Government 

feet to the fire to pressure the Chinese forest products industry to 

reform its tactics. These strategies have had some success. Last 

year, U.S. Government filed an unfair subsidies case against the 

Chinese hardwood plywood industry at the World Trade Organization. Earlier this year, was, WTO finally was willing to fine duties 

on Chinese coated paper imports due to the subsidies. This action 

shouldn’t be the last step. It should be the first step. 

The Bush administration seems to have forgotten that the trade 

laws are only as good as they are enforced. Mr. Chairman, the 

steps that you and other Members of Congress are just the first 

steps you must take to find the solution. The U.S. International 

Trade Commission needs to complete its current investigation. We 

need to see action from the Bush administration. We need more 

congressional hearings and focus on this issue. We need Congress 
15

to revise, revise the Lacey Act, and with the input of labor, industry and environmental to curb illegal logging in the world. 

Finally, we need to promote the fact that American wood products are legally harvested. This can be done in two ways. First, the 

wood product industry can promote their work so that Americans 

concerned about illegal logging know that made in the USA label 

means that products are harvested legally. Second, Congress can 

encourage made in the USA as a way to say that we do not condone illegal logging. These just are initial steps; much more is 

needed to be done. The Oregon AFL–CIO looks forward to working 

with you in the future to define solutions to these very pressing 

problems. 

[The prepared statement of Mr. Chamberlain follows:]

PREPARED STATEMENT OF TOM CHAMBERLAIN, PRESIDENT, OREGON AFL-CIO 

Mr. Chairman. Thank you for taking the lead on this very important issue to 

workers in Oregon and for giving me the opportunity to testify. My name is Tom 

Chamberlain and I have had the honor of serving as the President of the Oregon 

AFL-CIO since 2005. My organization represents more than 135,000 union members 

in Oregon, and our members support hundreds of thousands of spouses and children. There are approximately 20,000 union members, both in the AFL-CIO and in 

other unions, who work in the Oregon forest products industry. The value these 

20,000 workers add to the economy is very important in three ways. 

First, this industry has a high job multiplier. Depending on the economic analysis 

you read, it is somewhere between four and six. This means that for every one person employed by the forest products industry, there are somewhere between four 

and six other Americans employed in support industries—such as logging, transportation, utility and retail—who rely on this industry for their jobs. 

Second, these are the good manufacturing jobs that we should be striving to keep 

in the United States—they are highly skilled manufacturing jobs that pay high 

hourly wages and often come with full benefits. They keep up the local tax base that 

maintains necessary services such as police, fire and education. They are not low 

paying, no benefit ‘‘McJobs.’’

Finally, these Oregon workers and their families make up the backbone of many 

rural communities in our state and elsewhere in the United States. It is these well 

paying, highly skilled jobs that keep many of these communities financially afloat. 

As you mentioned in your opening statement, more than 70 percent of the companies in the hardwood plywood industry are headquartered in this state. There is no 

doubt that the future of this industry is of significant importance to Oregon. 

The timing of this hearing is very important, as it comes on the heels of last 

week’s Strategic Economic Dialogue talks in Washington. While issues such as China’s huge trade surplus with the United States, the Chinese government’s unwillingness to float its currency and the country’s seeming inability to protect American 

intellectual property have garnered much of the attention, the corrosive effects of 

practices of the Chinese forest products industry are only beginning to receive much 

public attention. 

But this is quickly changing. Thanks to your efforts along with a few other Members of Congress, the reporting of a few news outlets and the attention of a handful 

of governmental and nongovernmental organizations, the country and the world are 

beginning to realize what the hardwood plywood industry and its workers have 

known for many years—the Chinese do not play by the rules and will do whatever 

is necessary to establish global dominance. 

What makes Chinese actions even more worrisome is that they go to such great 

lengths to lure well paying, highly skilled manufacturing jobs that were formerly 

held by unionized workers in Oregon and other parts of the United States to China. 

What we are seeing is an industry that threatens to destroy large portions of the 

global ecosystem—be it in Asia, Africa or even South America—in order to keep its 

mills running at capacity with low cost, largely illegally logged supplies of fiber in 

the short run. In the long run, as biosystems are destroyed, everyone loses—even 

the Chinese. 

Rather than recapping what the problems are, I would like to spend a few minutes of the Committee’s time talking about some of the consequences of this activity. 

Illegal subsidies.—Several studies have documented that the Chinese government 

has subsidized its forest products industry to the tune of nearly two billion dollars 
16

over a five-year period. Chinese mills are quickly becoming some of the most modern 

and efficient in the world, while American workers are forced to compete in older 

mills since the industry can no longer fund necessary improvements to keep them 

competitive. It doesn’t take a MBA from Yale to understand the long term consequences. 

Customs issues.—By mislabeling exports to avoid duties, the Chinese make it 

harder for U.S. firms to compete as this deception makes it easier for U.S. resellers 

to choose Chinese products based on their unfair price advantage. It is impossible 

to ‘‘Buy American’’ if you cannot find American made forest products in the stores. 

Fraudulent stamping and illegal logging.—In recent years, American companies 

and consumers have become increasingly aware of the importance of sustainably 

harvested wood products. However, as the Washington Post, Chicago Tribune and 

Popular Mechanics have reported, the Chinese forest products industry, having seen 

the negative effect over-harvesting domestically, has been importing illegally harvested logs from Indonesia, Burma, Russia and any number of other countries and 

accepting obviously false certification papers. These activities also undermine the 

certification systems that have been set up to protect global ecosystems. According 

to the OECD, illegal logging results in an annual loss to the global economy of $15 

billion a year; the U.S. economy alone takes a $1 billion hit. Imagine what an additional billion dollars could for our industry or for rural school districts and counties 

in Oregon. 

Lack of reciprocal market access.—While it remains fashionable for proponents of 

so-called ‘‘free trade’’ to claim that labor is opposed to trade, that is, of course, false. 

Organized labor supports trade as long as it is fair and the country we are trading 

with gives us reciprocal market access. When we lose access to such a quickly growing market, we lose access to one of the ways to grow our industry outside of North 

America. 

So what are the next steps? We need to adopt the tactics of other groups that 

have begun to show some success in getting the Chinese government to act on 

issues such as Darfur. We need to shine a spotlight on Chinese practices and embarrass them into action. We need to garner support on all fronts from multiple allies. 

Here are some examples. 

First, we need to put the U.S. government’s feet to the fire to pressure the Chinese forest products industry to reform its tactics. So far, we have seen some successes—the U.S. government last year filed an unfair subsidies case against the 

Chinese hardwood plywood industry at the World Trade Organization and earlier 

this year was finally willing to apply duties on Chinese coated paper imports due 

to subsidies they receive. But these should not be the last steps—they should be the 

first. We need to remind the Bush administration that trade laws are only good if 

they are enforced. 

Moreover, steps that you and other Members of Congress have taken are just the 

first steps. Not only do we need to see the U.S. International Trade Commission 

complete its current investigation, but we need to see action from the Administration. Not only do we need more hearings on the Chinese forest products industry, 

but we also need Congress to revise the Lacey Act with the input of industry, labor 

and the environmental movement in order to help curb illegal logging. 

Finally, we need to promote the fact that American wood products are harvested 

legally. This can happen in two ways. First, the wood products industry can promote 

their work so that Americans concerned about illegal logging know that the ‘‘Made 

in the USA’’ label means that the product was harvested legally. Second, Congress 

can encourage ‘‘Made in the USA’’ as a way to say that we do not condone illegal 

logging. 

These are just the first steps. Much more needs to be done. The Oregon AFL-CIO 

looks forward to working with you in the future to find solutions to this problem.

Senator WYDEN. Mr. Chamberlain, thanks very much. All three 

of you have been very helpful. We’ll have some questions in a moment. 

Mr. Daly. 

STATEMENT OF EDWARD J. DALY, CHIEF OPERATING 

OFFICER, FOREST STEWARDSHIP COUNCIL—US 

Mr. DALY. Thank you, Senator Wyden. Thank you to the subcommittee for inviting me here today. I appreciate being on this esteemed panel. 
17

My name is Ned Daly. I’m Chief Operating Officer for the Forest 

Stewardship Council here in the United States. 

As a way of introduction, the Forest Stewardship Council is a 

tool that creates a marketplace for sustainable wood produced and 

wood and paper products. It rewards the best companies and cooperatives for the best practices. More importantly for this hearing, 

it is a way to measure the worst practices out of the marketplace. 

We are having an impact in China and across the globe with a 

very simple business motto. FSC is able to provide good producers 

and manufacturers, like the over 70 Oregon based FSC certified 

companies, a way to distinguish themselves in some environmentally and socially sustained operations in the global marketplace. FSC also allows consumers to identify sustainable wood 

products in the marketplace, and support companies with the best 

practices. It also allows environmentally social advocates to partner 

with sustainable companies and promote positive alternatives in 

the marketplace that support communities and the environment. 

FSC believes that working forests are an integral and necessary 

component to forest conservation. The business model has allowed 

us to help the global timber industry become an ally in conservation of forest worldwide. 

FSC standards have been applied to more than 225 million acres 

of actively managed forests in more than 70 countries, and it’s 

growing steadily. These standards ensure the legal sustainable origin of FSC certified products. 

FSC chain-of-custody certification require from manufacturers 

and distributors track certified products through the chain and has 

certified over 5,600 manufacturers and distributors in 73 countries. 

Evidence of FSC success in our ability to impact markets in 

China are the numerous companies that have FSC procurement 

policies, including Home Depot, Lowe’s, Crate and Barrel, Pier 1, 

Williams-Sonoma, Pottery Barn, JP Morgan, Bank of America, 

PNC Bank, Random House, Scholastic Publishing, Ikea, Nike, 

Starbucks, Staples, Office Depot, Wal-Mart, Patagonia, and the 

U.S. Green Building Council. 

FSC has just started the process of establishing an office in 

China. The working group members represent a broad cross section 

of forest stakeholders, including the International Network for 

Bamboo and Rattan, WWF China, Beijing Forestry Society, IKEA 

and many others. 

The FSC working group will focus on the development of national 

standards for timber harvesting in China, but due to serious flooding in 1998, when over 2,500 people lost their lives, the Chinese 

government banned commercial logging in 17 provinces. While the 

ban was intended to conserve landscapes, the most immediate impact has been the sharp increase of wood and pulp imported from 

Southeast Asia and Siberia. 

Timber imports into China has tripled in volume and doubled in 

value between 1997 and 2003. It is estimated that nearly half of 

all tropical timber trees harvested worldwide are consumed in the 

Chinese goods producing sector. The majority of imports come from 

Indonesia, Malaysia, and Russia. FSC partner, the Environmental 

Investigation Agency has shown illegally logged timber imports 

from Russia (50 percent of all export trade in the Russian Far East 
18

is considered illegal) as well as Burma, Cameroon, Gabon, Indonesia, Liberia, Papua New Guinea and Thailand. Thailand in turn 

imports illegal timber from neighboring Burma, Cambodia, and 

Laos for export to China. 

Some more important than developing standards for harvesting 

within China, is the application of FSC chain-of-custody standards 

to provide oversight on every step in the commercial production of 

wood and paper products from the stump to the retailer. 

As in any country, there are a number of goods sustainable producers and manufacturers throughout China and many Chinese 

companies that have already achieved FSC certification. But issues 

such as corruption, lack of management plans, lack of safety measures for workers, the inability to document or trace products create 

a large gap between much of the Chinese industry today and where 

they would need to be to become FSC certified. 

Fortunately, FSC has quite a bit of experience working in sectors 

of the timber industry that face similar challenges, most notably 

the garden furniture industry in Viet Nam, the charcoal industry 

in South Africa, and the general wood products industry in central 

Africa and the Amazon Basin where Brazilian government estimates 25,000 people in the timber and cattle industry. 

We are already seeing how market managed for sustainable 

products in the U.S. and Europe is affecting the Chinese export 

market. FSC accredited auditors have issued five forest management certificates in over 200 chain-of-custody certificates in China. 

But the challenges of operating in China remain significant. 

China has a number of requirements that make it very difficult 

to establish FSC audits in an FSC general office in China, such as 

significant registered capital, over $3 million, at least 10 full-time 

employees, and the requirement for conformity to government regulations that have not yet been promulgated. It has been a very difficult process to establish an FSC office in China and perform audits in China, but there are signs that the government is willing 

to accommodate FSC in the country. 

The misappropriation of the FSC label is also an issue. We are 

all ready seeing misuse of labels by companies in China, including 

the use of the FSC logo by non-FSC certified companies on nonFSC certified hardwood plywood. FSC has addressed these issues. 

It has a very robust trademark infringement procedure. With the 

help of the over 5,000 certified companies we are trying to protect 

their legitimate use of the label, we’ve done a good job to date, but 

the growth in China will definitely test our ability to protect the 

FSC trademark. 

Obviously the change will not happen overnight, but in tandem 

with our environmental partners such as WWF, Environmental Investigation Agency, FSC certified companies in support of governments in producing, manufacturing, and import countries, we can 

go a long way in the world, a long way in cleaning up international 

timber trade in China and around the world. 

In conclusion, I’d like to say that while there are a number of 

issues and problems that make the Chinese economy unique, in 

many ways China is nothing more than a fork in the mill. There 

are underlying problems with the global timber industry, illegal 

logging, ecologically destructive practices, violation of human rights 
19

that must be addressed alone with the global economy that seems 

blissfully ignorant to these terrible practices. I believe FSC is one 

tool that can help us address these issues in China and across the 

world. 

[The prepared statement of Mr. Daly follows:]

PREPARED STATEMENT OF EDWARD J. DALY, CHIEF OPERATING OFFICER, FOREST

STEWARDSHIP COUNCIL—US 

Thank you for the opportunity to testify before the subcommittee today. 

