Could this happen in a way that benefits American construction interests but also Canadian lumber exporting interests?
If there's ever some dispute about it could it be mediated somehow?
What would the outcome of that possibly be?
Could this happen in a way that benefits American construction interests but also Canadian lumber exporting interests?
If there's ever some dispute about it could it be mediated somehow?
What would the outcome of that possibly be?
The size of the forests isn't really relevant; compared to lumber demand, they're mostly insignificant. Humans have never had a problem wiping out local forests.
What matters is how much wood a forest can produce per year, not how much has accumulated over the course of the past.
Once you get further north the taigas are colder and slower growing and may take 200 years or longer to grow back.
The best thing for the USA is to use the resources which supports jobs in logging, wood processing, transportation, and have lower costs associated with transportation and fees from importation. I'm not against importing timber into very northern parts of the US but there is no reason to ONLY use canadian timber.
Assuming that stripping resources from other parts of the world is how we got into this ecological mess in the first place.
Isn't that already happening?
https://wits.worldbank.org/CountryProfile/en/Country/USA/Yea...