Minutes 2002 - 2008

• April 2007
• January 2006
• January 2005
• October 2004
• December 2003
• January 2003
• December 2002

CANADA YEW ASSOCIATION
Teleconference at Fredericton NB, April 29, 2008, 10:10 AM

Meeting Notes

Compiled by Stewart Cameron, CFS-AFC

Participants

Stewart Cameron, CFS-AFC, NB
Bill Hamilton, NB Dept. of Natural Resources
Rick Kowalski, NRC-IRAP, NB
Gil Lambany, Ministère des Ressources naturelles et de la Faune, Québec
John Letourneau, CFS-AFC, NB
Colin Marr, BioVectra Ltd., PEI
Ken Mayhew, PEI Department of Environment, Energy, and Forestry
Jeff Melschau, Weyerhaeuser Ltd., OR, USA 
Tom Noland, Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources
Kerry Scott, Active Botanicals Co. Ltd., PEI
Eric Smith, Chatham Biotec Ltd., NB
Ron Smith, VarFor Ltd., NB

1. Welcome and Introduction:

It was agreed that Ron Smith would chair the meeting. He welcomed those attending. Participants present at the meeting and on the telephone were introduced.

2. Approval of the Agenda

The agenda was approved as submitted. No additional items were added. Stewart Cameron was thanked for preparing the documentation for the meeting.

3. Industrial Member Updates

[Colin Marr] BioVectra will neither purchase nor harvest any Canada yew this year. All their operations have been converted to semi-synthetic production based on Taxalog technology to produce both paclitaxel and docetaxel. A DMF for docetaxel has been completed with an ANDA submission is planned soon.

• [E. Smith] Is the primary source from purchased 10-DAB? [Marr] Yes. BioVectra may get back into purchasing Canada yew when the economics improve, but currently it does not pay for them to do so. [E. Smith] The price of 10-DAB is reported to be climbing slightly to $17-20/g.

[Eric Smith] Chatham Biotec Ltd.(CBL) are also focusing more on semi-synthetic products. Their DMF has been registered and an ANDA has been started. Docetaxel is easier to make than paclitaxel has been delayed for a year since the world market is just starting to open up. They did a natural paclitaxel DMF a year ago. Without it Taxus canadensis is not competitive.

They have NRC support to extract additional taxanes from the biomass to make the species even more competitive. The research and commercialization are expected to take some time so there will be no immediate results, though the project appears promising.

CBL are submitting the final plans for a paclitaxel intermediate plant in order to be able to sell 10% paclitaxel as a powder for USD$35/g, which they expect should make natural paclitaxel competitive again.

• [Marr] How is $35/g competitive? [E Smith] For CBL the biggest costs are transporting biomass around the world, and crude extract requires large-scale equipment, whereas to go from 10-100% only smaller equipment is needed. High-pressure reversed phase columns do not require much space. Currently the price of natural paclitaxel is $115/g, and they expect to lower it to $80/g, and the semi-synthetic is at $90/g and they expect it to decrease to $60/g, for an overall average of about $65/g. The natural will never be as inexpensive as the semi-synthetic, but by using a 3:1 ratio the overall cost is pulled down to $65/g. [Marr] Those are from a plant with a US DMF?  [E. Smith] Yes, both natural and semi-synthetic are registered with the USDA. The DMF numbers are listed under the plants in China contracted by CBL.


• [E. Smith] The price decreases are necessary because Chinese prices have decreased from $130/g to $65/g for natural paclitaxel from Chinese sources. As well the Holton patent on semi-synthesis with the lactam side chain is due to expire next December. Without matching those prices, one would be out of business by the end of the year.

On the biomass side, the prices have been dropping dramatically. CBL believes plantations are the future of the business. Decreasing the costs of both the extraction/synthesis technology and the biomass are very important. There has been good growing success at both Zelenka and Weyerhaeuser, and they seem to be able to grow not just Canada yew but also other species in better climates a lot more efficiently than we can here. However, to grow Taxus canadensis in China would result in the loss of the Canadian industry in the opinion of CBL. New innovations in growing technology should also serve to lower Canadian biomass costs.

• [Kowalski] Can you restate the prices again? [E. Smith] There are prices of $160-$180/g but they are not realistic. CBL are selling natural paclitaxel at $115/g but are dropping to $80/g probably by year’s end, and are modifying their DMF to include 10% intermediate and high pressure reverse phase technology and refinement. The current semi-synthetic price can be as high as $130-$160/g. the CBL price will decrease from $90 to $60 by switching from an open to a lactam side-chain method, which is more efficient.