My testimony will cover how the Forest Stewardship Council supports and promotes companies with exemplary practices like the over 70 Oregon-based companies 

certified by FSC, what FSC is doing in China to reduce the impact of illegal and 

unsustainable wood and paper products on the global marketplace, and the challenges we see moving forward in China. I will address these issues in general, but 

they all apply to the market for hardwood plywood in the U.S. and globally. 

FSC certification is a complicated system of standards, policies, principles, criteria 

and indicators necessary to implement and oversee a global standard for environmentally and socially responsible timber production. As a way of introduction, there 

is an easier way to think about FSC certification—Ebay for sustainable timber. 

There are companies like Collins Pine, Warm Springs Forest Products and Columbia Forest products who have quite literally some of the best forest management 

and manufacturing practices in the world and they would like to be able to articulate to consumers that commitment to sustainability. 

At the same time there are consumers, both institutional and individual who 

would like to buy products that are sustainably produced, or more importantly, not 

from illegal or destructive practices. 

There are also advocates for conservation, sustainable forest management and 

healthy rural communities that would like to have positive alternatives in the marketplace that they can direct consumers to. 

Like Ebay, through a set of policies that legitimize the transactions in that marketplace and the establishment of a network of buyers and sellers, FSC is able to 

provide good producers and manufacturers a way to distinguish themselves in the 

marketplace, allows consumers to identify sustainable wood products and allows advocates to partner with sustainable companies to promote wood and paper products 

that support communities and the environment. 

FSC believes that working forests are an integral and necessary component to forest conservation. With the growing impacts of conversion from sources like agricultural expansion and development, working forest a essential to provide value to 

standing forests and keep the forests standing. 

WHAT IS FSC?

Since its inception in 1993, the Forest Stewardship Council has emerged as a 

globally influential system for transforming forestry around the world by reaching 

areas where other conservation strategies or government policies have fallen short. 

The Forest Stewardship Council is an independent, nonprofit organization that promotes the responsible management of the world’s working forests through the development of forest management standards, a voluntary certification system, and 

trademarks that provide recognition and value to products bearing the FSC label 

in the marketplace. 

FSC standards have been applied on more than 225 million acres of actively managed forests in more than 70 countries, and growing steadily. In 1994, FSC’s members approved an international set of Principles and Criteria that define FSC’s 

threshold for responsible forestry practices worldwide. These standards support biodiversity, reduce chemical use, protect streams and aquatic communities, conserve 

old growth, ensure protection of high conservation value forests, give stakeholders 

a voice, and ensure long-term timber supplies. Specific regional standards are developed in countries to interpret and operationalize the original Principles and Criteria 

in order to manage specific, local forest compositions. The regional standards were 

developed through a unique consensus process that allows for and actively seeks 

participation from all interested parties. 

Manufacturers and distributors of wood and paper products are required to have 

a ‘‘chain-of-custody’’ certification in order to label and sell FSC-certified products. 

Chain-of-custody certification is the process through which wood and fiber are 

tracked from their original point of harvest through the manufacturing process. FSC 

is a credible system because consumers can be confident that their purchase of wood 
20

or paper is truly linked directly back to the practice of certified forestry on the 

ground. FSC has 5,646 certified chain-of-custody companies in 73 countries. 

With 37 national offices and representation in every major forest producing country, FSC and its partners are creating a marketplace that demands well-managed 

forestry practices. Moreover, NGOs, businesses, government agencies, financial institutions, and landowners increasingly use FSC standards as an important land 

conservation tool, a vehicle to implement corporate social responsibility practices, 

and a strategy for product differentiation in the marketplace. Through use of the 

FSC certification system, institutions of all kinds can ensure their commitments to 

high standards of forest management. 

Demand for certified products is ‘‘pulling’’ acres into the FSC system. As certification gains recognition as the screen through which individual and commercial customers view their purchases, the most egregious forest practices are denied a place 

in the market. In short, the investment made to develop and apply FSC standards 

over the past decade is paying off in conservation benefits, such as protection of 

wildlife habitats, improved water quality, sustained availability of timber resources, 

and increased recognition that forestry can be practiced sustainably. With illegal 

logging still rampant in many parts of the world and wood and paper demands expected to grow over the next 50 years, the need for FSC standards as a conservation 

tool is greater than ever before. 

Evidence of such demand pull are the numerous companies that have FSC procurement policies including Home Depot, Lowes, Crate and Barrel, Pier 1, WilliamsSonoma, Pottery Barn, JP Morgan, Bank of America, PNC Bank, Random House, 

Scholastic Publishing, Ikea, Nike, Starbucks (flooring), Staples, Office Depot, WalMart, Patagonia, and the U.S. Green Building Council’s LEED program. 

CERTIFICATION

FSC accredited, independent, ‘‘third-party’’ certification bodies or ‘‘certifiers’’ certify forests. They assess forest management using the FSC principles, criteria, and 

standards, each certifier uses their own evaluative process. This allows FSC to remain outside of the assessment process, and supports the integrity of the standard, 

and of the FSC system. Certifiers evaluate both forest management activities (forest 

certification) and tracking of forest products (chain-of-custody certification). 

Forest landowners or managers can contact an accredited FSC certifier if they are 

interested in becoming certified. Certifiers engage in a contractual relationship with 

the landowner/manager to assess forest management against the FSC standard approved for the region where the forest is located. The general public is notified about 

certification assessments before they take place so that the certifiers, helping assure 

the integrity of the process, can hear a full range of voices. At the close, an assessment summary report is made public, while at the same time keeping the company’s 

proprietary information confidential. If the forest management operations assessed 

quality for certification, the landowner can choose to sign a certification contract. 

This event results in their being ‘‘certified’’ and brings with it the landowner’s commitment to continue to practice forestry in a certifiable fashion. This same process 

is applied in every country, including China, in which FSC operates. 

The contract’s duration is five years, at which point a full assessment will be conducted again if the landowner wishes to continue being certified. These five-year audits are supplemented by annual audits to verify that the terms of the contract are 

being followed, and facilitate regular contact between the certificate holder and certifier. 

For those companies who manufacture or trade certified products, a different form 

of certification applies. Again, to assure the credibility of claims on products, it is 

important to track materials as they leave the forest and become products down 

stream. This ‘‘chain of custody’’ (COC) certification process is quite simple. Like any 

inventory control system, COC allows products to be segregated and identified as 

having come from a particular source—in this case, an FSC-certified forest. 

FSC’s model of certification allows products that flow from certified forests to 

enter the marketplace with a credential that is unique. Any FSC labeled product 

can be traced back to a certified source. This aspect of the system is the basis for 

any credible certification system and is the link between consumer preference and 

responsible, on the ground forest management. 

FSC IN CHINA

FSC is in the process of establishing an office in China which is being led by the 

former director of accreditation for FSC International. A national working has been 

established to develop forest management standards for China. Since July 2005 the 

formative FSC working group in China has met seven times. Working group mem-
21

bers represent a broad cross section of forest stakeholders including the International Network for Bamboo and Rattan (INBAR), WWF China, Beijing Forestry 

Society (BFS), IKEA and others. Because of China’s importance and the difficulty 

of establishing an office there, the FSC International board will hold its next meeting in Beijing. 

The FSC working group will focus on the development of national standards for 

timber harvesting in China, but due to serious flooding in 1998, in which over 2,500 

people lost their lives, the Chinese government banned commercial logging in 17 

provinces. While the ban was intended to conserve landscapes, its most immediate 

impact has been the sharp increase of wood and pulp imported from Southeast Asia 

and Siberia. 

Timber product imports into China have tripled in volume and doubled in value 

1997-2003 and it is estimated that nearly half of all tropical trees harvested worldwide are consumed in Chinese goods producing sector. The majority of imports come 

from Indonesia, Malaysia, and Russia. FSC partner, the Environmental Investigation Agency has shown illegally logged timber imports from Russia (50 per cent of 

all export trade in the Russian Far East is considered illegal), Burma, Cameroon, 

Gabon, Indonesia, Liberia, Papua New Guinea and Thailand (Thailand in turn imports illegal timber from neighbouring Burma, Cambodia and Laos for export to 

China.) 

So more important than developing standards for harvesting within China, is the 

application of FSC chain-of-custody standards to provide oversight on every step in 

the commercial production of wood and paper products from the stump to the retailer. The Chain of Custody standards that govern the processing of wood products—mills, secondary manufacturers, brokers and merchants—are internationally 

established and provide oversight for products made in China often from imported 

wood and exported globally. 

Since FSC sets a global standard for exemplary forestry, there are many operations across the globe that cannot meet the FSC standard. This presents a challenge: how do you create market incentives for operations that cannot meet the FSC 

standard, that encourage those operations to move in the right direction. 

As in any country there are a number of good sustainable producers and manufacturers throughout China and many Chinese companies have already achieved FSC 

certification. But issues such as corruption, lack of management plans, lack of safety 

measures for workers, and the inability to document or trace products create a large 

gap between where much of the Chinese industry is today and where they need to 

be to become FSC certified. 

Fortunately, FSC does have some experience working with sectors of the timber 

industry that have faced similar challenges, most notably the garden furniture industry in Viet Nam and the charcoal industry in South Africa. Through partner organizations such as the Tropical Forest Trust, producers can receive selective recognition in certain markets if the commit to incremental improvement over 5 years 

and agree to become FSC certified at the end of the 5 year period. 

Obviously change will not happen overnight, but in tandem with our environmental partners such as WWF, Environmental Investigation Agency, and others, 

FSC certified companies and the support of governments in producing, manufacturing and import countries we can go along way in cleaning up the international 

timber trade in China and around the world. 

ESTABLISHING FSC CERTIFICATION IN CHINA

It has been a very difficult to establish an FSC office in China and to perform 

audits in China, but there are signs that the government is willing to accommodate 

FSC certification in country. 

For an FSC accredited certifier to legally operate in China, it must adhere to the 

following regulations:

Article 10 A certification body to be established shall meet the following requirements:

(1) having fixed premises and necessary facilities; 

(2) having management system that meets the requirements for certification and accreditation; 

(3) having a registered capital of not less than 3,000,000 yuan; and 

(4) having not less than ten full-time certification personnel in relevant 

fields.

A certification body to engage in product certification activities is additionally 

required to have technical competence in testing or inspection commensurate 

with relevant product certification activities. 
22

Article 15 Any certification personnel, when practicing certification activities, 

shall practice in one certification body only and shall not practice in two or 

more certification bodies simultaneously. 

Article 76 Structural fee charts for certification and accreditation shall be in 

conformity with the provisions of relevant laws and administrative regulations 

of the State on pricing. 

For social issues certification (e.g. SA 8000) the Certification and Accreditation Administration of the People’s Republic of China is operating on a ‘case by 

case’ basis both the certification organization and the enterprise involved must 

submit an application to CNCA in advance, explain the reasons for certification, 

and cannot start the certification process until approved.

The requirements for a physical presence, staff and investment in China make it 

difficult for many certification bodies to operate there. The fact that the Chinese 

government has not established guidelines for accreditation and certification in the 

forestry sector makes it difficult for FSC accredited auditors to establish management systems for operating in China. 

But the government is moving forward on a number of initiatives that would help 

establish FSC certification in China. The State Forest Administration’s (SFA) commissioned the Chinese Academy of Forestry (CAF) to develop a set of criteria and 

indicators suitable for national forest units. (The Chinese Academy of Forestry and 

the World Wide Fund for Nature (WWF) China were appointed for the task of establishing the FSC Working Group and develop a FSC National Standard in line with 

the regulations required by the FSC.) 

Since November 2003, all certification bodies issuing certificates in China need to 

be approved by the Certification and Accreditation Administration of the People’s 

Republic of China (CNCA). CNCA does not seem to have a major problem with the 

concept of ‘International Accreditation’ and certification bodies other than CNAB 

(CNAS) operating in China. Another positive sign is China is active in ENA-FLEG 

(Forest Law Enforcement and Governance Europe/North Asia) and shown a commitment to oppose illegal logging and associated trade. 

Despite these difficulties, FSC has begun to make some inroads in China. FSC 

accredited auditors have issued five forest management certificates and over 200 

chain of custody certificates in China. 

LOOKING TOWARD THE FUTURE

There are rarely simple solutions to complex problems like those related to creating transparency and oversight for the international timber trade. In most cases 

it is a number of tools, such as legislation, diplomacy or market pressure that help 

resolve such issues. I believe FSC is a tool that can help remove the worst players 

from the international timber market and reward the sustainable producers in the 

marketplace. FSC also plays a very important role for wood and paper products 

more generally. As this industry and many other industries have seen before, a few 

bad actors can tarnish the whole industry’s reputation. FSC establishes sustainably 

produced wood and paper products as the green, environmentally and socially beneficial products that they are. FSC can uniquely play that role because it is the only 

internationally recognized forest certification program that recognizes the importance of social issues—community involvement, indigenous and labor rights—in forest management. 

Still there is a very difficult road ahead. There is little question that China will 

be FSC’s toughest challenge to date. Along with the challenges aforementioned, trying to regulate misappropriation of the FSC logo and certification is a huge challenge. We are already seeing the misuse of labels by companies in China (including 

the use of the FSC logo by a non-FSC certified company on non-FSC certified hardwood plywood). FSC has a very robust trademark infringement procedure and with 

the help of the over 5,000 certified companies who are trying to protect their legitimate use of the label, we have done a good job to date, but growth in China will 

definitely test our ability to protect the FSC trademark. 

I have included for the committee the FSC’s Principles and Criteria which guide 

FSC certification and a list of the FSC certified companies in Oregon who use FSC 

as a way to highlight their sustainable practices and allows those companies to compete in the global marketplace based on good practices and good prices. 

INTRODUCTION TO FSC’S PRINCIPLES & CRITERIA FOR FOREST MANAGEMENT

CERTIFICATION

It is widely accepted that forest resources and associated lands should be managed to meet the social, economic, ecological, cultural and spiritual needs of present 

and future generations. Furthermore, growing public awareness of forest destruction 
23

and degradation has led consumers to demand that their purchases of wood and 

other forest products will not contribute to this destruction but rather help to secure 

forest resources for the future. In response to these demands, certification and selfcertification programs of wood products have proliferated in the marketplace. 

