[kjkjadksj]

Seems like the manufacturing centers need to be sited on rivers with rights to pull from and with access to sufficient available power, and a way to distribute this product. Are all forests in such condition? Probably not. I've seen some of these forests, they are often in the middle of nowhere connected by dirt roads built by the logging companies. This is marginal land, sometimes leased by the US forest service. Prime land near rivers and power sources isn't going to be squandered when you can get a permit to farm on marginal land or buy it for cheap if its a private holding, just like how you don't see grazing near feedlots. Grazing needs more land, can be done on marginal land, and you can just ship cattle to feedlots elsewhere near meatpacking plants. As a result we graze cattle in places where you sometimes can't even drag a plow, and have feedlots near chicago where cattle can be processed in vast quantity and then distributed.

I will agree that monoculture is no good and neither is taking over virgin forest, but this isn't exactly the only industry on this planet that behaves like this either. Rather than trade paper for plastic we can instead consider how we protect virgin areas from any sort of development. Monoculture is also a risk for industry in the form of crop loss from disease, so I wouldn't be surprised if this begins to change in the future and we see more polycultures farmed, not just in trees either. So if there is a plastic ban favoring domestic paper products instead, as well as sufficient protections in place for existing virgin forest, you can probably expect the value of a tree farm to go up to the point where people who might be using their land for one thing being more inclined to farm trees on this land.