• [Marr] The DMF modification is for the 10% API? [E. Smith] No, it is a DMF amendment for shipping and using the 10% intermediate (stability issues) instead of biomass and incorporating the column technology.


• [Marr] Can you tell us the names of the companies? [E. Smith] Jin-Shan is doing the natural paclitaxel and Techwell does the semi-synthetic under license to CBL.  

[Kerry Scott] Active Botanicals Co. Ltd (ABC) remains primarily a biomass supply company. The company had its best year ever the past year, breaking the 2005 record for sales. Processing efficiencies have led to a significant profit for the first time. ABC is currently the largest supplier for generic drug companies. The ABC focus for the next three years will be on increasing the value to landholders by looking at other plant species on their woodlots and doing more site management to include six other species.

Price to the harvester is now less than 50 cents/lb, significantly lower than 80 cents paid elsewhere. The Gaspe prices, through the syndicates, are higher but ABC only takes a small proportion of their biomass from this area. Selling at prices below $6.00/kg is now profitable, and is forecasted to be profitable below $5.00/kg in 18 months, and at about $4.00/kg three years into the future, which is the ultimate goal.

Biomass is now being dried with wood purchased from the landowners, thereby giving the landholders additional value. Biomass is not being transported over distances as long as in the past to further lower the cost. A modest approach to mechanized collection is being taken since cost recovery is predicted to take longer to recover at 40 cents/lb, which they expect to achieve by next year. The PEI legislation now limits the harvesting season to the fall only due to spring snow cover.

ABC is brokering product back into Canada from Chinese sources. Their current price for 70% paclitaxel derived from Canada yew is $30/g from DMF company sources. Pure natural paclitaxel is being marketed at less than $60/g with predicted reduction to $40/g. Pure semi-synthetic product is being marketed for about $50/g for large (10 kg or more) amounts. Prices have been stable for about the last two years but the supply-demand curve is changing: as more biomass is produced, more companies can make product which lowers the price. However, there is a floor because of the chemicals used. Chinese margins are thin – e.g., 10% extract is selling in China for about $2200.

ABC has been reviewing regrowth on their harvest sites, some of which have been harvested three times since 1999. The regrowth is as expected – virtually every site is ready to be reharvested on PEI. Results from six large sites in Ontario harvested three years ago indicate they are ready to be harvested again. Snow has prevented assessment of the NB sites thus far.

ABC are now the largest supplier to Teva and another large North American client. The average concentration last year for biomass was 308 ppm. No one client has a price advantage over any other, which helps stabilize the market.

• [Cameron] Does the landowner also get paid for the fuel wood from their site. [Scott] Yes, the landowner can actually be paid more that the forestry companies will pay, since ABC is the final wood user, and may incorporate the wood harvest as part of, for example, a minor thinning operation as part of a management plan for future Canada yew harvests. 100% utilization of anything removed from the site is part of their goal.
  
  The Canada yew biomass industry is best described as a cottage industry, and will likely never exceed $10 million a year. As volume increases the price seems to go down proportionately.


• [Kowaski] You mentioned that you have lowered transportation costs. How is this being accomplished? [Scott] It is done by processing the biomass closer to where it is sourced. Instead of trucking three loads of biomass back to Atlantic Canada for drying, then from the drying facility to an export port, only one shipment of dried biomass is made, directly to the dock for shipment overseas. The amount shipped per container has also been increased from 16-17K kilograms to 22-24K kilograms, and may be able to be increased to 30K kilograms, the maximum load for a container. This is done by using biomass compaction and a finer mesh size. The clients also prefer the finer mesh size since it better matches their processing lines. Another advantage is that the risk of pests in the fresh biomass being transported from one jurisdiction is reduced by drying locally, and movement of fresh biomass may be restricted in the future. ABC has informed CFIA of the problem. There is less problem late in the fall when the weather is cold than when collection begins in August.

[Melschau] Weyerhaeuser has no planned harvest from their plantations this year for the first time since 1998 since no crops of mature plants are currently ready. They will process crops, however, for another nursery – one of several in the region which also grow yew for biomass sales for whom they provide harvesting and drying services.

Their Taxus canadensis, which had been in the ground for four years, was harvested last year in September. Growth and biomass yield was not very different from the Taxus hicksii crops they traditionally grow. It is an upright grower in the open and well-suited to their mechanical harvesting methods.