The Forest Stewardship Council (FSC) is an international body which accredits 

certification organizations in order to guarantee the authenticity of their claims. In 

all cases the process of certification will be initiated voluntarily by forest owners 

and managers who request the services of a certification organization. The goal of 

FSC is to promote environmentally responsible, socially beneficial and economically 

viable management of the world’s forests, by establishing a worldwide standard of 

recognized and respected Principles of Forest Stewardship. 

The FSC’s Principles and Criteria (P&C) apply to all tropical, temperate and boreal forests, as addressed in Principle #9 and the accompanying glossary. Many of 

these P&C apply also to plantations and partially replanted forests. More detailed 

standards for these and other vegetation types may be prepared at national and 

local levels. The P&C are to be incorporated into the evaluation systems and standards of all certification organizations seeking accreditation by FSC. While the P&C 

are mainly designed for forests managed for the production of wood products, they 

are also relevant, to varying degrees, to forests managed for non-timber products 

and other services. The P&C are a complete package to be considered as a whole, 

and their sequence does not represent an ordering of priority. This document shall 

be used in conjunction with the FSC’s Statutes, Procedures for Accreditation and 

Guidelines for Certifiers. 

FSC and FSC-accredited certification organizations will not insist on perfection in 

satisfying the P&C. However, major failures in any individual Principles will normally disqualify a candidate from certification, or will lead to decertification. These 

decisions will be taken by individual certifiers, and guided by the extent to which 

each Criterion is satisfied, and by the importance and consequences of failures. 

Some flexibility will be allowed to cope with local circumstances. 

The scale and intensity of forest management operations, the uniqueness of the 

affected resources, and the relative ecological fragility of the forest will be considered in all certification assessments. Differences and difficulties of interpretation of 

the P&C will be addressed in national and local forest stewardship standards. These 

standards are to be developed in each country or region involved, and will be evaluated for purposes of certification, by certifiers and other involved and affected parties on a case by case basis. If necessary, FSC dispute resolution mechanisms may 

also be called upon during the course of assessment. More information and guidance 

about the certification and accreditation process is included in the FSC Statutes, Accreditation Procedures, and Guidelines for Certifiers. 

The FSC P&C should be used in conjunction with national and international laws 

and regulations. FSC intends to complement, not supplant, other initiatives that 

support responsible forest management worldwide. 

The FSC will conduct educational activities to increase public awareness of the 

importance of the following:

—improving forest management; 

—incorporating the full costs of management and production into the price of 

forest products; 

—promoting the highest and best use of forest resources; 

—reducing damage and waste; and 

—avoiding over-consumption and over-harvesting.

FSC will also provide guidance to policy makers on these issues, including improving forest management legislation and policies. 

Principle 1: Compliance with Laws and FSC Principles 

Forest management shall respect all applicable laws of the country in which they 

occur, and international treaties and agreements to which the country is a signatory, and comply with all FSC Principles and Criteria. 

Criteria 

1.1 Forest management shall respect all national and local laws and administrative requirements. 

1.2 All applicable and legally prescribed fees, royalties, taxes and other charges 

shall be paid. 

1.3 In signatory countries, the provisions of all binding international agreements 

such as CITES, ILO Conventions, ITTA, and Convention on Biological Diversity, 

shall be respected. 
24

1.4 Conflicts between laws, regulations and the FSC Principles and Criteria shall 

be evaluated for the purposes of certification, on a case by case basis, by the certifiers and the involved or affected parties. 

1.5 Forest management areas should be protected from illegal harvesting, settlement and other unauthorized activities. 

1.6 Forest managers shall demonstrate a long-term commitment to adhere to the 

FSC Principles and Criteria.

Principle 2: Tenure and Use Rights and Responsibilities 

Long-term tenure and use rights to the land and forest resources shall be clearly 

defined, documented and legally established. 

Criteria 

2.1 Clear evidence of long-term forest use rights to the land (e.g. land title, customary rights, or lease agreements) shall be demonstrated. 

2.2 Local communities with legal or customary tenure or use rights shall maintain 

control, to the extent necessary to protect their rights or resources, over forest operations unless they delegate control with free and informed consent to other agencies. 

2.3 Appropriate mechanisms shall be employed to resolve disputes over tenure 

claims and use rights. The circumstances and status of any outstanding disputes 

will be explicitly considered in the certification evaluation. Disputes of substantial 

magnitude involving a significant number of interests will normally disqualify an 

operation from being certified.

Principle 3: Indigenous People’s Rights 

The legal and customary rights of indigenous peoples to own, use and manage 

their lands, territories, and resources shall be recognized and respected. 

Criteria 

3.1 Indigenous peoples shall control forest management on their lands and territories unless they delegate control with free and informed consent to other agencies. 

3.2 Forest management shall not threaten or diminish, either directly or indirectly, the resources or tenure rights of indigenous peoples. 

3.3 Sites of special cultural, ecological, economic or religious significance to indigenous peoples shall be clearly identified in cooperation with such peoples, and recognized and protected by forest managers. 

3.4 Indigenous peoples shall be compensated for the application of their traditional knowledge regarding the use of forest species or management systems in forest operations. This compensation shall be formally agreed upon with their free and 

informed consent before forest operations commence.

Principle 4: Community Relations and Workers’ Rights 

Forest management operations shall maintain or enhance the long-term social 

and economic well-being of forest workers and local communities. 

Criteria 

4.1 The communities within, or adjacent to, the forest management area should 

be given opportunities for employment, training, and other services. 

4.2 Forest management should meet or exceed all applicable laws and/or regulations covering health and safety of employees and their families. 

4.3 The rights of workers to organize and voluntarily negotiate with their employers shall be guaranteed as outlined in Conventions 87 and 98 of the International 

Labour Organisation (ILO). 

4.4 Management planning and operations shall incorporate the results of evaluations of social impact. Consultations shall be maintained with people and groups 

(both men and women) directly affected by management operations. 

4.5 Appropriate mechanisms shall be employed for resolving grievances and for 

providing fair compensation in the case of loss or damage affecting the legal or customary rights, property, resources, or livelihoods of local peoples. Measures shall be 

taken to avoid such loss or damage.

Principle 5: Benefits from the Forest 

Forest management operations shall encourage the efficient use of the forest’s 

multiple products and services to ensure economic viability and a wide range of environmental and social benefits. 
25

Criteria 

5.1 Forest management should strive toward economic viability, while taking into 

account the full environmental, social, and operational costs of production, and ensuring the investments necessary to maintain the ecological productivity of the forest. 

5.2 Forest management and marketing operations should encourage the optimal 

use and local processing of the forest’s diversity of products. 

5.3 Forest management should minimize waste associated with harvesting and 

on-site processing operations and avoid damage to other forest resources. 

5.4 Forest management should strive to strengthen and diversify the local economy, avoiding dependence on a single forest product. 

5.5 Forest management operations shall recognize, maintain, and, where appropriate, enhance the value of forest services and resources such as watersheds and 

fisheries. 

5.6 The rate of harvest of forest products shall not exceed levels which can be permanently sustained.

Principle 6: Environmental Impact 

Forest management shall conserve biological diversity and its associated values, 

water resources, soils, and unique and fragile ecosystems and landscapes, and, by 

so doing, maintain the ecological functions and the integrity of the forest. 

Criteria 

6.1 Assessment of environmental impacts shall be completed—appropriate to the 

scale, intensity of forest management and the uniqueness of the affected resources—

and adequately integrated into management systems. Assessments shall include 

landscape level considerations as well as the impacts of on-site processing facilities. 

Environmental impacts shall be assessed prior to commencement of site-disturbing 

operations. 

6.2 Safeguards shall exist which protect rare, threatened and endangered species 

and their habitats (e.g., nesting and feeding areas). Conservation zones and protection areas shall be established, appropriate to the scale and intensity of forest management and the uniqueness of the affected resources. Inappropriate hunting, fishing, trapping and collecting shall be controlled. 

6.3 Ecological functions and values shall be maintained intact, enhanced, or restored, including: a) Forest regeneration and succession. b) Genetic, species, and ecosystem diversity. c) Natural cycles that affect the productivity of the forest ecosystem. 

6.4 Representative samples of existing ecosystems within the landscape shall be 

protected in their natural state and recorded on maps, appropriate to the scale and 

intensity of operations and the uniqueness of the affected resources. 

6.5 Written guidelines shall be prepared and implemented to: control erosion; 

minimize forest damage during harvesting, road construction, and all other mechanical disturbances; and protect water resources. 

6.6 Management systems shall promote the development and adoption of environmentally friendly non-chemical methods of pest management and strive to avoid the 

use of chemical pesticides. World Health Organization Type 1A and 1B and 

chlorinated hydrocarbon pesticides; pesticides that are persistent, toxic or whose derivatives remain biologically active and accumulate in the food chain beyond their 

intended use; as well as any pesticides banned by international agreement, shall be 

prohibited. If chemicals are used, proper equipment and training shall be provided 

to minimize health and environmental risks. 

6.7 Chemicals, containers, liquid and solid non-organic wastes including fuel and 

oil shall be disposed of in an environmentally appropriate manner at off-site locations. 

6.8 Use of biological control agents shall be documented, minimized, monitored 

and strictly controlled in accordance with national laws and internationally accepted 

scientific protocols. Use of genetically modified organisms shall be prohibited. 

6.9 The use of exotic species shall be carefully controlled and actively monitored 

to avoid adverse ecological impacts. 

6.10 Forest conversion to plantations or non-forest land uses shall not occur, except in circumstances where conversion: a) entails a very limited portion of the forest management unit; and b) does not occur on high conservation value forest areas; 

and c) will enable clear, substantial, additional, secure, long term conservation benefits across the forest management unit.
26

Principle 7: Management Plan 

A management plan—appropriate to the scale and intensity of the operations—

shall be written, implemented, and kept up to date. The long term objectives of 

management, and the means of achieving them, shall be clearly stated. 

Criteria 

7.1 The management plan and supporting documents shall provide: a) Management objectives. b) Description of the forest resources to be managed, environmental 

limitations, land use and ownership status, socio-economic conditions, and a profile 

of adjacent lands. c) Description of silvicultural and/or other management system, 

based on the ecology of the forest in question and information gathered through resource inventories. d) Rationale for rate of annual harvest and species selection. e) 

Provisions for monitoring of forest growth and dynamics. f) Environmental safeguards based on environmental assessments. g) Plans for the identification and protection of rare, threatened and endangered species. h) Maps describing the forest 

resource base including protected areas, planned management activities and land 

ownership. i) Description and justification of harvesting techniques and equipment 

to be used. 

7.2 The management plan shall be periodically revised to incorporate the results 

of monitoring or new scientific and technical information, as well as to respond to 

changing environmental, social and economic circumstances. 

7.3 Forest workers shall receive adequate training and supervision to ensure proper implementation of the management plan. 

7.4 While respecting the confidentiality of information, forest managers shall 

make publicly available a summary of the primary elements of the management 

plan, including those listed in Criterion 7.1.

Principle 8: Monitoring and Assessment 

Monitoring shall be conducted—appropriate to the scale and intensity of forest 

management—to assess the condition of the forest, yields of forest products, chain 

of custody, management activities and their social and environmental impacts. 

Criteria 

8.1 The frequency and intensity of monitoring should be determined by the scale 

and intensity of forest management operations as well as the relative complexity 

and fragility of the affected environment. Monitoring procedures should be consistent and replicable over time to allow comparison of results and assessment of 

change. 

8.2 Forest management should include the research and data collection needed to 

monitor, at a minimum, the following indicators: a) Yield of all forest products harvested. b) Growth rates, regeneration and condition of the forest. c) Composition and 

observed changes in the flora and fauna. d) Environmental and social impacts of 

harvesting and other operations. e) Costs, productivity, and efficiency of forest management. 

8.3 Documentation shall be provided by the forest manager to enable monitoring 

and certifying organizations to trace each forest product from its origin, a process 

known as the ‘‘chain of custody.’’

8.4 The results of monitoring shall be incorporated into the implementation and 

revision of the management plan. 

8.5 While respecting the confidentiality of information, forest managers shall 

make publicly available a summary of the results of monitoring indicators, including 

those listed in Criterion 8.2.

Principle 9: Maintenance of High Conservation Value Forests 

Management activities in high conservation value forests shall maintain or enhance the attributes which define such forests. Decisions regarding high conservation value forests shall always be considered in the context of a precautionary approach. 

Criteria 

9.1 Assessment to determine the presence of the attributes consistent with High 

Conservation Value Forests will be completed, appropriate to scale and intensity of 

forest management. 

9.2 The consultative portion of the certification process must place emphasis on 

the identified conservation attributes, and options for the maintenance thereof. 

9.3 The management plan shall include and implement specific measures that ensure the maintenance and/or enhancement of the applicable conservation attributes 
27

consistent with the precautionary approach. These measures shall be specifically included in the publicly available management plan summary. 

9.4 Annual monitoring shall be conducted to assess the effectiveness of the measures employed to maintain or enhance the applicable conservation attributes.

Principle 10: Plantations 

Plantations shall be planned and managed in accordance with Principles and Criteria 1—9, and Principle 10 and its Criteria. While plantations can provide an array 

of social and economic benefits, and can contribute to satisfying the world’s needs 

for forest products, they should complement the management of, reduce pressures 

on, and promote the restoration and conservation of natural forests. 

Criteria 

10.1 The management objectives of the plantation, including natural forest conservation and restoration objectives, shall be explicitly stated in the management 

plan, and clearly demonstrated in the implementation of the plan. 

10.2 The design and layout of plantations should promote the protection, restoration and conservation of natural forests, and not increase pressures on natural forests. Wildlife corridors, streamside zones and a mosaic of stands of different ages 

and rotation periods, shall be used in the layout of the plantation, consistent with 

the scale of the operation. The scale and layout of plantation blocks shall be consistent with the patterns of forest stands found within the natural landscape. 

