What If New Brunswick Implemented Different Forestry Policies?

The Actual History

New Brunswick's relationship with its forests has been foundational to the province's identity, economy, and political landscape. The province contains approximately 6 million hectares of forest land, with roughly half of this designated as Crown land managed by the provincial government on behalf of the public.

The modern era of New Brunswick's forestry management began to take shape in the 1960s and 1970s when the provincial government granted long-term Crown timber licenses to major forest companies. This system was formalized in 1982 under Premier Richard Hatfield's Progressive Conservative government through the Crown Lands and Forests Act. This legislation established a framework that granted 25-year evergreen forest management agreements to large industrial companies, most notably J.D. Irving, Ltd., which became the largest single holder of Crown timber rights in the province.

The 1982 system divided Crown forests into ten license areas, with major corporate licensees responsible for managing their designated territories according to management plans approved by the government. This arrangement effectively privatized the management of public forests while maintaining nominal public ownership. Under this system, large industrial players had significant control over silviculture practices, harvesting techniques, and access rights.

Throughout the 1980s and 1990s, forest management in New Brunswick increasingly favored industrial-scale forestry operations optimized for softwood production and pulp manufacturing. Clear-cutting became the dominant harvesting method, while silviculture shifted toward creating more uniform, plantation-style forests of commercially valuable species, particularly spruce and fir. These practices supported the province's pulp and paper mills and sawmills but raised environmental concerns about biodiversity loss, habitat fragmentation, and ecosystem health.

In 1999, the Jaakko Pöyry report commissioned by industry stakeholders recommended further intensification of forest management practices, advocating for increased plantation forestry and suggesting that as much as 60% of Crown land could be managed primarily for timber production. Many of these recommendations were eventually implemented, advancing industrial forestry's footprint.

A pivotal moment came in 2014 when the David Alward government announced a new forestry strategy that guaranteed larger timber allocations to industry, particularly J.D. Irving, for the next 25 years. This controversial decision increased the annual allowable cut by 20% and reduced conservation forest from 30% to 23%, despite significant public opposition. The strategy effectively doubled the area available for clear-cutting and plantation forestry.

Subsequent governments made modest adjustments but largely maintained this industrial forestry framework. In 2020, the Higgs government cancelled a planned glyphosate spraying reduction, a practice widely used in industrial forestry but controversial for its environmental impacts. Meanwhile, wood products contributed approximately $1.7 billion annually to New Brunswick's economy, with the forestry sector employing about 22,000 people directly and indirectly.

By 2025, despite decades of environmental advocacy and growing public concern about forestry practices, New Brunswick's Crown land forestry system remains dominated by large industrial interests, with roughly 85% of harvested Crown timber going to a handful of major companies. The province's forestry policy continues to prioritize timber production volume over ecological values or rural economic diversification, despite increasing challenges from climate change, biodiversity loss, and shifting global markets for forest products.

The Point of Divergence

What if New Brunswick had charted a fundamentally different course for its forestry management in the 1980s? In this alternate timeline, we explore a scenario where the province implemented a community-oriented, ecologically-focused forestry policy rather than the industrial model that has dominated for decades.

The point of divergence comes in the formative period of modern New Brunswick forestry policy, specifically during the development and implementation of the Crown Lands and Forests Act of 1982. In our timeline, this legislation consolidated forest management authority in the hands of large industrial licensees. In the alternate timeline, several plausible factors converge to produce a different outcome:

First, political dynamics could have shifted if Premier Richard Hatfield's Progressive Conservative government had faced stronger organized opposition from a coalition of environmental groups, woodlot owners, rural municipalities, and First Nations. In our timeline, these stakeholders were concerned but fragmented; in the alternate timeline, they form a powerful provincial alliance called "New Brunswick Forests for All" in 1980-81 that successfully advocates for a different model.

Second, economic conditions might have incentivized different policy choices if the recession of the early 1980s had more severely impacted the province's pulp and paper industry, forcing policymakers to consider alternative economic development strategies for forest-dependent communities rather than doubling down on industrial forestry.

Third, neighboring jurisdictions could have influenced New Brunswick's approach. If Quebec's reforms to forestry management had occurred earlier and demonstrated success, or if Maine had pioneered sustainable forestry legislation that created competitive advantages for their forest products, New Brunswick might have followed suit to remain competitive.

Fourth, key individuals within the bureaucracy or political system might have played different roles. Perhaps a particularly influential deputy minister of natural resources possessed a background in community forestry rather than industrial management, or a powerful cabinet member represented a forest-dependent rural riding and advocated for policies benefiting smaller operators.