In general they have seen an upswing in cultivation interest in the past 9-10 months, and they have a new cultivar in their rooting facility (120K plants) for the first time since 2005, plus 2.5-3 million Taxus hicksii field planted and spoken for. One customer has speculated that the interest is the result of a constant low-level but long-term ongoing interest in natural paclitaxel on the part of some smaller end-use companies. These companies, for which paclitaxel may only be a small portion of their business, do not want to undertake the paper work and cost of validating semi-synthetic production.

In general, Weyerhaeuser out west has been aggressively looking to develop other botanical or pharmaceutical products from their forests. These could come from either naturally occurring botanicals or other species that might be planted after a forestry unit has been established, providing some alternatives to timber income from the land beyond yew.

• [Cameron] Has there been a comparison of the relative amounts of wood and needles in T. canadensis versus T. hicksii under your growing conditions? [Melschau] T. canadensis has less wood because it is much more prone to branching than T. hicksii, which is relatively columnar. Weyerhauser prunes T. hicksii during crop growth to encourage branching, but they did not have to do so with T. canadensis. Wood is screened out during the harvesting process, and much less wood – almost an insignificant amount – was recovered from T. canadensis.


• [E. Smith] If the T. canadensis had been top-pruned would it have been better for biomass. [Melschau] Potentially, but they were constrained from doing so since the crop did not belong to Weyerhaeuser.


• [E. Smith] were the growing costs the same comparing T. canadensis and T. hicksii? [Melschau] Yes, there were no extra operations or difficulties.


• [E. Smith] As a general comment, the west coast seems to have the best growing conditions for a variety of different species. [R. Smith] Climatic conditions aside, however, there is no substitute for having a combination of a good growing site and a good, experienced grower with a green thumb.  

3. Provincial Member Updates

[R. Smith, report read on behalf of Howard Frame, NS Dept. of Natural Resources]:
“There is no known harvesting of Yew on Crown land, although it is suspected to have occurred occasionally. There is probably some harvesting on private lands, but we have no way to collect data on that either.  We understand that over-harvesting could occur very easily and quickly, and if suspected to be the case on Crown Lands then the province would quickly develop a conserva-tion policy for that plant. But for now, it seems to a wait and see scenario.

I don't see the province, at this time, joining an association even though it seems to promote sustainable harvesting. I think it safe to say that NS would be more likely to promote the conservation/non-harvest of that species in this province particularly where it isn't considered abundant here.”

• [E. Smith] CBL found that in NS that the product is in small plots here and there and not economical to harvest. Also, because the plots are small, there is a temptation to over-harvest, so only mimimal harvest has been done there.

[R. Smith, report read on behalf of Basil English, NL Dept. of Natural Resources]:
“… the Taxus harvest has not really taken off here as we would have hoped and right now it’s a low profile opportunity. In 2006, [one company] … identified good stands of yew in the Stephenville - Humber River corridor on the island's west coast, set up local buying stations, identified a local company rep and tried hard to recruit harvesters. Unfortunately, they were unsuccessful in attracting local harvesters and rarely had more than 10 people in the woods at any given time … .

… I should point out that labour is becoming a real issue in Newfoundland, particularly for low-education, natural resource type jobs. A huge number of people are commuting to work in Alberta, making it a real challenge to attract people to local forestry and agricultural occupations. For example, in 2007 we were unable to plant all the trees grown at the Provincial Tree Nursery because contractors couldn't find planters and were therefore unable to fulfill their contracts. We believe the silvicultural sector will be challenged to carry out all the work we have lined up to do. Harvesting contractors are also having trouble retaining skilled workers such as truck drivers, mechanics and machine operators.

So, we remain interested in Taxus harvesting. However, we've only had one company make any serious attempt at harvesting and they had mixed results.”

• [E. Smith] CBL was the harvester in Newfoundland. The shortage of manpower really is there. No one is available to do the harvesting – they are all out west. It will be a challenge in the future, even though there are good harvest sites in Newfoundland, and mechanization will probably have to be the method used.

[Gil Lambany, MRNF Quebec] In Quebec Canada yew harvesting is very slow. Since 2001 there have been regulations reserving public lands for specific companies. However, these agreements are now over since April 2006 and public lands are freed up. Anyone can now make representation to government to harvest on public land provided they fulfill the obligations to operate a mill, to differentiate between private and public land, and to pay a duty per tonne that is harvested on public land.