10.3 Diversity in the composition of plantations is preferred, so as to enhance economic, ecological and social stability. Such diversity may include the size and spatial 

distribution of management units within the landscape, number and genetic composition of species, age classes and structures. 

10.4 The selection of species for planting shall be based on their overall suitability 

for the site and their appropriateness to the management objectives. In order to enhance the conservation of biological diversity, native species are preferred over exotic species in the establishment of plantations and the restoration of degraded ecosystems. Exotic species, which shall be used only when their performance is greater 

than that of native species, shall be carefully monitored to detect unusual mortality, 

disease, or insect outbreaks and adverse ecological impacts. 

10.5 A proportion of the overall forest management area, appropriate to the scale 

of the plantation and to be determined in regional standards, shall be managed so 

as to restore the site to a natural forest cover. 

10.6 Measures shall be taken to maintain or improve soil structure, fertility, and 

biological activity. The techniques and rate of harvesting, road and trail construction and maintenance, and the choice of species shall not result in long term soil 

degradation or adverse impacts on water quality, quantity or substantial deviation 

from stream course drainage patterns. 

10.7 Measures shall be taken to prevent and minimize outbreaks of pests, diseases, fire and invasive plant introductions. Integrated pest management shall form 

an essential part of the management plan, with primary reliance on prevention and 

biological control methods rather than chemical pesticides and fertilizers. Plantation 

management should make every effort to move away from chemical pesticides and 

fertilizers, including their use in nurseries. The use of chemicals is also covered in 

Criteria 6.6 and 6.7. 

10.8 Appropriate to the scale and diversity of the operation, monitoring of plantations shall include regular assessment of potential on-site and off-site ecological and 

social impacts, (e.g. natural regeneration, effects on water resources and soil fertility, and impacts on local welfare and social well-being), in addition to those elements addressed in principles 8, 6 and 4. No species should be planted on a large 

scale until local trials and/or experience have shown that they are ecologically welladapted to the site, are not invasive, and do not have significant negative ecological 

impacts on other ecosystems. Special attention will be paid to social issues of land 

acquisition for plantations, especially the protection of local rights of ownership, use 

or access. 

10.9 Plantations established in areas converted from natural forests after November 1994 normally shall not qualify for certification. Certification may be allowed 

in circumstances where sufficient evidence is submitted to the certification body 

that the manager/owner is not responsible directly or indirectly of such conversion.

Senator WYDEN. Very good. Thanks, thanks to all of you. This 

has been very helpful. Let’s take a minute or two and talk about 

where forestry is going in the State of Oregon, and then how hardwood plywood fits into it. 
28

I spend a lot of time in Washington, DC, trying to point out to 

people in the U.S. Senate that the Federal Government owns most 

of our land. Essentially for 100 years now, we would get money for 

essential services through timber receipts. We have a cut, we get 

money for the receipts, we get those funds for schools and roads 

and we go about our business, that was how we paid for central 

services. It was different than the way it was done throughout the 

country. 

When environmental values changed, that money dried up. I was 

able to get a law passed in 2000 to essentially pick up the slack. 

Once again, we’re in the same boat. It seems to me, Oregon is really at a crossroads. 

I’m going to push and push and push until we get another multiyear reauthorization to county payments for legislation. We would 

have gotten 81 percent, about $1.1 billion, had what I got passed 

through the Senate become law. So now when I go back next week, 

we’re going to pick up that fight again and stay with it until we 

get it done. 

But it’s very clear to me that we have to find other economic opportunities for resource dependent communities. Once I get the 

county payments legislation done, I’m going to go on to a thinning 

program, so we can get some of the dead material off the forest 

floor and get it to the mills. Bring together people like yourselves 

in industry and scientists and labor folks, environmentalists and do 

something that promotes the health of the forest. We’re going to 

promote biomass programs because that’s going to help clean energy, again, something that could put people to work. 

But it seems to me what you’re giving us today is an opportunity 

for a third leg, and that is additional opportunities in manufacturing that are value added. In other words, they take the resource, you add value to it, and it’s an opportunity for us to have 

markets here and around the world in hardwood plywood. My 

sense is that unless we get fair rules and fair treatment with respect to the Chinese, we’ll lose the very kind of value added manufacturing industry that we need as we try to make this transition 

that the Federal Government is pushing us toward in this county 

payments debate. 

Do you all share that view? Why don’t we just go right down the 

row, particularly for the—Mr. Daly, we’ll spare you and just get the 

Oregonians into this debate. 

Mr. Gonyea, Mr. Guay, Mr. Chamberlain, isn’t this exactly the 

kind of industry we ought to be promoting as the Federal Government says look, you’re not going to get all the money that you originally had in the county payments? 

Mr. GONYEA. Absolutely, Senator. Many of those, that type jobs 

are represented here today. We’d be a sad community if we didn’t 

offer employment and opportunity to make products like we do 

here in the Southern Rogue Valley. 

Senator, part of the solution has to be at the tenable Federal programs. It seems to me that at minimum level we should strive for 

and work together would be the Northwest Plan. We’ve talked 

about it for 14 years and we can’t even get close. At 1.1 billion feet 

is not unattainable. It should be a fair minimum and environmentalists should be working with us to achieve that for forest 
29

health, for jobs in our community. It seems to me that needs to be 

part of the solution going forward. 

Mr. GUAY. We would absolutely agree with Joe. If we could get 

back to the sustainable cut that was allowed, it would lower the 

cost of wood for us. 

Senator WYDEN. We’ll make the stool four legs. 

Mr. GONYEA. Exactly. But I would, actually, in terms of the value 

added jobs, I would take it a step further, because I think it’s either a far more bigger issue than just hardwood plywood. Plywood 

is an intermediate product. It’s made into something else. When 

you stop making plywood in North America, you stop making furniture in North America. When you stop making hardwood planks 

in North America, you stop making engineered flooring in North 

America. 

So, I just happened to be in Bend this past weekend and one of 

the articles in the Bend Bulletin, the local newspaper, was another 

small custom furniture manufacturer had closed that weekend. He 

hadn’t—he wasn’t small. He had 40 or 50 employees. His reason 

was he simply can’t compete with offshore manufacturers. A big 

reason why he can’t compete with those offshore manufacturers is 

because we cannot produce competitively priced panel 120 miles 

south of Klamath Falls to supply him. That is a lot about the illegal activities we’ve been talking about. 

So, I think when you look forward at Oregon or our entire country, the absence of a competitive intermedial product with panels 

has put furniture manufacturers and other sorts of wood panel 

users offshore, compounding the value added job situation from 

that. 

Senator WYDEN. Important point. Mr. Chamberlain. 

Mr. CHAMBERLAIN. Senator Wyden, I couldn’t agree with you 

more. You know, manufacturing jobs are so important to our community because they are an economic driver. When we lose a manufacturing job, it’s like dropping a pebble into a brook or into a 

lake, rather. It has a ripple effect. It washes across the supplier, 

it washes across those folks employed by our school systems, public 

employees, folks in the building trades, everybody loses when we 

lose jobs like this. 

The other way I look at this is, our State can’t be driven by high 

tech alone. High tech is pretty much in the Portland Metro area. 

We have to think of Oregon as Oregon, not Portland center. These 

are rural Oregon’s economic drivers. They are so important to the 

State. To lose these type of manufacturing jobs, that provides opportunity to working families across the State, is absolutely going 

in the wrong direction. 

Senator WYDEN. Of course, it’s of benefit to the whole State. 

What happens in rural Oregon creates jobs from the forest all the 

way to the boardrooms in downtown Portland. There’s no question 

that there’s a rural/urban connection that eats up what you described. 

I’m going to get into some of the nuts and bolts issues of this 

question of how the Chinese engage in these practices, but I wanted to spend a minute on that first question because I think these 

debates always kind of strike people as ‘‘well, why are we bringing 

that up right now?’’ I want people to know that given the chal-
30

lenges we’re going to have with county payments, and I’m going to 

get that law renewed, I’m going to get it renewed for a multi-year 

basis and multi-year program. The Congressmen from this area, on 

the other side of the aisle, has done a lot of good work in assisting 

me on this. But we’re also going to have to find good paying additional industries in fields to strengthen the Oregon economy. 

Frankly, I’m going to use your testimony. If somebody is trying 

to ratchet down our county payments program, I’m going to say 

you’d better help us in terms of these other areas, the question of 

the Northwest Forest Plan, biomass programs, thinning programs, 

and yes, this question of fair treatment in the trade area with respect to China. So you have put it in the right kind of context. I’m 

going to get into this, some of the nuts and bolts question of how 

these unfair practices go forward. 

Tell me a little bit, for the record, what the HP–1 standard is. 

Because I understand this is one of the areas in which the Chinese 

hardwood people have engaged in questionable activity. Can you all 

enlighten me on that? I understand that you have heard that Chinese hardwood plywood manufacturers improperly labeling their 

product, as meeting this ANSI HP–1 standard. Is that right? I’m 

sorry, HPDA. I read an initial wrong. HPVA, yes. 

Mr. GUAY. Definitely. We see that with plants that work over 

there, products are being labeled with HPVA grade levels that are 

not correct. It’s a wide range. 

Senator WYDEN. What does this mean for consumer? 

Mr. GUAY. What it means to a consumer is they think, put most 

basically, they are buying a beautiful piece of plywood and they are 

not. They are buying a piece of plywood with certain structural 

characteristics, and they are not. 

Senator WYDEN. Are there any dangers to people or——

Mr. GUAY. It isn’t in that standard as probably the glues that are 

used. None of us import what we have to call dangerous formaldehyde levels in the United States, consciously. But China sends dangerous formaldehyde levels into the United States. We find that 

when the customer opens the container. That’s quite dangerous. 

Senator WYDEN. So China is sending products with dangerous 

formaldehydes in them? What’s happening to those products now? 

They just go out across the land? 

Mr. GUAY. You know, unless it’s caught in Customs, which is a 

very low likelihood because of the volume versus the resources, it’s 

in your kitchen cabinet. 

Senator WYDEN. Mr. Gonyea, you’ve got something, a sustainable 

forest initiative certificate process, which strikes me as something 

where American industry is trying to go the extra mile to show 

that its products are of high quality. How does that work? 

Mr. GONYEA. Senator, whether SFI, which we chose to kind of 

follow in our company, or FSC, what we can say is we initiated a 

third party certification of our forest lands, and quite a process to 

go through and audit on a regular basis to make sure that we’re 

complying with the standards as set forth, and either as a buyer, 

FSC, and ensure that we’re practicing sustainable forestry, which 

we are proud to do today. 
31

Senator WYDEN. But yet I gather some of the people we’re dealing with around the world are not exactly tripping over themselves 

to meet the same standards? 

Mr. GONYEA. Besides SFI, obviously we comply to rigorous standards, both State and Federal, Senator. What we’ve done is take 

good forest practices here in this country. With foreign products, 

Chinese, we’ve exported demand to countries that have virtually no 

forest practices. I say let’s bring back good forest practices and use 

our forest as intended. 

Senator WYDEN. Now, both of you also, as I understood it, given 

the crunch you’re in, have to import some Chinese hardwood plywood as well. So, you have to bring some in. But you’re also trying 

to make sure that the public is aware that there needs to be better 

protection in this area. Tell me a little bit about how you deal with 

the kind of meshing of these two concerns, Mr. Gonyea and Mr. 

Guay. 

Mr. GONYEA. Senator, as I referenced in, yes, we do import products, about 12 percent of our total annual sales are imported products from around the globe. Yes, a small portion of that would be 

from China. It may be ironic to note that in not many years past, 

we exported products around the globe at a greater percentage of 

our overall sales. 

Today, we import products because, not because we choose to do 

so, it’s because our customers, the consumers have dictated their 

desires for price point advantageous products from around the 

globe. We would like to change those habits. We would like the consumers in our country to buy American made products that are 

sustainably produced and that we can ensure that they are 

sustainably produced because we comply with SFI or FSC. 

Senator WYDEN. Mr. Guay. 

Mr. GUAY. I think my answer is very similar to Joe’s. We got into 

the import business by following our customers there, not by leading our customers to China. A big part of our customer base is very 

large original equipment manufacturers, OEM, furniture manufacturers, cabinet manufacturers that have moved their factories to 

China. They became used to sourcing from there and ultimately decided to use Chinese products here in the United States, the one 

that’s left open. So they were going to import with or without us. 

Our thought was by being the importer, we could make a profit 

for our shareholders, but perhaps more importantly, stay in contact 

with those customers because they were going to import, with or 

without us. If we didn’t stay in contact with them, when initiatives 

like this took place, we would have no entree to say here’s what’s 

happening and here’s what can be done better. 

Senator WYDEN. I would gather that if you didn’t have even a 

small amount of imports, folks in Oregon might not even have all 

the jobs they’ve got; is that right? 

Mr. GONYEA. We think that imports do complement our product 

line and we hope to sell more domestic produced products with a 

smaller percentage. So, in that regard, I think that would be correct, Senator. 

Senator WYDEN. You both, all three of you from Oregon, are in 

favor of new rules regulating the import of timber that occur illegally? 
32

Mr. GONYEA. Absolutely. 

Mr. GUAY. Absolutely. 

Mr. CHAMBERLAIN. Yes. 

Senator WYDEN. Tell me about the situation with Russia. Now, 

our understanding is a lot of the illegal timber coming into China, 

the manufacturer hardwood plywood comes in from Russia. You indicated that you were doing business in Russia. What has that experience been like and what is the connection, for the record, between China and Russia? 

Mr. GUAY. When I say we import, the largest importer of Russian birch, the Russian birch we’re bringing in is coming from the 

western side of Russia where we know it is legally logged. When 

you are talking about the logs going into China, they are coming, 

as Ned said, from Siberia and eastern Russia where, you know, 

frankly, I don’t know that there is legal logging up there. It’s so 

rampant and uncontrolled. 

