Memorandum by Roger Hay CBE (RH 02)
THE ROAD
HAULAGE INDUSTRY
I am writing on behalf of the Roundwood Haulage Working
Party, which represents the British grown forest industry wood
supply chain.
BACKGROUND
Some 85 per cent of all of the timber products
used in Great Britain involve the use of imported timber, both
as round wood and as finished products.
Current production of round timber from within
Great Britain is approximately 9,000,000 tonnes. It is estimated
that not more than 400,000 tonnes is transported by rail. On the
basis that the average load is 20 tonnes the number of Heavy Goods
Vehicle movements associated with carrying round timber from the
forest to processing mills is 365,000 (assuming some 200,000 tonnes
is used on estate mills). The majority of the vehicles used, particularly
in Northern England, Wales and Scotland, are specialist timber
haulage vehicles and are difficult to return load. It is estimated
that some 250,000 vehicle movements returning empty occur. The
total movements for round timber are approaching 650,000 and rising.
Along with the transport of finished products from the processing
mills the total number of lorry movements from the Great Britain
forestry industry is about 1,000,000. It is estimated that some
1,000 vehicles are used by hauliers specialising in timber transport.
Nearly all of the source forests are in rural
areas and the relatively small number of processing mills means
that much of the haulage, while emanating from rural forests and
woods and using a wide network of rural roads, also travels extensively
on the trunk and motorway network.
ENVIRONMENT
Vehicles hauling round timber are primarily
working in rural areas. Use of alternative forms of timber transport
have been explored and encouraged. There has been an increase
in the use of rail. There will always be the problem of hauling
to the rail head, particularly because the source of the timber
being in remote rural areas, and not all of the processing sites
are able to accept rail. Sea transport depends to large extent
on freight subsidy and the industry awaits with interest the renewal
of subsidy for coastal shipping.
It is expected that, despite all of the best
efforts of the industry, the majority of all future timber movements
will be by road and the total level of alternative freight shipments
is unlikely to exceed 1.2 million tonnes. It is submitted that
the natural environment is not greatly affected by timber carrying
vehicles and that the best method of reducing pollution from large
vehicles is to require better engine design.
The problems associated with the use of minor
rural roads by large vehicles has largely arisen from the lack
of investment by government, both local and national, in the rural
road network for a generation or more. The view of the forest
industry is that the provision and upkeep of an adequate rural
road infrastructure is the responsibility of the Local Authorities,
and that the funding is a matter for agreement between the Local
Authority and the Transport Department. The industry makes a substantial
contribution to rural employment, and the woodprocessing industries
make a significant contribution to local rates. The industry feels
that it is a reasonable expectation that Local Authorities should
be willing to commit a proportion of their resources to the maintenance
and improvement of the public highway system as a necessary support
for forestry and the rest of the rural economy.
The forest industry accepts that the development
of forests can put a strain on Local Authorities' spending on
rural roads. The industry has introduced and encouraged a voluntary
agreement whereby hauliers are restricted to "preferred routes"
enabling limited Local Authority resources to be channelled into
improving a reduced quantity of public roads. This involves more
use of internal forest roads and longer and more costly haul distances.
The industry has also offered to phase its operations in such
a way as to take account of the timing of road improvements. Regular
dialogue on traffic flows has taken place with most Local Authorities,
providing them with the opportunity to plan their operations in
an orderly and progressive way.
The situation has now been reached where most
Local Authorities who have large forest areas within their boundaries
are probably unable to see funds being made available for the
upkeep of those rural roads which serve these forest areas.
Recent changes in funding arrangements have
exacerbated the situation and Government now makes payments to
Local Authorities on a formula basis. While this is meant to take
account of the difficulties that Local Authorities may have with
rural roads, it is difficult for Local Authorities to find the
funding within the single allocation and the demands on Local
Authorities are such that the rural road is well down the list
of priorities.
The forest industry is now in a situation where
the development of forests which were and are encouraged and the
introduction of large new processing capacity has enhanced the
viability of the industry, but the ability for the producer to
get his product to the market is being eroded almost daily by
restrictions on the use of the public road system. The Industry
is near enough to the margins of profitability for the uneconomic
use of vehicles or large scale rerouting becoming too great a
burden on the forest owner particularly.
