Poland's timber sector is pushing back against parts of the proposed National Forest Programme, warning that new limits on harvesting could reduce wood availability and make life harder for sawmills and other processors.<\/p>\n
Nine forestry and timber organisations and institutions have backed a joint response to the preliminary draft. The Polish Chamber of Commerce of the Timber Industry (PIGPD) coordinated the document, which was published at the end of July.<\/p>\n
Much of the criticism concerns proposals that could directly affect how much timber is harvested and when it reaches the market. These include plans to phase out clear-cutting, restrict harvesting in certain forest areas and suspend logging during the bird breeding season.<\/p>\n
The signatories say a broad seasonal ban could cause serious problems for forestry contractors and mills that depend on regular deliveries throughout the year. They want clear-cutting to remain available and say any areas removed from commercial forest management should be determined according to agreed criteria.<\/p>\n
For Poland's sawmills, the debate comes down in large part to access to raw material. Changes that reduce harvesting volumes or concentrate logging into shorter periods could affect both log availability and procurement costs.<\/p>\n
The document also questions plans to increase the amount of dead wood retained in forests, saying the possible fire risk has not been sufficiently considered.<\/p>\n
Another proposal would give a stronger role to forests managed primarily for recreation, landscape and other social purposes. The timber organisations argue that the draft does not define this category clearly enough and want the effects on timber production assessed before such areas are designated.<\/p>\n
Wood processing should count in forest economics<\/strong><\/p>\n PIGPD and the other signatories also take issue with the way the programme approaches the economic value of forests.<\/p>\n The draft gives considerable attention to ecosystem services such as carbon storage, water retention, recreation and biodiversity. The timber sector does not reject putting a value on these functions, but says the calculation becomes misleading if it stops at the forest gate.<\/p>\n Logs harvested in Poland feed sawmills, panel plants, furniture factories and other manufacturers. The joint position argues that the value created by these businesses should be included when the government weighs the economic costs and benefits of changes to forest management.<\/p>\n Poland has a large wood-processing and furniture industry, making the availability of domestic timber an industrial issue as well as a forestry one.<\/p>\n The signatories therefore want ecosystem valuations used as one source of information rather than as a measure that could determine future harvesting policy on its own.<\/p>\n Roundwood and sawmill residues<\/strong><\/p>\n The definition of wood itself has also become part of the argument.<\/p>\n The draft uses the broader term woody biomass in provisions dealing with cascading use and monitoring. PIGPD wants a clearer distinction between roundwood coming directly from forests and residues created later during processing.<\/p>\n For a sawmill, the difference is significant. Bark, sawdust and chips are generated during lumber production and are already sold into established markets, including panel, pulp, pellet and energy production.<\/p>\n The timber organisations argue that rules intended to govern the use of forest raw material should not automatically extend to these industrial residues.<\/p>\n They support giving material uses of wood priority but oppose provisions that could restrict what mills do with their by-products after the primary processing stage.<\/p>\n Disagreement over log exports<\/strong><\/p>\n Raw timber exports are another point of contention.<\/p>\n The draft proposes restrictions covering unprocessed wood shipped outside the EU. The signatories question why the measure should distinguish between exports within and outside the bloc.<\/p>\n Their argument is straightforward: a log exported from Poland is no longer available to a Polish processor whether it is shipped to another EU country or further abroad.<\/p>\n They instead want policy to encourage more processing inside Poland, allowing a larger share of the value from domestic timber to remain in the country.<\/p>\n Harvesting methods also under scrutiny<\/strong><\/p>\n The proposed National Forest Programme would gradually increase the use of natural regeneration, with targets of 25% by 2035 and 40% by 2050.<\/p>\n The timber organisations say the draft does not provide enough evidence to explain why those particular levels were chosen. They want the targets supported by a feasibility assessment or removed.<\/p>\n There are also objections to naming FSC and PEFC directly in the programme. The signatories favour neutral language on voluntary forest certification rather than provisions referring specifically to individual certification systems.<\/p>\n PIGPD takes procedural dispute to OECD<\/strong><\/p>\n PIGPD has meanwhile opened a second front in the dispute, this time over how the programme itself is being prepared.<\/p>\n The chamber contacted the OECD's Directorate for Public Governance on July 31, arguing that the process has been too compressed and that timber companies have not been adequately represented.<\/p>\n One of its main complaints concerns the working groups that met between May 5 and June 19. PIGPD says six weeks was too little time to examine issues that could shape Polish forest management for years.<\/p>\n The chamber also says timber businesses had limited representation in several groups. Small and medium-sized wood companies and large companies were each represented by only one person in some of the discussions.<\/p>\n PIGPD believes this contributed to an imbalance in the draft, with environmental measures worked out in considerable detail while questions concerning timber production and wood processing received less attention.<\/p>\n The OECD has no authority to order Poland to change the programme. By approaching the organisation, however, PIGPD is asking for the preparation process to be viewed against OECD standards for transparency and participation in policymaking.<\/p>\n Final decisions still some way off<\/strong><\/p>\n The National Forest Programme remains under development, and none of the disputed proposals should yet be treated as final policy.<\/p>\n A revised draft is expected in September, followed by further government work and public consultation. The current timetable foresees adoption by the Council of Ministers in 2027.<\/p>\n That gives the government and the timber sector more than a year to argue over the details.<\/p>\n For sawmills, some of those details could be consequential. A ban on certain harvesting methods, seasonal interruptions to logging and a larger area of forest where timber production is secondary would all have the potential to change the amount and timing of wood coming onto the Polish market.<\/p>\n That is why the debate over the National Forest Programme is increasingly becoming a wood supply issue, rather than simply an argument about how Poland should manage its forests.<\/p>","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":" Poland’s timber sector is pushing back against parts of the proposed National Forest Programme, warning that new limits on harvesting could reduce wood availability and make life harder for sawmills and other processors.<\/p>","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":99566,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"Default","format":"standard","meta":{"_acf_changed":false,"inline_featured_image":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[5204],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-99565","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-daily-news"],"acf":[],"yoast_head":"\n