Relationship is really pretty simple. As Ned mentioned, in 2000 

China began limiting their own timber harvest. During that same 

cycle, the numbers that Joe and I talked about saw an astronomical increase in consumption of wood in China for re-export to the 

United States. A vast majority of that is Russian birch. It’s the 

cheapest wood in the world and it’s adjacent to the plywood manufacturing centers of China. So it became the obvious source of 

wood, but it is an utterly uncontrolled environment. 

Senator WYDEN. You describe the United States as being a 

dumping ground, Mr. Guay, that’s pretty strong language. Somebody calls our country a dumping ground for unsafe wood, what do 

you mean by that? 

Mr. GUAY. We are the world’s largest, second largest consumer 

of wood. Almost all of that wood comes from sources offshore. Most 

of that is southeast Asia, Russia, and Africa. The logic there is simply those three parts of our globe have no control over logging. We 

are the second largest consumer of that wood on the planet. The 

E.U. being one of the other largest consumer, actually has regulations. There are entire species that are harvested in Russia, or excuse me, in Africa, that you cannot import to Europe, period. You 

can import it here. We lack control as a country. 

Senator WYDEN. Mr. Chamberlain, a question for you, with respect to the value-added issue. I think one of the biggest challenges 

for our congressional delegation is a sensible trade policy. Mr. 

Gonyea often talked about free and fair trade. I often describe it 

as a need for smart trade, where you protect your interests, you 

have the freest possible market, but you’re also a smart trading 

partner in the world. 

One of the areas that I think there’s the biggest consensus on, 

as it relates to the foundation of a new trade policy, is that we do 

everything we can to get a level playing field for value-added products, and the kind of products that we’re talking about here today. 

Do you think that’s the beginning of a new consensus between 

labor and business on this trade issue? 

Mr. CHAMBERLAIN. I hope so. I hope so. The AFL–CIO National 

when I was in contact with them yesterday, prior to this meeting 

about trade, is they feel that they have made some progress on 

trade agreements with the International Laboring Organization 
33

Standards being adopted in two trade agreements. But there has 

to be a consensus on maintaining, maintaining manufacturing jobs 

in this country and creating a level playing field for workers and 

business if it weren’t in these trade agreements. I think it’s essential. 

Senator WYDEN. Mr. Daly, a couple questions for you. What does 

it mean when you say that the Chinese are misappropriating our 

logos? In other words, Mr. Gonyea, Mr. Guay are talking about this 

certification process, I guess the technical name for it is the FSC 

certification. So, we’ve got, our companies go through all this trouble to get everything certified and adhere to high standards. Then 

you say that the Chinese are misappropriating our logos. What 

does that mean? What are the real world implications of that? 

Mr. DALY. It’s very similar to what Joe and Phill said about the 

HPVA standard, or very similar to what you see with the Underwriters Laboratory standard on our electronic products. It is just 

used by a number of companies inappropriately without authorization to try to access these growing markets in the United States 

and Europe. 

Clearly, we’re having an impact. People feel like they have got 

to take these initiatives in order to access those markets. But it’s, 

it’s creating a lot of problems in terms of the legitimacy of the 

label. 

So to date we haven’t had any major problems. We’ve been able 

to address all the issues. We found the chain-of- custody seems to 

work very well. But our assumption is that this will be continuing 

to be a problem and something that we have to monitor. 

We appreciate the work of the organization, a company like Columbia Forest Products, who probably, like a few other companies, 

spend a lot of time in China, make sure that what they are buying 

is legal and from sustainable sources. With partners like that, I 

think we can address this issue. 

Senator WYDEN. How is Chinese law enforcement been in this 

issue? Are they being helpful? 

Mr. DALY. Well, to date they have not had a very big impact. I 

think that——

Senator WYDEN. Is it because they are not trying or——

Mr. DALY. Not clear, but there’s not been a lot of effort. The 

problem seems to be overwhelming in a lot of ways. And the imports from the far east of Russia, there is no oversight, no control 

whatsoever. Nothing at the border, no documentation. Clearly they 

could step up efforts. 

Senator WYDEN. When you say the problem is overwhelming to 

Chinese law enforcement, that can’t make people in Oregon, the 

people here feel particularly good. In other words, it suggests to me 

that there’s a problem now and it’s going to get bigger, unless we 

take steps to turn it around; is that right? 

Mr. DALY. Definitely. Certainly in the Russian far east, and the 

illegal, like in southeast Asia, more often you’re seeing mislabeled 

and misrepresented species, poor work, just logs coming in through 

ships in fairly remote ports where there’s just either not a lot of 

oversight, where all the oversight is corrupt. 

Senator WYDEN. I think that ought to be a wake-up call for everybody in the U.S. Congress and a good one to put this panel on. 
34

We always like to give our witnesses the last word. Anybody on 

the panel want to add anything, or we’ll excuse you at this time? 

Mr. GONYEA. Senator, I just add thank you. I thank you for being 

an advocate for free, fair and hopefully smart trade. Let’s keep 

moving forward. 

Senator WYDEN. We are on it. 

Mr. GUAY. I add one comment. I think, Senator, that you’re absolutely right. We are at a cusp of change in our industry right now. 

First quarter of this year saw 6 percent increase in volume at 33 

percent increase in value. Chinese are now bringing in a high valued, especially designed products that are now what remains of our 

bread and butter in this industry. If we lose those specialty products, we’re going to lose this industry, period. 

I thank you for the opportunity to be here, and most especially 

for you and your staff the efforts that you’re doing here through 

332, I think will have an enormous impact. 

Senator WYDEN. Thank you all. Mr. Chamberlain, do you want 

to add anything? 

Mr. CHAMBERLAIN. Yes, I do. 

Senator WYDEN. Good. 

Mr. CHAMBERLAIN. I really want to thank you for chairing. Oftentimes I have to fight to be on a panel. It’s rare that I’m asked 

to join a panel. It’s commendable if you want a working family’s 

perspective into this problem because it is a working family problem. Thank you. 

Senator WYDEN. You and working families are what it’s all 

about. I particularly appreciate the fact that there’s an effort, a 

labor business effort to reach out in this State. Mr. Daly, you’ll always be welcome here in the Pacific Northwest. Thank you for coming. 

Mr. DALY. Thank you very much. 

Senator WYDEN. All right. You’re excused. 

Our next panel can come forward. Ms. Vera Adams, Executive 

Director of Trade and Enforcement Facilitation, United States Department of Homeland Security, Customs Bureau, and Mr. Tim 

Wineland, Senior Director of China Affairs, Office of China Affairs, 

U.S. Trade Representative. 

Let us begin with you, Ms. Adams, Mr. Wineland, both of you, 

we thank you very much for coming. I also want to begin this 

panel, express my appreciation to the Trade Representatives Office. 

I have been meeting with the Trade Representative, Ambassador 

Schwab. At our first meeting I urged the ambassador to send a letter to the Chinese raising these hardwood plywood issues to determine whether the subsidies could be pursued in a World Trade Organization case. 

After that meeting, U.S. Trade Representatives did file with the 

World Trade Organization subsidy cases, specifically targeted subsidy benefiting the Chinese hardwood plywood industry. We’ve had 

a number of follow-up meetings. Ambassador Schwab has been 

meeting with a number of our Senate Finance Committee on which 

I serve. So please express my appreciation to the Ambassador. It’s 

an instance where you all really followed up and we appreciate and 

we welcome both of you. 
35

Ms. Adams, we’re glad that you all are involved in this as well, 

and pleased to make a part of the hearing record, your full remarks. If you can summarize your major concerns, that would be 

good. 

STATEMENT OF VERA ADAMS, EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, COMMERCIAL TARGETING AND ENFORCEMENT, OFFICE OF 

INTERNATIONAL TRADE, DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY, CUSTOMS AND BORDER PROTECTION 

Ms. ADAMS. Thank you. Good afternoon, Chairman Wyden. It’s a 

privilege and an honor to appear before you today to discuss importing Chinese plywood. We appreciate the support that Congress 

provides to the Department of Homeland Security as U.S. Customs 

and Border Protection performs its important security and trade 

enforcement mission, while simultaneously facilitating the flow of 

legitimate trade and travel that is so important to our nation’s 

economy. As the guardian of our Nation’s border, CBP recognizes 

the importance of enforcing trade laws that help protect the forest 

product industry and the communities that depend on it. 

I want to first express my gratitude to you and the committee 

and to the Hardwood Plywood Veneer Association, the Hardwood 

Federation and other associations that have played a role in bringing to our attention certain enforcement concerns that pertain to 

import of plywood into the United States. 

As the volume of trade increases, information from domestic associations place an ever more important role in assisting CBP in 

identifying illicit activity to ensure successful enforcement of our 

Nation’s trade laws, CBP has developed ‘Priority Trade Issues’ or 

‘PTI’s’ to help facilitate legitimate trade while protecting the American economy from unfair trade practices and illicit commercial enterprises. The PTI’s are specific commodities or other trade topics 

upon which CBP has decided to focus its resources. These PTI’s 

are: Antidumping and Countervailing Duty, Intellectual Property 

Rights, Textiles and Wearing Apparel, Revenue, Agriculture, and 

Penalties. The concerns that have been raised with respect to plywood importations into the United States, cross over many of these 

PTI’s. 

As you are aware, CBP has been examining certain issues related to plywood importations since you first brought this to our attention in November 2006. As was stated in your letter to Commissioner Basham, it is alleged that the plywood is being misclassified 

as duty free under the tariff for birch-faced plywood instead of, for 

example, oak-faced plywood with an 8 percent duty rate. 

CBP is quite familiar with the subject of tariff misclassification 

and we have initiated other enforcement actions with similar types 

of merchandise. For instance, in August 2005, CBP worked with 

the Hardwood Federation to investigate misclassified imports of 

hardwood flooring from China, Brazil, and Canada. CBP conducted 

a national operation targeting all imports entering under specific 

tariff classifications from the three target countries and found 

widespread misclassification. As of today’s date, CBP has discovered more than 120 importers misclassifying the hardwood flooring, 

using a duty free or lower duty rate provision than is appropriate. 
36

Approximately $30 million in potential lost revenue has been identified so far. We are entering the penalty phase for those violations. 

Regarding plywood, in recent months, CBP has conducted several 

meetings with industry associations and representatives from the 

Hardwood Plywood & Veneer Association, the Hardwood Federation, and the Industry Trade Advisory Committee on Forest Products to gather information to assist us in our enforcement actions. 

Based on the allegations raised in your letter to CBP and upon information provided by these industry representatives, CBP initiated a nationwide operation to verify the allegation of 

misclassification and misdescription. We learned from the hardwood flooring operation that misclassification and misdescription in 

this industry is rampant. 

Senator WYDEN. I want to make sure I’m on that. So, you all 

have begun the process. You’ve already made some official assessments of it. You would say misclassification and the concerns that 

the industry, those practices are rampant, is that how you characterize it? 

Ms. ADAMS. According to many of our domestic industry partners, yeah, they believe and we believe that in the end, the outcome will be determined there is also rampant misclassification 

coming in. 

Senator WYDEN. That’s, that’s your assessment, that’s the government’s assessment, your Agency’s assessment today? 

Ms. ADAMS. We believe that there is going to be significant 

amount of misclassification. We have to wait for the end results, 

power enforcement operation in our laboratory to——

Senator WYDEN. It’s just I was interested and I’ve been less clear 

about where we were with Customs. I wanted to get a sense on the 

record of what you all have done and picked up at this point, and 

that’s very helpful. 

Ms. ADAMS. OK. Shall I? 

Senator WYDEN. Yes, please. 

Ms. ADAMS. A significant number of shipments have already 

been targeted for intensive examination. As part of the operation, 

sections of plywood are cut from the arriving shipments and sent 

to our Laboratory and Scientific Services Division for analysis to 

determine whether the plywood face consists of ply birch or is composed of some other species, which would cause it to be in a different classification. Once the lab analysis is complete, our import 

specialists at ports of entry will determine the proper tariff classification and the amount of duty owed. At this point in time, our 

lab analyses are ongoing and the results of our enforcement actions 

are pending. 

CBP recognizes that finding violations is only part of an enforcement picture. Follow-up to ensure continued compliance is essential 

to any enforcement action and is standard practice. Through data 

and trend analysis, document reviews, and examinations of merchandise, CBP continues to monitor hardwood flooring shipments 

and will monitor plywood imports after this current operation is 

complete and the results are in. 

Mr. Chairman and members present, as CBP moves forward in 

addressing the subject of misclassified plywood imports, we look 

forward to working in partnership with Congress and industry 
37

stakeholders to build on our accomplishments to date and focus on 

achieving the desired results. I thank you for this opportunity to 

testify. 

[The prepared statement of Ms. Adams follows:]

PREPARED STATEMENT OF VERA ADAMS, EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, COMMERCIAL TARGETING AND ENFORCEMENT, OFFICE OF INTERNATIONAL TRADE, DEPARTMENT OF

HOMELAND SECURITY, CUSTOMS AND BORDER PROTECTION

Good Afternoon Chairman Wyden, and members of the committee, it is a privilege 

and an honor to appear before you today to discuss imported Chinese plywood. We 

appreciate the support that Congress provides to the Department of Homeland Security as U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) performs its important security 

and trade enforcement mission while simultaneously facilitating the flow of legitimate trade and travel that is so important to our nation’s economy. As the guardian 

of our nation’s borders, CBP recognizes the importance of enforcing trade laws that 

help protect the forest product industry and the communities that depend on it. 

I want to first express my gratitude to you and the committee and to the Hardwood Plywood & Veneer Association, the Hardwood Federation and other associations that have played a role in bringing to our attention certain enforcement concerns that pertain to the import of plywood into the United States. As the volume 

of trade increases, information from domestic associations plays an ever more important role in assisting CBP in identifying illicit activity. 