The reality today is that any company can now apply for access to public land. In 2001 Bioxel, Chaichem and Science Quality Quest were all in the marketplace. Now, none of the three are interested in harvesting. CBL, is now longer operating the facility they had in 2006. Therefore there is no longer any processing in Quebec for specific biomass or products like paclitaxel.

• [Cameron] Is Chaichem still in the paclitaxel business? [Lambany] Yes. [E. Smith] We have not been able to contact them, either in Montreal or Amqui.


• [E. Smith] When CBL leased the facility in 2006, the problem was that most of the Crown land sites that were not reserved and could be accessed did not have enough biomass on them when CBL did a survey to make them commercially viable since CBL needed a minimum of 5 million pounds to support the plant. The marketing boards also wanted $1.35/lb at that time for the biomass, which was too expensive to support the processing plant. However, they intend to resubmit for one region in Quebec in the Gaspe. Other areas seem to be no longer interested in Canada yew or still have very high prices.


• [Lambany] The duty on public land has been reduced to 10 cents per pound, reduced since April 1 from 22 cents.


• [Scott] Is the process still the same for applying for public land? [Lambany] Yes, a company must present an offer to the ministry, and the ministry has calculated the amount of biomass that can be removed from a particular block. The rules are the same since 2001. A company must do a basic transformation on the biomass, producing a concentrate that is free of fiber. That is our definition of a commercial product. However, the ministry is looking at the possibility of accepting a powdered biomass that can exported from Quebec.

[Tom Noland, OMNR] In Ontario there was harvesting last summer by ABC in the area of Manitoulin Island and on the north shore of Lake Huron, plus others attempting to set up additional harvesting operations in the Sault Ste. Marie area.

The OMNR final research report on the Canada yew plantation research project started four years ago was finished and sent out for comment to a number of external people. The pharmaceutical partner was Bioxel, and they have the option of first refusal on taking the elite material for propagation and further development for plantation work. They have the information but they have not responded to date.

This is the third year of study for the Canada yew sustainable harvest trial in Ontario, so they will do an assessment of the regrowth after simulated light, moderate and severe harvest. The moderate and severe are the same as the CFS treatments: 3 years growth off of both the terminal and 7 years of growth removed, respectively. The light treatment is at the request of CBL to simulate mechanical harvesting: 2 years of growth off both the terminal and six laterals – more branch tips per branch. Spring, fall and summer harvests have been done on one site, and fall harvesting only on another site, but with the canopy thinned to open it up to about 50%. As expected, regrowth is much better at the higher light levels.

Harvesting through OMNR is the same as in the past: a voluntary business plan submitted to the district manager. If approved, a letter is issued to the company allowing them to harvest in that district. The recommendation currently is to follow the CFS/PEI guidelines until the OMNR study is completed.

The interest from the industry in the recent past has been fairly low, but how much will be done in the upcoming year is not known. The OMNR person responsible for Canada yew policy development, Chuck Mason, retired in January of 2008 so there is currently no one working on policy. Noland and Mason wrote a “State of the Resource Report” on Canada yew and its status in Ontario in 2007.

• [Cameron] Is the report publically available? [Noland] Yes, it is on the internet. The web site is http://www.web2.mnr.gov.on.ca/mnr/sorr/pdf/SORR_CanadaYew.pdf

[Noland] The status of whether the Canada yew resource will be managed actively by OMNR really depends on the harvesting industry. Because the activity has fallen off significantly, the Ministry does not wish to pass legislation unless they know it is going to be a long term activity in the province.

• [Lambany] Does Biolyse harvest on public land in Ontario at this time? [Noland] They have in the past, and they do harvest material larger than the recommended size – 14-20 inches long. They are not reported as harvesting in Ontario since 2006, but they have been reported to be harvesting other places: in Quebec in the Gaspe.


• [Scott] They have been harvesting in the Gaspe since 1993. Their sizes are larger but they harvest at a lower intensity: perhaps one in three or four branches. Yew grows well in Quebec and Ontario – much better than, for example in NB and PEI where it is a lot slower. [Noland] One OMNR sustainable harvest site is close to the Lake Superior coast with lots of moisture, and it is growing back well. The other site, close to Mattawa growing under yellow birch, is both very moist and fertile and it grows the best of all of the sites.