In this alternate timeline, these factors combine to produce a fundamentally different Crown Lands and Forests Act in 1982—one that creates a mixed management model prioritizing community involvement, ecological sustainability, and economic diversification over industrial timber production. This legislation, rather than granting exclusive control to large licensees, establishes a three-tiered system: regional community forestry boards with significant management authority, smaller-scale industrial concessions with strict ecological constraints, and expanded protected areas co-managed with Indigenous communities.

This divergence, though seemingly administrative, sets in motion a cascade of different outcomes for New Brunswick's forests, rural communities, economy, and environment that would unfold over the subsequent decades.

Immediate Aftermath

Legislative Implementation (1982-1985)

The passage of the alternate Crown Lands and Forests Act in 1982 creates immediate turbulence in New Brunswick's forestry sector. The legislation establishes seven Regional Forest Management Authorities (RFMAs) composed of representatives from municipalities, First Nations, woodlot owners, environmental organizations, and industry. Each RFMA receives authority to manage approximately 60% of the Crown forest in their region according to sustainable harvest principles, while 25% remains allocated to industrial licensees (though with stricter ecological conditions), and 15% is designated as conservation forest co-managed with Indigenous communities.

The implementation phase proves contentious as major industrial players, particularly J.D. Irving, Ltd., initially resist the changes through legal challenges and political pressure. However, Premier Hatfield, bolstered by broad public support for the reforms, stands firm. By 1984, all seven RFMAs are operational, with professional staff and locally-developed management plans. The government creates a $45 million Forest Communities Transition Fund to support infrastructure development for smaller-scale, value-added wood processing facilities in rural regions.

Industry Restructuring (1985-1989)

The displacement of the industrial forestry model triggers significant economic restructuring in the forest sector. Large companies including J.D. Irving must adjust their operations to accommodate reduced access to Crown timber. This period sees:

Mill Consolidation: Several less-efficient pulp operations close or downsize, including the New Brunswick Chemical pulp facility in Saint John (1986) and parts of the Fraser Papers operation in Edmundston (1987).
Pivot to Private Land: Major companies intensify harvesting on their freehold lands while simultaneously accelerating land acquisition from private woodlot owners, leading to temporary price spikes for private timber.
Value-Added Development: The shift away from volume-based production forces industry adaptation. With financial support from the Transition Fund, smaller specialty mills open in communities like Doaktown, Sussex, and Blackville, focusing on hardwood products, specialty lumber, and engineered wood products.
Employment Transition: While approximately 1,200 jobs are lost in large-scale industrial operations during this period, the RFMAs and new value-added facilities create approximately 1,800 new positions, though with different skill requirements and geographic distribution.

Indigenous Co-Management (1984-1990)

A groundbreaking aspect of the alternative forestry regime is the establishment of formal co-management arrangements between the provincial government and Mi'kmaq and Wolastoqiyik (Maliseet) First Nations for designated conservation areas. The Mi'kmaq-Acadian Forest Authority and Wolastoqiyik Forest Guardians programs become early models for Indigenous resource governance in eastern Canada.

These programs incorporate traditional ecological knowledge into forest management and create educational and employment opportunities for Indigenous communities. By 1988, both authorities have established forest guardian training programs and small-scale harvesting operations using traditional selective methods. The University of New Brunswick's Forestry School collaborates with these authorities to document traditional management practices and develop curriculum materials incorporating Indigenous knowledge.

Political Consequences (1987-1991)

The forestry reforms initially strengthen Premier Hatfield's political position, as rural voters respond positively to the new community-oriented approach. However, by 1987, the implementation challenges and industrial adjustment pains create political vulnerability. When the Liberal Party under Frank McKenna wins the 1987 election in a landslide, many observers expect a rollback of the forestry reforms.

Surprisingly, the McKenna government maintains the core of the alternative forestry model while making pragmatic adjustments. The government consolidates the seven RFMAs into five larger entities for administrative efficiency and increases industrial allocations slightly (from 25% to 30% of Crown forest) to address timber supply concerns. However, McKenna recognizes the political popularity of community forestry in rural areas and the emerging economic benefits from value-added processing, strengthening rather than dismantling the system through the Community Forestry Enhancement Act of 1990.

Early Ecological Results (1988-1992)

The ecological effects of the alternative management approach become measurable by the late 1980s. Scientific monitoring conducted by the Canadian Forest Service and University of New Brunswick documents:

Increased structural complexity in forests managed by RFMAs compared to industrial operations
Higher retention of older age classes of trees, particularly hardwoods
Greater habitat connectivity maintained between forest blocks
More diverse wildlife populations in community-managed areas
Successful natural regeneration reducing silviculture costs

These early ecological successes receive international attention, with New Brunswick sending delegations to share their experience at the 1992 Earth Summit in Rio de Janeiro, positioning the province as an emerging leader in sustainable forestry practices.