BACKGROUND

To ensure successful enforcement of our nation’s trade laws, CBP has developed 

‘Priority Trade Issues’ or ‘PTI’s’ to help facilitate legitimate trade while protecting 

the American economy from unfair trade practices and illicit commercial enterprises. The PTI’s are specific commodities or other trade topics upon which CBP has 

decided to focus its resources. These PTI’s are: Antidumping and Countervailing 

Duty, Intellectual Property Rights, Textiles and Wearing Apparel, Revenue, Agriculture, and Penalties. The concerns that have been raised with respect to plywood 

importations into the United States, which are within the authority of CBP to address, cross over many of the PTI’s. 

As you are aware, CBP has been examining certain issues related to plywood importations since you first brought this to our attention in November of 2006. As was 

stated in your letter to Commissioner Basham, it is alleged that the plywood is 

being misclassified as duty free under the tariff for birch-faced plywood instead of, 

for example, oak-faced plywood with an 8% duty rate. 

CBP is quite familiar with the subject of tariff misclassification and we have initiated other enforcement actions with similar types of merchandise. For instance, in 

August of 2005, CBP worked with the Hardwood Federation to investigate 

misclassified imports of hardwood flooring from China, Brazil, and Canada. CBP 

conducted a national operation targeting all imports entering under specific tariff 

classifications from the three target countries and found widespread 

misclassification. As of today’s date, CBP has discovered more than 120 importers 

misclassifying the hardwood flooring, using a duty free or lower duty rate provision. 

Approximately $30 million in potential lost revenue has been identified. 

CURRENT ENFORCEMENT

Regarding plywood, in recent months, CBP has conducted several meetings with 

industry associations and representatives such as the Hardwood Plywood & Veneer 

Association, the Hardwood Federation, and the Industry Trade Advisory Committee 

on Forest Products (ITAC 7) to gather information to assist us in our enforcement 

actions. Based on the allegations raised in your letter to CBP and upon information 

provided by these industry representatives, CBP initiated a nationwide operation to 

verify the allegation of misclassification and misdescription. We learned from the 

hardwood flooring operation that misclassification and misdescription in this industry is rampant. We are able to use what we learned in hardwood flooring and apply 

it to our current operation. 

A significant number of shipments have already been targeted for intensive examination. As part of the operation, sections of plywood are cut from the arriving shipments and sent to CBP’s Laboratory and Scientific Services (LSS) Division for analysis to determine whether the plywood face consists of ply birch or other species. 

Once the lab analysis is complete, our import specialists at ports of entry will deter-
38

mine the proper tariff classification and amount of duty owed. At this point in time 

our lab analyses are ongoing and the results of our enforcement actions are pending. 

CBP recognizes that finding violations is only part of an enforcement picture. Follow up to ensure continued compliance is essential to any enforcement action and 

is standard practice. Through data and trend analysis, document reviews and examinations of merchandise, CBP continues to monitor hardwood flooring shipments 

and will monitor plywood imports after this current operation is complete. 

CONCLUSION

Mr. Chairman and members of the committee, as CBP moves forward in addressing the subject of misclassified plywood imports, we look forward to working in partnership with the Congress and industry stakeholders to build on our accomplishments to date and focus on achieving the desired results. I thank you for this opportunity to testify. 

I will be happy to answer any of your questions.

Senator WYDEN. Very good. 

Mr. Wineland. 

STATEMENT OF TIM WINELAND, SENIOR DIRECTOR, OFFICE 

OF CHINA AFFAIRS, OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES TRADE 

REPRESENTATIVE 

Mr. WINELAND. Thank you, Chairman Wyden. I am pleased to 

participate in today’s hearing. The office of U.S. Trade Representative is responsible for the developing and coordinating U.S. international trade policy and working to secure a level playing field for 

American workers, farmers, and businesses in overseas markets, as 

well as in the U.S. market. USTR oversees negotiations with other 

countries on international trade matters. We seek to resolve trade 

problems with other countries, plus giving a brief overview of 

USTR’s engagement with China, touching on some of the tools that 

we use to address key trade concerns, including hardwood plywood 

sector. 

Since joining the WTO 5 years ago, China has taken significant 

steps to bring its trading system into basic WTO compliance. These 

steps have helped to deepen and strengthen economic reforms that 

China had begun more than two decades ago. U.S. businesses, 

workers, farmers, service, providers and consumers have all benefited significantly from these steps. 

Last year, U.S. goods exports to China climbed from 32 percent, 

while China’s exports to the United States increased by 18 percent. 

Today, China is our fourth largest export market. 

China’s record in implementing its WTO obligations is decidedly 

mixed. While China has implemented many of its obligations, but 

there are a number of areas where it has a great deal of work to 

do. 

In our engagement with China, we pursue trade problems 

through a dual-track approach—bilateral dialog where possible to 

try to achieve practical solutions to trade issues, together with a 

full willingness to use WTO dispute settlement process when necessary. 

We are committed to seeking some cooperative resolutions 

through bilateral dialog with China and we’ve achieved some important successes that I have outlined in my written testimony. 

Many of those successes were derived through the Annual U.S.—

China Joint Commission on Commerce and Trade or ‘‘JCCT’’. The 
39

meeting is held annually to resolve a number of important trade 

issues in the JCCT. 

However, in other areas, we’ve been unable to resolve important 

issues through bilateral dialog. In those cases, we have turned to 

formal WTO dispute settlements in five instances, including cases 

on China’s value-added tax policies, its policies on imported auto 

parts, its illegal regime for protecting intellectual properties, certain barriers to market access for U.S. copyright-intensive industries. I do mention several of China’s subsidies programs, which do 

have an impact on hardwood plywood sector. 

I’d like to spend a little more time talking about that, the issue 

of subsidies. It is an area of priority concern for USTR, the Chinese 

Government’s role in directing the Chinese economy through subsidy and other measures. We are confronting this serious challenge 

using both enforcement levers as well as dialog. 

As you mentioned, in February 2007, we initiated WTO consultations with China over what we contend is China’s persistent use 

of prohibited subsidies. Basically we believe that China uses its tax 

laws and other tools to encourage exports and to discriminate 

against imports on a variety of manufactured goods. The subsidies 

at issue in this case are offered across a broad spectrum of industry 

sectors, including wood products, steel, information technology, and 

others. 

It’s an important case, important because it challenges policies 

that are tilting the playing field against our workers and companies, but most important because it will help impel China to maintain a process of economic reform and to redirect its economy toward a model of consumption rather than export growth. 

Victory for the United States in this WTO dispute should have 

a positive impact on the hardwood plywood sector. The case targets 

a number of very harmful subsidies, including export-related tax 

breaks offered to foreign-invested firms in China’s plywood sector 

and other industry sectors. 

While we have filed this WTO case, we continue to engage in dialog on China on their use of subsidies more broadly. 

The hardwood plywood industry and other industries have expressed to us concerns about the problems that many other Chinese Government incentives create for them. Supporting industry’s 

efforts to obtain more information about the various types of financial support that China provides to its domestic industries and taking effective action on that information is a priority for USTR. 

Finally, although it does not fall within USTR’s purview, I 

should note that the Department of Commerce continues to apply 

U.S. trade remedy laws to ensure unfair trade practices do not distort the playing field against U.S. companies. 

Turning to other hardwood plywood issues, the administration 

has aggressively worked to ensure a level playing field for U.S. 

hardwood plywood manufacturers, as well as the entire forest and 

paper industry sector. China’s hardwood plywood industry has 

emerged as a chief competitor to our industry. 

In the forest product sector, the growth in China’s wood processing industry and strong Chinese demand for imported wood 

have provided opportunities for U.S. exporters. Our exports of 

hardwood lumber have shown strong growth in recent years, meet-
40

ing some of China’s demand for forest products and raw materials. 

At the same time, in some sectors of our forest industry, like wood 

panel products and hardwood plywood, we are aware that Chinese 

exports of these products to the United States are climbing. 

In late January, as you mentioned after meeting with you, Ambassador Schwab wrote to Chinese Congressman, Minister Bo 

Xilai, specifically on the issue of hardwood plywood. She asked if 

we can begin talks to address this issue at a higher level. A first 

meeting on the issue of hardwood plywood was held in February 

in Beijing. We anticipate continuing a dialog on that issue. 

We have been pressing China to help work with us to stem the 

problem of illegal logging timber that may be a source of raw material for Chinese producers. Specifically, this spring we asked China 

to agree to engage in a dialog on illegal logging effort after hearing 

about the concerns of industry and you to explore ways to cooperate through a bilateral agreement. We are pleased that as of last 

week’s Strategic Economic dialog held in Washington, DC, Chinese 

Vice Premier Wu Yi agreed to our request to establish a cooperative dialog on the issue of illegal logging with the potential for a 

bilateral agreement at some point in the future. In coming weeks 

and months, we will open this dialog. 

This effort builds on other initiatives we are taking on illegal logging, including a MOU with Indonesia on illegal logging and other 

regional efforts to accommodate Singapore and Malaysia. 

We’re also working to address other issues related to hardwood 

plywood. For example, we have raised with China the issue of their 

border trade policies, where wood and other products imported 

from Russia may be coming in without paying value-added taxes, 

disadvantaging our hardwood plywood industry. 

Additionally, we continue to press China on the issue of ‘‘reference pricing,’’ where Customs authorities in China, in some cases 

inappropriately use ‘‘reference pricing’’ and not the actual price of 

imports when calculating product valuation at the border, a practice that can in some cases lead to a higher Chinese tariff than appropriate. We have indicated to the U.S. hardwood plywood industry, our desire to work together on this and have sought specific 

examples, including specific shipments where reference pricing is 

being used by Chinese Customs. 

In summary, USTR is committed to ensuring that we are using 

the most effective tools at our disposal to pursue an open and fair 

trade relationship with China. 

Thanks for the opportunity to testify. I’ll be happy to answer 

questions. 

[The prepared statement of Mr. Wineland follows:]

PREPARED STATEMENT OF TIM WINELAND, SENIOR DIRECTOR, OFFICE OF CHINA

AFFAIRS, OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES TRADE REPRESENTATIVE

INTRODUCTION

Chairman Wyden and distinguished members of the Energy and Natural Resources Subcommittee on Public Lands and Forests, I am pleased to participate in 

today’s hearing. 

I understand that today’s hearing is focused principally on issues related to the 

impact of Chinese hardwood plywood trade on the National Forest System and other 

public lands, and our communities that depend on them. The Office of the U.S. 

Trade Representative (USTR) is responsible for developing and coordinating U.S. 
41

international trade policy. The work of USTR aims at increasing exports by developing and coordinating U.S. international trade, commodity, and direct investment 

policy, and overseeing negotiations with other countries . In working with other U.S. 

Government agencies we hope to expand market access for American goods and 

services abroad and secure a level playing field for American workers, farmers and 

businesses in markets around the world, including the U.S. market. USTR accordingly oversees negotiations with other countries on a wide range of international 

trade matters. In addition, we seek to resolve trade problems using a wide variety 

of tools, including bilateral discussions, negotiations, and formal dispute settlement 

proceedings. 

To provide more concrete perspective on our work, I will give you a brief overview 

of USTR’s recent engagement with China, touching on the mechanisms USTR uses 

to address key trade concerns including concerns in the hardwood plywood sector. 

KEY CHINA TRADE EFFORTS

China’s accession to the WTO marked a critical step forward toward China’s integration into the international rules based system. Since acceding to the WTO five 

years ago, China has taken significant steps in an effort to bring its trading system 

into basic compliance with WTO rules. These steps have helped to deepen and 

strengthen economic reforms that China had begun more than two decades ago. U.S. 

businesses, workers, farmers, service providers and consumers have benefited significantly from these steps and continue to do so as U.S.-China trade grows. Indeed, 

last year, U.S. goods exports to China climbed by 32 percent (while China’s exports 

to the United States increased by 18 percent). These data suggest that the Chinese 

market is becoming more accessible for American companies, and that Chinese consumers are developing an appetite for America’s highly competitive goods and services. China today has become our fourth largest export market, and the fastest 

growing major export market for the United States in the world. It is helping to 

support thousands of American jobs today and will support even more in the future. 

Despite this progress, China’s record in implementing its WTO obligations is 

mixed. While China has fully implemented many of its WTO obligations, there are 

a number of areas where it still has work to do, as it continues to transition from 

a centrally planned economy toward a free-market economy governed by rule of law. 

In our engagement with China, the United States follows a dual-track approach 

to resolving its WTO concerns—bilateral dialogue to try to achieve practical solutions where possible, together with a full willingness to use WTO dispute settlement 

where appropriate to resolve problems that have evaded resolution through dialogue. 

The United States remains committed to seeking cooperative and pragmatic resolutions through bilateral dialogue with China, and the United States has achieved 

some important successes. For example, through our bilateral dialogues in the past 

year, primarily conducted through the U.S.—China Joint Commission on Commerce 

and Trade or ‘‘JCCT’’, China made several commitments related to IPR protection 

and enforcement. It also committed to eliminate duplicative testing and certification 

requirements applicable to imported medical devices, to make adjustments to its 

registered capital requirements for telecommunications service providers, and to finalize a protocol allowing the resumption of trade in U.S. beef and beef products. 

China also reaffirmed past commitments to technology neutrality for 3G telecommunications standards and to ensuring that new rules in the postal area would 

not negatively affect foreign express couriers. In addition, China committed to commence, by no later than December 31, 2007, formal negotiations to join the WTO’s 

Government Procurement Agreement. The United States has been working with 

China to make sure that it implements all of these commitments. 

However, we have been unable to resolve other important issues through bilateral 

discussions, despite extensive effort, and we have turned to formal WTO dispute settlement in five instances:

—In March 2004, we commenced a WTO dispute against China’s discriminatory 

value-added tax on integrated circuits. We were able to work successfully 

with China to resolve this issue during the consultation phase, and China repealed the discriminatory treatment. 