[Scott] ABC will probably increase their harvesting in Ontario and Quebec in the coming year if there is an available workforce. Likely none will be done on PEI: the regulations, increased paperwork and the rate of return landowners expect make the cost too high. This will be ABC’s biggest harvesting year yet, though it is probably only 1/10th of what could be harvested. There was a lot of inventory built up between 2003-2005 which has now largely been cleared. As the quality of inventory goes up, perhaps in a few years it will be cost-effective to extract in North America as fuel costs increase, but for now using existing plants elsewhere for extraction and processing is a cheaper alternative. This is not a huge business: if all the biomass n the world came from Canada it maybe would amount to perhaps a $40 million per year business – about 1/10th the size of the maple sugar industry in Quebec.

[Ken Mayhew, PEI Dept. of Environment, Energy, and Forestry] PEI was quiet insofar as harvesting is concerned in 2007, but an increase is anticipated this year. There was harvester training two years ago, and it is hoped to hold training for licensing harvesters and buyers during June, before the start of the season. The reporting forms for the industry have been standardized since what was being received from the industry before was not in compliance with what is needed.

• [Cameron] The group should know that Ken is now the official contact point for yew on PEI. Is that correct? [Mayhew] Yes, I have been designated to look after the regulations under the act.


• [E. Smith] CBL will be more active on PEI, particularly on land conversions. There is also a manpower shortage on PEI. CBL are doing blueberries, cranberries and Canada yew plus a few other products as well on PEI. Many farms are going out of business, the land mass is becoming available, and there is a need for alternative income-generating crops.


• [Scott] How does the provincial government handle product conversions? [E. Smith] It is similar, for example, to woodland cutovers being converted to blueberries. Ground hemlock is similar – removing trees for a conversion to wild plantations or looking for sites for planting cuttings.


• [E.Smith] It appears that Canada yew prefer sandy soils. Growth of seedlings at Debert NS appeared to be better than on PEI which has heavier clay soils. [Cameron] Perhaps not so, since the plants were in the provenance trial and were the same, yet the plants harvested in PEI were quite a bit larger than in Debert.

[Bill Hamilton, NB Dept. of Natural Resources] In NB, the current government is amenable to making Crown land available to private harvesters who have processing facilities within the province. Two companies responded to the tender for Crown land Taxus put out by the province. Initially Chatham Biotec had the contract in 2006. Last year, the same contract was let to begin working on a trial basis with mechanical harvesters, but it was late in the year before any activity could be started and there was no activity.

For 2008, the same level of activity is anticipated, and the government is considering allowing in additional harvesters as well. Both CBL and ABC will be recommended for harvesting contracts, should they wish to apply. In the contracts the NB government has tried hard to respect and follow the P,C&I developed by the Canada Yew Association years ago in drafting Crown land contracts. However, there are exceptions: mainly that the NB government does not wish to become involved in regulating activities concerning a non-endangered species on private lands in NB.

Bill Hamilton is retiring and the person taking over his duties is Nicole Laflamme, who will be responsible for the Taxus file. It has been decided that, for now, the government will not allow spring harvesting in order to have things in place for the fall harvest.

• [E. Smith] With the downturn in the timber and pulp market and pulp and sawmills shutting down, is more importance being placed on alternative woodland products? [Hamilton] With the current Premier’s Charter for Change there are a couple of initiatives to increase the productivity of non-productive properties, getting them back into forestry or agriculture. There is a tri-departmental committee working on that currently. The private land silviculture budget, which was initially cut by 50%, now has been increased back to 75% of its original value and initiatives will be 70/30 cost shared by the provincial government. Both of those may impact NTFPs.

5. Update on R&D

[Cameron] the sustainable harvest trial results, some of which have been reported at previous CYA meetings, are planned for publication in the form of two papers to be submitted to a journal later this year. A third is also planned for next year after the three remaining sites from the original five are analyzed to verify regrowth of the different harvest types ranging from three-year to severe (seven year) clipping. The large main branches have already been destructively harvested to see what the regrowth has been, along with some sol and foliar analysis. It is hoped to have the measurements done by the end of the summer.

A new method for doing the taxane analysis from crude samples has been developed. John Letourneau has done some chemistry to develop internal standards to increase the precision of the reading, plus a couple of other innovations. The measurements on provenance trial samples – first from PEI, then NS – will begin again shortly, but results will require some time since there are many plants.

Within the next two weeks, sampling will be completed for the third year on the two “semi-commercial” sites at Grand Lake and in PEI with a combination of spacings, mulch, and inorganic and organic fertilizers. A paper was put out 2 years ago on the first results which seemed to indicate that compost tea may have a slight stimulatory effect on taxane content, but the results are only preliminary and must be verified.