The forest industry believes that sums totalling
£6,000,000/10,000,000 per year for Great Britain (£6,000,000
for Scotland and £1 million for England and Wales) would,
if ring fenced, provide sufficient funds for the Local Authority
to improve the Rural Road Network serving forests and woodlands
and to allow rural industries to function economically and encourage
the development of new areas of forest and woodlands.
TRANSFERRING FROM
ROAD TRANSPORT
OF TIMBER
TO RAIL
Timber lorry movements from the remote forest
locations to the main wood processing areas requires large scale
lorry transport. Because of handling costs, as timber is moved
from lorry on to rail wagons and vice versa, it is estimated that
movement distances of less than 200 kms will continue to be more
economic by road transport. Distances in excess of this amount
would be able to move by rail at economic costs if there were
better sidings and facilities both within the rural forest areas
and at the processing industry sites. It is estimated that an
investment of £1 million per year for five years would allow
for some additional one million tonnes per year by rail-equivalent
to 100,000 lorry movements. There would be additional benefits
as the end produce from the processing industry would also be
in a position to move by rail.
TRANSFERRING TIMBER
FROM ROAD
TRANSPORT OF
TIMBER TO
SEA
Timber movement by sea is restricted to small
quantities from remote Scottish Islands. The current fleets of
vessels serving the Highlands and Islands are essentially built
to carry lorry traffic as roll-on-roll-off vessels. Change to
bulk carriage and thus encouraging the change from road to sea
transport requires a comprehensive review of the shipping needs
of the Western Highlands and Islands. There is clearly potential
for movement of timber produce to markets by sea, and as a result
of such a review might well provide an indication of the likely
freight subsidy necessary to allow such a transfer to take place.
THE DUTY
PROBLEM
A recent Study on the future of the British
Forest and timber industry (Jaakko Poyry; Priorities for the development
of the GB Softwood Market over the next 15-20 years; 1998) recommended
that the industry had to reduce its delivered costs to become
more internationally competitive. Studies within the industry
have shown that transport costs within the UK are considerably
more than those of competitor countries (table 1). Because of
the globalisation of the wood supply market and the low ratio
of home grown timber relative to imported timber, British growers
and processors are at a major disadvantage.
All of our competitor countries have lower fuel
prices; lower vehicle excise duties and, in most cases higher
vehicle payloads. An analysis of the variations due to these fiscal
and legislative measures suggests that UK transport costs—like
for like—are very marginally different from the other countries
surveyed.
Because of the lack of investment since the
1950's in the rural road network, it is unlikely that very much
larger vehicles can be accommodated on "c" class and
unclassified roads and it is only in the relationship of duty—both
vehicle and fuel—that efforts to meet the gap in economic
transport between the UK and other Northern European countries
can be addressed.
Forestry and wood products in the UK is a minor
industry on the world stage, but creates rural wealth and is able
to meet the challenges from importers, if the playing field is
reasonable level. We are tacking all of the practices within the
wood supply chain to ensure efficiencies are taken wherever they
occur. The fiscal burden is so severe that up to 40 per cent of
the delivered cost of round timber are transport costs. Our competitors,
who start with an advantage of having much larger forested areas
and shorter transport distances, have an additional cost advantage
in the high charges borne by transport suppliers within the UK.
Their products arrive in this country at the major ports with
immediate access to the trunk and motorway network and the shortest
distances to the ends markets.
The forest industry would wish to see the Government;
1. Recognise that the upkeep of rural roads
requires some form of ring fencing of the funds that the DETR
provides for such a function.
2. Accept that small additional funds should
be made available for the improvement of "c" class and
unclassified roads.
3. Accept that reduction in pollution from
vehicles can best be achieved by rigorous application of good
engine design and maintenance.
4. Allow congestion and the market to sort
out the traffic patterns.
5. Recognise that high levels of duty, both
as vehicle excise duty and as fuel duty, reduces the ability of
indigenous industry to compete with imports from countries which
do not have such high duty regimes.
January 2000
| 