—In March 2006, the United States, acting in coordination with the European 

Communities and Canada, commenced a WTO dispute settlement case challenging Chinese discriminatory charges on imported auto parts. We are now 

pursuing this case in front of a WTO arbitral panel. 

—In February 2007, the United States, later joined by Mexico, filed a WTO consultation request in a case challenging several subsidy programs that appear 

to be prohibited under WTO rules, either because they are contingent upon 
42

exportation or contingent upon the use of domestic over imported goods. The 

parties held a first round of consultations in March 2006. 

—In April 2007, the United States requested WTO consultations regarding certain deficiencies in China’s legal regime for protecting and enforcing intellectual property rights related to copyrights and trademarks that affect a wide 

range of products. The problems identified include high thresholds for criminal prosecution that create a substantial ‘‘safe harbor’’ for wholesalers and retailers who distribute or sell pirated and counterfeit products in China. Under 

WTO rules, formal consultations will take place in this case before mid-June. 

—In April 2007, on the same day as the filing of the IPR case, the United 

States requested WTO consultations regarding certain barriers to market access for U.S. copyright-intensive industries, including books, music, home videos and movies. Consultations in this case also are due before mid-June.

USTR provides a detailed discussion of the efforts the United States has made 

to address these and other areas of concern, using bilateral dialogue and WTO dispute settlement, in the ‘‘2006 USTR Report to Congress on China’s WTO Compliance,’’ issued on December 11, 2006. The report is available on the USTR website 

(www.ustr.gov). 

SUBSIDIES

An area of priority concern for USTR is the Chinese Government’s role in directing the Chinese economy, including through the use of subsidies. We are confronting 

this serious challenge using both enforcement levers as well as dialogue. 

As you know, and as I described earlier in my testimony, in February 2007 we 

announced that the United States has requested consultations at the WTO over 

what we contend is China’s persistent use of prohibited subsidies. Basically, the 

United States believes that China uses its tax laws and other tools to encourage exports and to discriminate against imports of a variety of manufactured goods. The 

subsidies at issue in this case are offered across a broad array of industry sectors 

in China—including wood products, steel, information technology, and others. 

It is an important case—important because it challenges policies that are tilting 

the playing field against our workers and companies, important because it makes 

clear that we will use WTO dispute settlement procedures to hold China to its commitments where dialogue does not resolve our concerns, and—perhaps most of all—

important because it will help impel China to maintain a process of reform and to 

redirect its economy towards a model of consumption-led, rather than export-led, 

growth. A victory for the United States in this WTO dispute should have a positive 

impact on the hardwood plywood sector. The case targets a number of very harmful 

subsidies, including export-related tax breaks offered to foreign-invested firms in 

China’s plywood sector and other industry sectors. 

While we have filed this WTO case, we continue to engage in dialogue with the 

Chinese on their use of subsidies. These discussions are happening both at the sector-specific level—for example, our recently created ‘‘Steel Dialogue’’ under the 

JCCT is enabling a conversation among governments and industries of both sides—

as well as in connection with our broader economic dialogues, including the Strategic Economic Dialogue. Industrial policies that limit market access for non-Chinese origin goods and that provide substantial government resources to support Chinese industries also remain a concern. 

The hardwood plywood industry and other industries have expressed concerns to 

us about the problems that many Chinese government incentives create for them. 

Supporting industry’s efforts to obtain comprehensive information about the various 

types of financial support that China provides to its domestic industries and taking 

effective action on that information is a priority for USTR. 

Finally, although it does not fall within USTR’s statutory purview, I should note 

that the Department of Commerce continues to apply U.S. trade remedy laws to ensure that unfair trade practices, whether undertaken by the Chinese or others, do 

not distort the playing field against U.S. companies. 

CHINA HARDWOOD PLYWOOD ISSUES

The Administration has aggressively worked to ensure a level playing field for 

U.S. hardwood plywood manufacturers as well as the entire forest and paper industry sector. China’s hardwood plywood industry has emerged as a chief competitor 

to our industry. 

In the forest products sector, the growth in China’s wood processing industries 

and strong Chinese demand for imported wood have provided opportunities for U.S. 

exporters. Our exports of hardwood lumber have shown strong growth in recent 

years, meeting some of China’s demand for forest products and raw material. At the 
43

same time, in some sectors of our forest industry, like wood panel products and 

hardwood plywood, we are aware that Chinese exports of these products to the 

United States are climbing. 

In late January, Ambassador Susan Schwab wrote the Commerce Minister of 

China specifically on the issue of hardwood plywood, asking Minister Bo Xilai to 

begin talks to address this at a high-level. In response, Minister Bo agreed to our 

request, and a first meeting on the issue of hardwood plywood was held in February 

in Beijing between the Assistant US Trade Representative for China Affairs and 

Commerce Ministry officials. 

Additionally, in the past few months we have been pressing China to help work 

with us to stem the problem of illegal logging of timber that may be a source of 

raw material for Chinese producers. In the context of both the President’s Initiative 

to Address Illegal Logging and the Strategic Economic Dialogue (SED), we asked 

China to agree to engage in dialogue and consultation on illegal logging in order 

to increase mutual understanding and communication, and explore ways of cooperation, including through a bilateral agreement.. We are pleased that at last week’s 

SED, Chinese Vice Premier Wu Yi agreed to our request. In coming weeks and 

months, we will open this dialogue with China. 

This effort builds on other initiatives we are taking. The United States recently 

concluded a first-of-its-kind Memorandum of Understanding with Indonesia on combating illegal logging. We are also working to address the problem regionally, for 

example by getting Singapore and Malaysia more involved in efforts to stem illegal 

logging and associated trade. 

We are also working to address other issues related to hardwood plywood. For example, we have raised with China the issue of their border trade policies, where 

wood and other products imported from Russia may be coming in without paying 

value-added taxes, disadvantaging our hardwood plywood industry. We remain committed to working with our industry to address these problems. 

Additionally, we continue to press the Chinese government on the issue of ‘‘reference pricing,’’ where Chinese Customs authorities in some cases inappropriately 

use ‘‘reference pricing,’’ and not the actual price of imports, when calculating product valuation for the purpose of imposing Customs duties—a practice that can in 

some cases can lead to a higher tariff than appropriate. We have indicated to the 

U.S. hardwood plywood industry our desire to work together on this issue, and have 

sought specific examples, including specific ports, and specific shipments where reference pricing is being used by Chinese Customs. 

In summary, USTR is committed to ensuring that we are using the most effective 

tools at our disposal to pursue an open and fair trade relationship with China. This 

effort ties into broader Administration engagement on international economic 

issues, including work by Treasury and Commerce, and work with Members of Congress to achieve our common goals: a level playing field for American businesses, 

workers, and farmers. 

Thank you for the opportunity to testify. I will be happy to take your questions.

Senator WYDEN. Thank you both and thank you for making the 

trek to the most wonderful part of the United States for this hearing. 

Let me begin with you, Mr. Wineland. I’m sure people would be 

interested in knowing what it means to initiate a World Trade Organization case. I mean this had to be something of a wake-up call 

for the Chinese because there they are, and I was not happy with 

my initial kind of conversation with them and others. I kind of got 

the sense that they didn’t think that the American Government 

was going to take this very seriously, and some guy from a place 

that they hadn’t ever heard of called Oregon. All of a sudden there 

was going to be a case filed against them in terms of, in terms of 

these subsidies. 

What was, what was the reaction after that case was filed, and 

particularly how has that affected the discussions that you’ve 

begun more recently? Have you found they are taking it more seriously now? 

Mr. WINELAND. Well, legally we filed the WTF settlement case 

in February. Shortly thereafter, in March we targeted in that case 
44

nine specific subsidies that we could identify. Certainly the U.S. 

Government and industry believe that there are many more subsidies out there that we need to address. But these are the nine 

that we could identify on short order, and pursue it as potential 

trade violations. 

Shortly after we filed that targeted case, looking at nine Chinese 

subsidy practices, the Chinese, in fact, revoked one of the nine. So, 

we are hopeful that that suggests a recognition on China’s part this 

is an important issue. That they have WTO obligation. 

The filing with the WTO case essentially means that we have 

identified areas where China has promised to live by WTO rules. 

Filing WTO cases says that we have identified some problem areas, 

where China does not appear to be living by WTO rules. We have 

tried to resolve the issues of bilateral dialog and failed. So we have 

chosen the route of the WTO case where an independent panel of 

the WTO will rule on the case, make a decision and require China 

to change its policies. 

Senator WYDEN. Now you also said that last week the Chinese 

agreed to work on illegal logging issues with the United States. 

What does that mean and specifically how are you going to hold 

their feet to the fire? 

Mr. WINELAND. Well, that, that commitment came in context of 

the strategic economic dialog, which was established by Treasury 

Secretary Paulson last fall. 

In the December 1 meeting of the SED, we agreed to talk about 

four main work streams, including economic and trade issues, as 

well as environmental trade issues. In the context of our work in 

the SED on environmental trade issues, through the spring, based 

partly in the concerns that we’d heard from you and from industry 

about illegal logging, we sought from China an agreement to work 

together on illegal logging, recognizing that in some, unlike say a 

country like Indonesia, the problems on the demand side by Chinese processing industry. 

So, we, in the course of negotiating the strategic economic dialog 

outcomes, which came last week, we asked the Chinese to cooperate on this issue for the sake of the environment as well as the 

sake of a level playing field. China agreed to that. 

To answer your question about holding their feet to the fire, I 

think the SED, the continuing meetings, it’s twice a year exercise, 

the continuing meetings of the SED will build in some accountability on China’s part to move toward a dialog on this issue, as 

well as concrete steps. 

Senator WYDEN. Can we count on you all to stay and raise it, all 

of these strategic economic dialog programs until we get this resolved? I hate to use the initial SED kind of lingo for what these 

processes are described in Washington, DC, but to me here at 

home, what it means is every time we sit down for the big time 

talks with China, we’re going to have these practices brought up 

and you’ll have a chance to push the Chinese to change. Can you 

all keep bringing them up and make that commitment today until 

we get this resolved? 

Mr. WINELAND. You absolutely can from the USTR. The State 

Department has joined the responsibility of the illegal logging 
45

issue. We certainly will. It’s part of the administration broader efforts to come back and to do the logging in the region. 

Senator WYDEN. I appreciate that. Tell the Ambassador that we 

appreciate her office as well. She’s got a lot on her plate right now. 

It’s important that this be there as well. We appreciate the response. 

Let me ask you, if I might, for our Customs. Is there a hardwood 

enforcement action underway now, Ms. Adams? I know you can’t 

get into the case, and I appreciate that, in our discussions, but I 

think it is possible to just in a yes or no way to state so we have 

it for the record, whether or not there’s a hardwood plywood enforcement action underway from your department? 

Ms. ADAMS. Yes, I can confirm that yes, we have an enforcement 

action underway to address the issue. I can tell you that we have 

sampled shipments that comprise approximately 120 different employers. Those samples are pending lab analysis to determine 

whether the classification issue, which is an issue of whether it’s 

birch or hardwood, is bonafide. Those lab analysis are pending. So 

we don’t have the results yet but yes, we do have an action on 

those. 

Senator WYDEN. Without compromising your case, and you can 

see how I’m sort of trying to kind of skirt around this, you all were 

successful in a wood flooring enforcement action. Is that from a 

comparative standpoint of some value in terms of looking at what 

our folks are dealing with here in the Northwest? 

Ms. ADAMS. Yes. For two main reasons, and this is what I was 

somewhat alluding to in my opening statement. When it comes to 

classification of some of these hardwood products, there’s three 

basic issues involving the classification to make sure you get to the 

correct one. No. 1: ‘‘What is the material made of?’’; No. 2: ‘‘How 

is it constructed?’’; and No. 3: ‘‘Is there any further processing done 

before it arrives at our shore?’’. Those same classification criteria 

apply in hardwood flooring, and to some extent, in the plywood situation. 

So, you know, all of the expertise and knowledge of how they, the 

violators are misclassifying the hardwood puts us on the alert in 

terms of what kind of issues to look for in the plywood. 

Sometimes when you have an industry group of importations 

that are commercially related, when you find violators in one segment, often the same importers are importing the same thing in 

other segments that you’re now looking at. So, one of the things 

that we are in the process of doing is doing a crosswalk between 

the violators we’ve discovered in the hardwood flooring issue and 

see if those same importers are importing the plywood. By doing 

that crosswalk, we can vary, you know, more readily probably focus 

where the risk is going to be. 

So that’s where the benefit of the hardwood flooring operation 

comes into being, both from a technical issue, as well as from it 

tells us the violators are in one issue, and if they are also the importers of the plywood, which sometimes they are, we can more 

narrowly focus and start to know where the risk is likely to be. 

Senator WYDEN. Heaven help us if one branch of government 

talks to another. I think you’ve laid out a good case for how to take 

this up. I appreciate that approach. 
46

Tell me, if you would, about this matter of unsafe formaldehyde 

and content. Without going through all of the kind of technical 

issues, I think that our folks, our plywood people believe that with 

their sealing to bind the plys that contain formaldehyde, they have 

got actual alternatives they are using, soybased alternatives, and 

we obviously are concerned about the safety issues that we heard 

about earlier. Have your lawyers concluded that you don’t have the 

authority to enforce a formaldehyde standard? 

Ms. ADAMS. The preliminary analysis is, you know, CBP or Custom’s can enforce many regulations for many different agencies. 

The difficulty with the HUD regulation on formaldehyde is that it’s 

specifically geared toward what the end use of that product is. 

Meaning, if the wood product is used in the construction of a home, 

then it has to meet the certain HUD standards. 

Unfortunately, at the time that the product crosses the border, 

we don’t know what the end use of that wood product is going to 

be, which makes it very difficult for us to enforce a regulation like 

that or that type of requirement. We call those end use provisions. 