Long-term Impact

Forest Industry Transformation (1990s-2000s)

By the mid-1990s, New Brunswick's forest industry had undergone a fundamental transformation from its volume-focused industrial roots to a more diverse, quality-oriented sector:

Market Differentiation

The RFMAs invested heavily in Forest Stewardship Council (FSC) certification beginning in 1995, becoming the first jurisdiction in North America to achieve FSC certification for over 1 million hectares of public forest. This market differentiation strategy created premium pricing for New Brunswick wood products in emerging green building markets, particularly in Europe and urban North American centers.

J.D. Irving and other industrial operators, facing market pressure, eventually adopted Sustainable Forestry Initiative (SFI) certification for their operations, creating a dual-certification system that positioned almost all New Brunswick forest products as environmentally preferable in international markets.

Value-Added Manufacturing Expansion

The restricted timber supply from Crown lands accelerated investment in manufacturing efficiency and value-added processing. By 2000, New Brunswick's forest sector had achieved a remarkable transformation:

The province's wood product exports shifted from 70% commodity products (pulp, newsprint, dimensional lumber) in 1982 to 55% value-added products (engineered wood, specialty products, finished components) by 2000
Employment in the forest sector remained stable at around 22,000 jobs, but with significantly higher average wages
Small and medium-sized enterprises grew from representing 30% of the sector's economic output to 45%

Technological Leadership

Facing timber constraints, New Brunswick companies invested heavily in technologies that maximized value from available wood. The New Brunswick Wood Technology Centre, established in Fredericton in 1996 with joint provincial-federal funding, became a North American leader in wood scanning technology, resource-efficient processing, and bioproduct development. This technological edge helped compensate for the province's self-imposed harvest limitations.

Rural Community Revitalization (2000s-2010s)

The alternative forestry model's most striking impact emerged in the province's rural communities, which followed a dramatically different trajectory than in our timeline:

Population Stabilization

While rural New Brunswick communities in our timeline experienced significant population decline (15-20% in many regions between 1990-2010), the alternate timeline shows remarkable stability. Statistics New Brunswick data from 2010 shows that communities with RFMA headquarters or value-added processing facilities experienced average population declines of only 3-5%, with some communities like Sussex, Doaktown, and Kedgwick actually growing by 5-8%.

Community Wealth Generation

The revenue sharing model established by the 1990 Community Forestry Enhancement Act required that 25% of stumpage revenues remain in the communities where harvesting occurred. This created a stable funding source for rural infrastructure and economic development:

The Miramichi RFMA invested in a community-owned district heating system using wood waste
The Acadian Peninsula RFMA established a revolving loan fund for local entrepreneurs
The Fundy RFMA developed tourism infrastructure connecting forest recreation with coastal experiences

By 2015, these community investments had generated an estimated $420 million in additional economic activity beyond direct forestry operations.

Education and Skills Development

The community forestry model required more knowledge-intensive management and specialized manufacturing skills. This drove educational innovation throughout the province:

The New Brunswick Community College system expanded its forestry programs to include specialized training in sustainable forest management, precision manufacturing, and wood product design
UNB's Forestry School evolved into the School of Forest Management and Ecosystem Services, becoming an international leader in community forestry research
Mi'kmaq and Wolastoqiyik educational institutions developed specialized programs in Indigenous forest management

These educational developments helped create career pathways that kept young people in rural communities and attracted new residents seeking meaningful work in sustainable resource management.

Environmental Outcomes (2000s-2020s)

The ecological consequences of New Brunswick's alternative forestry path became increasingly pronounced as decades passed:

Biodiversity Conservation

The 2015 State of New Brunswick's Forests report documented significant biodiversity benefits compared to neighboring jurisdictions:

Old forest habitat increased from 18% of forested area in 1982 to 26% by 2015
Populations of woodland caribou, American marten, and other old-forest dependent species stabilized rather than declining
Aquatic ecosystem health improved substantially, with 85% of forest watersheds meeting or exceeding water quality standards

Climate Resilience

Perhaps most significantly, New Brunswick's forests developed greater resilience to climate change impacts. The maintenance of diverse, multi-aged forests with higher species diversity reduced vulnerability to insect outbreaks, extreme weather events, and wildfires.

The 2023 Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change regional assessment specifically highlighted New Brunswick's forestry model as creating enhanced carbon sequestration (estimated at 18% higher carbon storage than business-as-usual scenarios) while simultaneously building adaptive capacity to climate impacts.

Reduced Chemical Inputs

The community forestry approach dramatically reduced chemical usage in forest management. While glyphosate application on Crown lands exceeded 15,000 hectares annually in our timeline, the alternate timeline saw this practice largely phased out by 2010, replaced by natural regeneration strategies and selective harvesting practices.