Work on SE has been stopped since there is no manpower to carry it out. A paper on the vegetative propagation work done by M.Sc. student Laurie Holloway was presented in Bulgaria by our UNB collaborator, Marek Krasowski, on rooting and some plant growth regulators. (Propagation of Ornamental Plants, 2008, vol.8, pages 23-27). It was hoped to confirm some of those results last fall, but there was not enough manpower to do so. The experiment is now planned for this coming fall.

A paper (Cameron and Smith) was published in Pharmaceutical Biology in January on the seasonal changes in taxane content in woodland plants. (Pharmaceutical Biology, 2008, Vol. 46, pages 35-40).

6. Membership and Structure of the CYA

[Cameron] There are two perennial major problems. The first problem Bill Hamilton started to resolve last year by polling provinces to see whether there was interest in having an official provincial rep to the CYA. Some are, and others are not. Another issue was the way in which the CYA sign-on terms were drafted was not acceptable to a number of people. Bill also attempted to find out what language would be acceptable and he drafted a document which has been sent to everyone.

The second problem is that, over the last 3-4 years, some members have expressed the need to do things which only a formal association can do – e.g., writing a letter on behalf of members on the sustainable harvest of Canada yew. Such activities are beyond the scope of a volunteer group – i.e., it is inappropriate to send out a letter based only on the wishes of whoever happens to be in attendance at a particular year’s annual meeting. Therefore, as a starting point, a draft of some by-laws have been sent to those on the mailing list as a discussion document and the first step to incorporating as a non-profit entity.

The Association can either remain as it is now, a voluntary group, or work to incorporate, in which case a Board of Directors would be needed. For this reason, a second document was sent out to the mailing list – the directors’ terms of reference – again to help guide discussion.

For the present time, it was agreed at the last meeting that it would be sufficient, at a minimum, for CYA members to send in a fee of $50.00 as a token of their interest in the Association, regardless of whether they were willing to sign up officially. Only a few have replied thus far indicating their interest, while others are declining to participate, and they have been removed from the mailing list.

The question is, then: is it sufficient to simply pay a fee to cover minor expenses, or do those currently present wish to incorporate into a formal association?

• [E. Smith] Given the way the industry is developing, there should be an association representing all of Canada rather than separate provinces and companies, because the regulations are getting tougher for pharmaceutical products. It would be useful to have a website where one could go to get up-to-date information, and some form of spokesmanship for the industry as a whole for developing a sustainable Canadian product for the benefit of the country. Therefore having a formal association and a website for access to information would be beneficial.


• [Hamilton] From a government perspective, the association has a great educational component. It serves as a forum for getting together with other provinces and people from several levels of industry, and finding out what developments are taking place. Whether “membership” is the proper term, whatever is required should be done by way of financial commitments or continued [NB] provincial participation to keep the organization going.
  
  What is not clear, however, is whether a formal organization is required – e.g., if a letter needs to be sent out, it could be signed by all or come from each company and each province with a common message. That method may be even more effective to make a point with someone outside of the association.
  
  As far as the fee is concerned, there is probably little problem in doing so as long as membership does not legally restrict making decisions on Crown land or require the same decisions on private land.
  
  [Cameron] When the province was a member of the Christmas tree association how was the fee handled administratively? [Hamilton] The fee was simply submitted, the cheque was cashed by the association, and the names of both the department and Hamilton were on the membership.

• [Cameron] Whether a provincial member “officially” represents his/her province or not, it is sufficiently important that each province has a voice, albeit informal, ex-officio or other, to give the provincial viewpoint, even if they have to pay the fee from their own pocket.
  
  [Hamilton] Different provinces have different views: two thought the industry is too small in their province to join; another was concerned about joining because of their administrative role in licensing and the potential for conflict. However, if membership is made less formal and fees are requested simply because they are needed to keep the organization going, there would likely be more support.


• [Mayhew]  PEI sees the Canada Yew Association as an excellent place for information sharing, developing stewardship/sustainability standards, and introducing new technology and concepts. However, a government rep can only speak to what is happening on public lands. Private lands are between industry and the landowner except where it concerns the implementation of the PEI regulations. Nonetheless PEI does support the association and has no problem with a fee in order to be a member.


• [Cameron] If the CYA is to be more informal, how should membership/fees be done?
  
  [Hamilton] State that, if you generally agree in principle with the P,C&I of the Canada Yew Association, please send in a small fee to help support the costs being incurred by the organization. Keep it simple, non-binding and informal – less legal – to make it easier to join.

