The US has been a large importer of softwood wood products, including timber, for many decades, with Canada being the largest supplier of these products. Over the past couple of decades, Canada has supplied roughly 30% of US softwood lumber and oriented strand board (OSB) consumption and 14% of softwood plywood consumption annually.
Recently, tariff discussions about reducing US dependence on foreign goods became a focus for the second Trump administration. At the World Economic Forum on January 23, President Trump stated: “We don’t need [Canada] to make our cars, we make a lot of them; we don’t need their lumber because we have our own forests… we don’t need their oil and gas, we have more than anybody.”
On March 1, Trump signed the Immediate Expansion of American Timber Production executive order to increase domestic timber supply. This order seeks a 25% increase in federal lands’ timber production, promoting security and sound forest management practices.
However, the US forest products industry’s reliance on Canadian wood raises questions about eliminating Canadian wood imports entirely.
This piece is the second in a two-part series by the Fastmarkets team about this policy’s feasibility. Part one of this series, written by Dustin Jalbert, explored converting capacity to replace finished products sourced from Canada.
This viewpoint examines whether US federal lands have enough timber to completely meet domestic wood product needs.
To answer this, we consider three sub-questions regarding timber sufficiency and harvesting potential on federal lands:
- First, do US federal lands provide sufficient timber resources to increase harvest levels and, if so, where?
- Second, if the resources exist, where would increased harvesting occur on these federal lands?
- Lastly, we must ask if undertaking the additional timber harvest levels is realistically feasible.
Does US federal land have sufficient timber resources and where?
Currently, US Forest Service (USFS) and Bureau of Land Management (BLM) timberlands hold 1,400 billion board feet (BBF) of net softwood sawtimber.
On all federally owned forestlands, the USFS EVALIdator tool estimates 1,973 BBF of net softwood sawtimber volume nationwide. For comparison, private timberlands in the South and West hold 270 BBF and 211 BBF, respectively, of softwood sawtimber. These estimates account for factors such as rot but represent wood suitable for products including softwood lumber and structural panels.
However, volumes include lands where timber harvesting may be logistically or economically unfeasible. Thus, these estimates reflect potential volumes without considering any regulatory or logistical constraints. Most of this timber volume is in the Pacific Northwest (PNW) and West regions of the United States.
Timber species such as Douglas-fir, western hemlock and true firs dominate these regions. The PNW’s softwood timber availability closely matches that of Canadian softwood species. Additionally, most federal forestlands are located in the PNW, making it a prime area for timber production expansion.
Steps to increase federal timber production in the PNW began before Trump’s second term. The US Forest Service (USFS) proposed increasing logging in the Northwest Forest Plan (NWFP) area in November 2024. This proposal aimed to reduce wildfire risks and support local economies in the region.
The NWFP area encompasses 17 national forests throughout California, Oregon and Washington. The proposal suggested increasing timber harvest levels by 33% to 200% in the NWFP region. This indicates the government’s ability to potentially increase harvest levels significantly in this specific area.
Currently, sawtimber harvest in the NWFP area averages only 0.4 billion board feet (BBF) per year. Even in an extreme scenario, only an additional 0.8 BBF would be harvested per year in the NWFP.
Timber needed to offset Canadian supply
To determine timber harvest volumes needed, US softwood lumber reliance on Canadian imports must first be quantified.
In 2024, Canada supplied 12 BBF of softwood lumber, accounting for 24% of US lumber consumption. Canada is expected to supply 12 BBF of softwood lumber annually to the US for the next few years. This matches current US demand and aligns with historical Canadian market share trends.
Accounting for lumber recovery rates, Canadian lumber imports equal 7 BBF annually of softwood timber on the International ¼” scale. The USFS and BLM manage 76% of federal forest land and oversee almost all federal timber sales. Since the 1980s, USFS timber harvest levels have dropped significantly due to environmental regulations.
USFS timber harvest restrictions limit activity across large land areas to protect environmental and ecological interests. Currently, sawtimber harvest on USFS lands averages only 1.5 BBF annually across the nation.
Historical data from the USFS report indicates that softwoods make up over 90% of total sawtimber harvest volume. Using these historical averages, we infer that USFS softwood sawtimber harvest volumes average 1.4 BBF annually. Strictly considering the average USFS softwood sawtimber harvest volumes, a 25% increase in harvest levels as targeted by the executive order would increase the average annual harvest level by 0.35 BBF to total 1.7 BBF of softwood sawtimber harvest per year.
This increase falls dramatically short of the required US federal softwood sawtimber harvest levels to offset Canadian supply. Knowing how much additional harvest is required to offset Canadian supply, how much will it take for USFS land to meet harvest criteria?
At the low end, an additional 7 BBF of softwood timber is needed to offset annual Canadian supply. If strictly applied to USFS softwood sawtimber, total annual harvest levels would have to increase to over 8 BBF, which has not occurred since the 1980s. This implies that current USFS softwood sawtimber harvest levels would have to increase upwards of 450% to offset Canadian supply.
Feasibility of increasing federal timber production to offset Canadian production
Theoretically, US federal lands currently have ample timber supplies to offset the volume of softwood lumber imported from Canada. However, increasing federal timber harvests upwards of 450% may be challenging, as many headwinds, aside from those related to lumber production capacity, may limit the government’s ability to ramp up timber production to this level.
Foremost is the contraction of forest area available for harvest due to environmental regulation and wildfires.
Trump’s executive order and proposed NWFP amendments aim to address these issues, but this will likely not happen overnight.
Even without environmental regulations, harvesting additional timber would require significant workforce and resources. Since 2019, total federal forestry and logging employment has averaged around 3,600 employees (Figure 3).
An estimated 0.44 million board feet (MMBF) of softwood sawtimber is produced per federal forestry worker annually. This means offsetting Canadian supply would need 12,500 more workers and considerable capital investments.
Challenging markets, aging workforce, harvest mechanization, higher costs and recruitment issues have reduced logging employment levels. Supply chain challenges have also contributed to this steady decline across forest products industry sectors (Figure 4).
Average annual logging employment in 2024 totaled 40,000 workers, a 24% decline from 2015 levels.
This decline underscores the challenges in acquiring workers needed to harvest timber and lower reliance on Canadian supplies. Additionally, the federal government has implemented job and budget cuts, aiming to improve efficiency across agencies. Reports suggest 10% of USFS staff were laid off, with more layoffs expected in the future.
The industry and government may struggle to acquire the workers needed to meet timber self-sufficiency goals. These workforce challenges could severely undermine plans to expand federal timber harvest levels.
To conclude, it is important to note that this analysis does not include the additional harvest that would be required to offset Canadian OSB and plywood supply, imports from other nations or the prospects of future growth in US wood products demand. Thus, these estimates are likely on the low end.
Under these considerations, increased federal timber harvest levels would have to expand even further and require more employment and CapEx expenditures. Therefore, while sufficient domestic timber supplies exist to meet US needs, it would be incredibly challenging for US federal timber harvest alone to offset Canadian wood products in the coming years.
How quickly the US can make strides to become self-sufficient in terms of wood products largely depends on how quick and willing lumber mills and the government are to invest in major capacity, workforce and CapEx expansions.
Want more insights like this? Speak to one of our experts to learn about the Fastmarkets North American Timber 5- and 15-Year Forecasts.