Provincial Economic Position (2010s-2025)

By the 2020s, New Brunswick's forest-based economy had diverged significantly from our timeline:

Economic Diversification

While forest products remained important, their nature transformed substantially:

Traditional pulp and paper declined more rapidly than in our timeline, but was replaced by advanced biomaterials including nanocellulose products, cross-laminated timber, and specialized packaging
Forest-based tourism grew significantly, with networks of backcountry cabins, guided experiences, and hunting/fishing opportunities generating over $200 million annually by 2022
Non-timber forest products including maple syrup, mushrooms, and medicinal plants became a $75 million industry

Innovation Environment

The necessity of doing more with less timber drove a culture of innovation that spilled over into other sectors. The New Brunswick Forest Innovation Cluster established in 2010 spawned technologies later applied in agriculture, manufacturing, and renewable energy.

Fredericton emerged as a center for forest monitoring technology, including drone-based forest inventory systems and precision harvesting software exported globally.

Fiscal Impact

The most striking economic outcome appeared in provincial finances. In our timeline, New Brunswick's reliance on volume-based industrial forestry generated diminishing returns as global commodity markets fluctuated. In the alternate timeline, higher-value products, more local processing, and broader economic diversification in rural areas strengthened the tax base while reducing dependence on federal transfers.

By 2025, New Brunswick's per capita GDP in the alternate timeline stands approximately 8% higher than in our timeline, with significantly better distributed economic benefits between urban and rural areas.

Political and Cultural Transformation (2015-2025)

The alternative forestry path reshaped New Brunswick's political and cultural landscape in profound ways:

Political Realignment

The urban-rural political divide that characterizes much of our timeline's New Brunswick politics evolved differently. With rural communities experiencing greater economic stability and agency through the RFMAs, political discourse centered less on resource extraction versus conservation and more on how to optimize the benefits of sustainable management.

By the 2020s, forestry policy exhibits remarkable political consensus across party lines, with all major parties supporting the community-based model while differing primarily on implementation details and revenue distribution mechanisms.

Indigenous-Settler Relations

Perhaps the most profound long-term impact emerged in the relationship between Indigenous and settler communities. The successful co-management of conservation forests created models for shared decision-making that gradually extended to other resource sectors and governance questions.

The 2020 Peace and Friendship Resource Management Accord formalized this approach across multiple sectors, recognizing Indigenous rights while creating practical cooperative management frameworks. This groundbreaking agreement resolved longstanding tensions and created a model examined by other Canadian provinces facing similar challenges.

Cultural Identity

By 2025, New Brunswick's identity has become inextricably linked to its distinctive forestry approach. The province markets itself internationally as "The Sustainable Forest Province," attracting immigration from individuals seeking communities with strong environmental values and meaningful work in resource stewardship.

Annual Forest Festivals in communities across the province celebrate both the economic benefits and cultural importance of sustainable forestry, reflecting a society that has successfully integrated resource utilization with conservation in both policy and identity.

Expert Opinions

Dr. Thomas Beckley, Professor of Natural Resource Sociology at the University of New Brunswick, offers this perspective: "New Brunswick's actual forestry path represents a classic case of resource capture by dominant industrial interests. The alternative timeline we've explored demonstrates how different regulatory choices in the 1980s could have created a more diverse, resilient forest economy. What's most striking is how the alternate approach potentially resolves the false dichotomy between environmental protection and economic development. By emphasizing local control, value-added processing, and ecological sustainability, this path might have created more total economic value while better preserving the forest's ecological functions. The biodiversity benefits alone would represent an incalculable asset in our era of ecological uncertainty."

Dr. Solange Nadeau, Senior Research Economist with the Canadian Forest Service, provides this analysis: "The economic implications of the alternative forestry policy deserve careful consideration. While our actual model prioritized economies of scale and short-term efficiency, the community forestry approach would have likely delivered greater economic resilience over time. Our research indicates that every 1,000 cubic meters of wood harvested creates approximately 2-3 jobs in commodity production but potentially 8-10 jobs when channeled through value-added manufacturing and local supply chains. The opportunity cost of New Brunswick's actual policy choice—particularly in terms of foregone rural development—may have been substantially higher than generally recognized. What's more, the increased focus on quality over quantity might have better positioned the province's forest sector for the 21st century's challenging market conditions."

Chief Patricia Bernard, forest policy analyst and member of the Wolastoqey Nation, comments: "The alternative forestry path described here represents more than just a different resource management approach—it offers a glimpse of how different relationships between Indigenous peoples, settlers, and the land might have evolved. The actual history of New Brunswick forestry perpetuated colonial resource extraction patterns, marginalizing Indigenous knowledge and rights. A community-based approach incorporating meaningful co-management would have created space for Wolastoqey and Mi'kmaq nations to express their traditional relationships with the forest while participating in its economic benefits. When we imagine different forestry policies, we're really imagining different power relationships and different possibilities for reconciliation. The path not taken here represents a significant missed opportunity for healing relationships both with the land and between peoples."