[R. Smith] At one time having two classes of membership – industrial and non-industrial – was suggested. Are they still needed? [E. Smith] No. Both types of members are equally interested and invested in the health of the Canada yew industry. There should be no distinction. [Kowalski] Another point: employees representing federal and provincial governments are not allowed to be directors of an outside organization. Their memberships have to be informal.

[Hamilton] What are the overall costs to keep the organization going? [Cameron] Currently, the website is $150/year, with other minor items (e.g., the voice recorder for teleconferences) adding up to another $100 or so. There is no association letterhead or stationary yet.

[Hamilton] Can we estimate how many people might be sufficiently interested to contribute to expenses? [R. Smith] There have been 10-12 participating in the meeting today. [Cameron] The mailing list currently stands at 31 people. The CYA now has a bank account to deposit any fees received. [Hamilton] The bottom line: the CYA appears to be worthwhile enough to have a modest annual fee as long the restrictions do not go against what our employers allow.

• [R. Smith] Is there general agreement that the fee should be $50 rather than $25? [By concensus, those in attendance agreed to the $50 fee.]

[R. Smith] How many voting members should each organization have, should the CYA wish to vote on a particular issue?

• [Cameron] One associated point is that a person from a US company (E. Yee with Hospira) would like to remain a member, but does not think that it is appropriate to have a vote, and would prefer to have an ex-officio status.


• [Scott] From the last meeting’s discussion, one option suggested was that there could be one vote per entity (company or government), but as many additional people as were interested could be members.


• [Melschau] Weyerhaeuser is not currently involved in Canada yew cultivation, so the company does not see a need for a vote. Should they grow Canada yew in the future this need might change, but for now it is sufficient to network with the other members, attend meetings, and be on the mailing list.


• [Scott] Details of voting rights are required for incorporation, but to accommodate having members who may not wish to vote for a variety of reasons, specifying that there can be non-voting memberships may provides a convenient alternative to not being a member at all.

[R. Smith] In summary, then, there is general support for maintaining a website, the idea of sustainable management of the resource without too much reference to the details, and posting useful information on the website if the membership agrees it is appropriate by concensus or vote. The remaining question, then, is: does the association need to be incorporated or not?

• [Hamilton] Only if you have to – keep it simple.


• [R. Smith] It is required in order to have a non-profit bank account. [Cameron] Those are bank regulations only.


• [Scott] If there is a named association, then there has to be a charter to confirm it is a non-profit entity.


• [Kowalski] The CYA should be incorporated. The by-laws can be made very simple, suitable for a small club or association. It is required in order to both have a bank account and because of the obligation on non-profit organizations to report their status once a year.


• [E. Smith] Members are in agreement, then, to incorporate but keep the process simple.

[Cameron] Action to be taken: a three-person committee to be struck (R. Smith, Kowalski, Cameron) to draft simple by-laws, to be sent out to members for approval.

• [Hamilton] Note the advantage that non-profit incorporation also allows a small contingency fund to be held without tax implications. [R. Smith] The amount can be from one-half to one year’s operating funds.

7. Activities of the CYA
 
[R. Smith] The question for discussion is: should mechanical harvesting be incorporated into the sustainable harvest guidelines?

• [Hamilton] NB-DNR is allowing mechanical harvesting on a trial basis, but should the practice become a part of the P, C&I? [Cameron] Has anyone seen the new methods of operation yet? [Hamilton] There was a brief demonstration given by one operator, and the equipment can be used effectively and still do a good job to meet the criteria. [Mayhew] Another brief demonstration on PEI yielded positive results.


• [Hamilton] DNR is currently withholding a final opinion. The operators are the key: they can try to use the device properly or they are intent on giving the plants a buzz cut.


• [Mayhew] The PEI position is similar. It is important to differentiate between wild harvesting and large mechanical harvesting on a converted site which is more like a farmed crop and so would fall outside of the sustainability guidelines and PEI regulations.


• [Scott] The method is immaterial: the harvested site must match the contents of the bag, and must be in accord with the P,C&I.


• [Mayhew] There is no interest in having two sets of standards, mechanized versus hand harvesting – enforcement would be nightmarish. [R. Smith] From the biology point-of-view it does not matter. What is important is how much is removed.


• [E. Smith] To compete globally at current prices requires 300 ppm, which means a cut of 6-8 inches of growth. The CBL-designed machine will jam up if the harvester tries to make a longer cut, which lowers his productivity, and from the company perspective, it lowers the taxane value anyway in a market where there is increasing pressure to increase the biomass quality.