In fact, even as difficult as it is for us to know the end use, a lot 

of times the importer does not know the end use because they may 

be a distributor reselling downstream to further, you know, to construction companies or other things and they may not know exactly 

what the end use of that product is going to be. That’s where the 

challenge of enforcing that type of regulation at the border comes 

in to play. Sorry, I’m very dry. 

Senator WYDEN. No. I, I had gotten the sense from our discussions, there was some questions about your authority to enforce 

formaldehyde standards, some questions about your authority to 

enforce these labeling standards, you know, where our people are 

trying to do the certification, FSC kinds of issues. If you want to 

add anything to it—you’ve been very forthcoming today—if you 

want to add anything now or you can send it into the record. The 

reason I’m asking is we’re going to get into the trade debate on the 

Finance Committee later this year. If you all were to tell us that 

you didn’t have the authority to enforce formaldehyde standards 

and meet certification standards, then I’m interested in working 

with the Administration on a bipartisan basis to get that done. 

Ms. ADAMS. We, we have the preliminary announcement from 

Counsel, but they had asked some additional followup questions on 

this end use situation. So, I prefer to submit something for the 

record when we get their final opinions back to us. 

Senator WYDEN. Good. Let’s leave it in the context that if it 

comes back that your lawyers do not feel they have the authority 

to enforce—formaldehyde is a safety issue. There are labeling kinds 

of questions that go to whether or not we have fair treatment for 

our plywood folks, I’m interested in following up with you all and 

the Administration. 

Ms. ADAMS. The trademarks issue is a little bit of a different situation. 

Senator WYDEN. Right, I understand. 

Ms. ADAMS. If you’d like to me to address that. 

Senator WYDEN. Fine. I understand that. I just want it, I just 

want it understood that because you all are initiating proceedings 

already, we welcome that. I wanted to get some information as to 
47

whether you have adequate authority in those kinds of areas and 

please offer anything else you’d like to now. 

Ms. ADAMS. The issue of, if the—in your letter you had brought 

up the issue of the fraudulent stamping. 

Senator WYDEN. Right. 

Ms. ADAMS. For voluntary standards, we cannot enforce the 

standard per se, unless it is backed by some kind of a Federal regulation or standard. But what we can do similar to the UL logo, the 

UL market, we’re all used to seeing on our electronic appliances, 

if there is some kind of trademark, registered patent trademark, I 

believe the gentleman that was sitting here had mentioned such a 

situation, I’d like to followup on a dialog with him about that, his 

comments. If that trademark is also registered with CBC, we can 

enforce those types of trademarks, just like we do for Underwriters 

Laboratory. 

What we are enforcing is the mark itself, not the standard behind the mark. The way it works with UL is we have access to 

their data base. We can see all of their registration numbers and 

the products related to those numbers. When something comes into 

the country and we verify with UL’s data base whether that product is allowed to have that mark on it, and if not it’s an IPR, it’s 

product violation and we can easily seize that for that mark. So to 

the extent that the forest product industry can pursue that line, 

that we can easily work on that type of enforcement with them. 

Senator WYDEN. I thank you, thank you both. I’ve got my constituents in the audience I see making paper fans trying to cool 

themselves off. So, I should probably wrap this up shortly, but we 

thank you very much for your responsiveness on these, these 

issues. It wasn’t very many months ago when I raised this after 

folks in the hardwood plywood industry in our State brought it to 

me. You all both swung into action. We appreciate it. It’s a long 

way to go. 

But as you probably have picked up, in fact you can tell anybody 

else in the Administration, how strongly people in Oregon feel 

about the county payments legislation when you go back to Washington, DC, I suspect they already know, but you can tell them that 

nine or ten more times when you get back. 

Tell them to make sure that we look at the kinds of industries 

that we are focused on today because we want to work with the Administration first to secure this multi-year county payment agreement. We very, very much need those dollars for libraries and police and schools and essential services, but we need them also to 

provide a transition into other areas. That’s why it’s so important 

that these kind of value-added industries like hardwood plywood 

get fair treatment because they are exactly the kind of industries 

that are going to pick up some of the slack as we deal with this 

transition on the county payment issue. 

So you all have been very responsive. We’d like to give our witnesses, particularly the ones that come from Washington, DC, the 

last words for today’s program. 

Mr. Wineland, Ms. Adams, anything else you want to add. 

Mr. WINELAND. No thank you. We look forward to continuing to 

work with you on these issues. 

Ms. ADAMS. Likewise as well. 
48

Senator WYDEN. With that, the subcommittee is adjourned. 

[Whereupon, at 1:50 p.m., the hearing was adjourned.] 
(49)

1From Challenge and Response—Strategies for Survival in a Rapidly Changing Forest Products Industry, by Al Schuler, USDA research economist; Craig Adair, market research director 

for the Engineered Wood Association; and Paul Winistorfer, professor, Virginia Tech, Engineered 

Wood Journal, Fall 2005. 

APPENDIX 

ADDITIONAL MATERIAL SUBMITTED FOR THE RECORD

STATEMENT OF THE FOREST SERVICE, DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE

Mr. Chairman and Members of the Subcommittee, thank you for the opportunity 

to submit written testimony to you today on the impacts of the Chinese hardwood 

plywood trade on National Forest System lands. The Chinese hardwood plywood 

trade has a negligible effect on National Forest System lands in Oregon. However, 

there have been changes to the forest products industry in the U.S. and in Oregon, 

which we will describe below. 

A RAPIDLY CHANGING FOREST PRODUCTS INDUSTRY

The U.S. has been the world’s largest market for wood and wood products, fueled 

by its demand for wood-frame housing.1 However, forest product markets are changing, both in terms of where the products originate (domestically or abroad) and what 

products are being produced and consumed. 

Source changes for forest products are being driven by globalization trends, technology advancements, and labor costs and supply, which are causing builders to 

change not only the way they build houses but also their choice of building materials. 

Most imported structural lumber and panels in the U.S. continue to come from 

Canada. However, there are increasing softwood plywood imports from South America, and softwood lumber from both South America and Europe. Total North American structural panel imports are approximately two billion square feet (3⁄8′′ thickness) and that figure is expected to continue rising as more foreign mills obtain certification for our markets. 

In another trend, more housing components are being manufactured in the factory 

(e.g., trusses, wall panels, and engineered floor systems), and shipped to the job site 

for final assembly. Conventional wood products, mostly solid sawn dimension lumber, are being replaced by engineered wood products that offer improved performance durability and efficiencies in site construction. 

Non-wood products such as steel and concrete continue to make inroads into traditional wood markets, particularly in the South. The South accounted for 50 percent 

of housing starts in 2006, but termite problems have favored an increase in nonwood building materials. 

Additionally, technological improvements in communication, computing, and distribution are driving changes in the supply chain. The number of parties participating in the supply chain is shrinking as more products go directly from the mill 

to the consumer with an ever-smaller market share moving through traditional distributors. 

More recently, consolidation in the residential construction industry has resulted 

in fewer builders producing a larger share of houses. The top 10 builders now 

produce more than 20 percent of the single-family homes in the U.S., up from 10 

percent a decade ago. The larger builders are leading the transition toward more 

factory manufactured components and are demanding more services from their suppliers, such as installed windows, doors, and wall panels; and complete framing 

packages cut to specification. 

Builders want to simplify the construction process by accelerating accurate assembly of components on the job site, devoting more of their time to locating and developing land, providing financing to potential buyers, and reducing litigation risks. 
50

All of these trends indicate that the North American wood products industry will 

face challenges ahead. 

PLYWOOD PRODUCTION TRENDS IN OREGON

A large percentage of the United States forest products are consumed in one market—residential construction. About three quarters of structural wood panels and 

softwood lumber, and nearly 90 percent of the engineered wood products (e.g., Ijoists and LVL) are consumed in residential construction including new construction 

and remodeling). Oregon is the largest hardwood plywood producing state in the 

United States and this plywood is used in manufacturing cabinets. However, the 

National Forests in Oregon are not a source of hardwood for these manufacturers 

as there is little high quality hardwood on National Forest lands. Most plywood 

manufacturers import their veneer from eastern Canada, the eastern U.S. including 

eastern national forests, and from overseas. 

There have been several significant events that have greatly affected softwood 

plywood production in Oregon over the past two decades:

—Plywood production has fallen steadily in Oregon since 1987 as the production 

of other structural panels, particularly oriented strand board (OSB), has increased both in Oregon and elsewhere in North America. Currently OSB accounts for about 60 percent of the structural panel consumption in the United 

States. 

—During the early 1990’s, timber harvest in Oregon fell by nearly 50 percent 

as a result of the implementation of the Northwest Forest Plan. This caused 

an increase in prices for softwood products due to a reduced supply. 

—In the mid to late-1990’s, exports from the region fell because of these increased prices and the 1997 collapse of the Japanese real estate markets. 

—Lastly, the recent downturn in U.S. housing markets has depressed lumber 

and panel prices leading to production curtailments among producers during 

2006—2007.

In light of these trends and changes in the North American forest products industry, it is important that a strong industry is available to utilize wood from the national forests. To manage for healthy, sustainable forests, the national forests, as 

well as small non-industrial private landowners, need markets for a variety of timber products, including lumber, plywood, OSB, furniture, and flooring. 

CONCLUSION

This concludes the Forest Service statement. Please submit any questions you 

may have to the Chief of the Forest Service. 

STATEMENT OF THE HARDWOOD FEDERATION

Mr. Chairman and members of the Subcommittee, thank you very much for holding this hearing. The Hardwood Federation (HF) was formed in April 2004 to represent the interests of the hardwood industry in Congress and with the Administration. The HF was designed as an umbrella group of associations and serves to coordinate and align all key issues for the industry so that we speak with one voice 

on broad policy issues. 

The HF is the largest forest products industry association in the United States 

representing over 14,000 businesses, 30 trade associations and over one million 

hardwood families. The Federation represents the majority of organizations engaged 

in the manufacturing, wholesaling, or distribution of North American hardwood 

lumber, veneer, plywood, flooring, pallets, kitchen cabinets and related products. 

The vision of the HF is to have a healthy hardwood community and the HF’s mission is to:

—Promote and represent the common business interests of and improve business conditions among members of the hardwood industry. 

—Maintain a healthy business environment for family businesses and small 

companies in the hardwood community. 

—Maintain commercial access to federal and private hardwood timberlands. 

—Maintain and improve the health of public and private hardwood forests 

through effective legislation.

The HF and its members believe it is critical to keep American companies operating and our citizens employed given the impressive record of hardwood forest 

stewardship and the growing consumer demand for hardwood products. 
51

We are pleased that two of our leading member companies, Columbia Forest Products and Timber Products Company are appearing before you today to present a 

first-hand view of the impact of illegal logging, and Chinese imports on their Oregon 

businesses and federal timber resources. These companies have taken a lead in our 

efforts to address the inequities and unfairness currently being experienced in our 

worldwide trade, particularly with our trading partners in Southeast Asia and 

China. These companies also have experienced first hand the impacts on their 

neighboring federal forests and our industry echoes the concerns they are outlining 

in this important hearing. We would note that while most hardwood resources supplying our mills come from private landowners, the lines between public and private 

lands are immaterial when judging the impact of unfair trade policies; all stand to 

lose, and most critically, the health of this valuable U.S. resource. 

Companies in the hardwood industry are predominantly small, family-owned businesses, dependent upon a sustainable supply of healthy timber resources. Many are 

operated by third, fourth or even fifth generation family owners. With facilities and 

employees in all 50 states, we have a wide U.S. presence. 

U.S. hardwood plywood producers are facing unprecedented and rapidly growing 

competition in the U.S. market from imported products coming from China and 

Southeast Asia. In addition, competition from international producers is affecting 

the U.S. industry’s ability to compete in export markets. If allowed to continue unchecked, this rapidly growing competition with an uneven playing field will result 

in the displacement of a significant portion of U.S.-based hardwood plywood industries. 

Thanks to the efforts of Chairmen Wyden and Baucus, the International Trade 

Commission (ITC) has been asked to conduct a ‘‘Section 332’’ study to investigate 

unfair trade practices of imported Chinese hardwood plywood and wood flooring. 

Among other concerns the study will look at the misclassified Chinese hardwood 

plywood imports and illegal logging in Asia which we believe have put the U.S. plywood and flooring industries at a competitive disadvantage. The Hardwood Federation is working closely with our U.S. government trade analysts to provide a complete picture of current market practices and impacts. We are assured that the continued interest and support from our elected officials, particularly Chairman Wyden 

will help result in a complete and comprehensive study. 

Hardwood plywood import tariffs vary depending on the species of hardwood on 

the face and back of the plywood: oak-faced plywood has an eight percent tariff, 

birch-faced plywood has no tariff. Chinese hardwood plywood is most likely being 

improperly characterized (e.g., identifying the back as the front) to avoid applicable 

tariffs. As a result, Chinese hardwood plywood enters the U.S. market duty-free, 

giving it an unfair competitive advantage over legally identified imported hardwood 

plywood and U.S. produced hardwood plywood. 

In addition to tariff misclassification, illegal logging has hurt the competitiveness 

of the U.S. wood products industry. According to an American Forest and Paper Association (AF&PA) study, illegal logging robs U.S. companies of $460 million a year 

in lost sales. A great deal of illegally harvested wood is shipped to manufacturing 

hubs in China before it is sent to the U.S. It is difficult for domestic hardwood industries to compete with foreign industries not adhering to timber harvesting laws. 

Earlier this year, the Hardwood Federation issued the first public statement of 

support for efforts to end illegal logging, including the possibility of amending the 

Lacey Act. We are currently reviewing legislative proposals to determine implications for domestic hardwood producers and are optimistic that some agreement can 

be reached among various stakeholders to join together in supporting legislative action. Curbing illegal wood imports will help protect U.S. industries and employees. 

Again, Mr. Chairman, thank you for calling this important hearing, and for your 

leadership in addressing the issues facing the hardwood industry in the State of Oregon and throughout the U.S.

Æ