• [R. Smith] We all agree that one can achieve 300 ppm by harvesting whole plants mechanically then shaking off the needles, but that is unsustainable regardless of the method.

[Cameron] How then, can the Association validate the method, and how do we wish to do it? Inspection in person or by viewing a filmed segment are two obvious alternatives. At least that way, the principles of operation could be understood. The way the information gets disseminated to the CYA should be up to the harvest contractors.

• [Scott] Do the P,C&I specify the equipment by which the biomass must be cut? [Smith] No, only the growth and biology are addressed. However, using the words “mechanical harvesting” evokes all sorts of different ideas by potential customers, the public at large and environmental groups. It makes good sense for the CYA could, with some information,  substantiate that the mechanical harvesting methods being discussed by Association members is exactly what they say it is, with documentation to prove it is sustainable.


•  [E. Smith] The first indication of mechanical biomass harvesting came from a logging company in Quebec who were using a machine they developed: a buncher with a grapple and a saw, with a compactor on the back of the machine. They were doing land clearing and wished to remove all the biomass for energy and other products, including Canada yew, from the site. In such cases the Taxus harvesting is obviously unsustainable, but the practice of clearcutting is certainly condoned in most provinces. Economically, CBL would not condone it at any rate since the fresh to dry ratio is 8:1 if only the needles are taken, which is expensive to transport and process.
  
  CBL evaluated 23 different machines and chose three for different kinds of mechanical harvesting, currently with patents pending. The whole purpose is to use mechanical harvesting to increase production and compensate for the lack of workers willing to do manual clipping. The trend will continue until elite plantations come on line. In their opinion, the price for paclitaxel will decrease but demand will continue to increase, perhaps by a factor of 3-4 times as countries like China and India become more affluent. Canada yew has a place in this place due to the amounts of biomass available, but mechanization is a necessity to get the volume, not manual clipping, since elite plantations will take awhile to appear.

[R. Smith] Are there suggestions, then, about how to document the kinds of harvesting that the CYA means when it uses the term “mechanical” that might be put on the website or used to answer questions from others?

• [Scott] If the sites look the same and if what is in the harvest bag looks the same, perhaps no one will worry about mechanical harvesting being used. The blueberry, cranberry and even the forest industry would not exist without mechanical harvesting. There is no option other than to mechanize because there is no available workforce.


• [Hamilton] DNR are moving ahead with the attitude that mechanical harvesting is an acceptable practice and they will continue to work with the harvest contractors until the method is proven not to work. The supervision of the operators, not the equipment, will likely be the problem. [Scott] The prototyping needs to be done and bugs worked out to modify the methodology first.


• [Letourneau] Can the website be used as a venue, then, to dispel misconceptions about mechanization with photos or a film clip as long as there are no trade secrets revealed? The internet could be a source of positive information and thereby good for the industry. [Scott] Such demonstrations would be likely more useful as a marketing initiative for an individual company, and the there is the question of showing a comparison between the mechanical harvesting equipment from two different companies.


• [Cameron] If competitive advantage is the issue, isn’t it likely that major contractors like CBL and ABC would both know within 3 years about the other’s equipment and technological advantages anyway, at least in a general way? The CYA does not have rush to endorse mechanical harvesting while prototype development is going on. However, by declining to do video clips, one or both companies may be losing an excellent opportunity to show people like concerned environmentalists that the sites are being sustainably harvested – a visual demonstration is much easier than inspecting a 100 ha site before and after harvesting. Video footage would not necessarily have to be done right now, and the casual inquirer would be happy to see general principles in practice at some point in the future.


• [Scott] Anyone can make a technique work for five minutes of filming. However, the best measure still is to look at the sites after four years of regrowth.


• [E. Smith] CBL has a training video on their website on hand pruning and intends to add a training, safety and maintenance video for the new machines later this year. If the CYA wishes to use any of that footage, they are welcome to do so. Most of the cuttings with this machine are 2-4 inches, with only very few at 6 or 10 inches. [Cameron] Thank you for the offer. The video or parts of it (or a link to the CBL website) will be put up on the CYA website, subject to prior approval by the CYA membership.

[R. Smith] This concludes the meeting. Would all members please send in their $50.00 to help cover some of the CYA costs – e.g., mainly the website registration and the voice recorder. [E. Smith] Do we have to vote on funding? [Cameron] No – there is no formal association to do so yet, but a receipt will be issued for any fees received.