Plenary Session, October 19th

The Forestry/Bioenergy/Carbon Connection

Jay O'Laughlin — Wed, 19 Oct 2011 00:00:00 PDT

The increase in western wildfires over recent decades past can be attributed to accumulations of fuels and climate change that dries fuels and extends fire seasons. Silvicultural designed to reduce fuels while restoring other desirable conditions and providing a range of ecosystem services is an effective strategy for mitigating climate change. Fuel reduction treatments at a scale large enough to modify wildfire behavior will produce not only substantial quantities of wood to make consumer products and substitute for fossil energy but also additions to the workforce that will help revitalize rural economies. Forests also play a key role in the global carbon cycle by capturing, storing, and cycling carbon, functions that can be enhanced by active management. In addition to federal energy policy ambiguity (discussed earlier in “Towards a Cohesive Federal Policy for Wood Bionergy”) regulatory uncertainty for biomass energy production arises from the “carbon neutrality” debate about accounting for “biogenic” greenhouse gas emissions. A narrow focus on Clean Air Act implementation may overlook the carbon balance effect of sustainable forest management. Biomass utilization faces two economic challenges; neither is insurmountable. First, high costs of harvesting and transporting low-value biomass can be reduced with public subsidies. Benefits from avoided costs of wildfire suppression and site rehabilitation may exceed fuel treatment costs and create a rationale for subsidies. A policy choice is whether the subsidy should be merchantable timber, cash payments, or tax credits. The second challenge is long-term supply. Unless entrepreneurs can demonstrate reliable biomass supplies for 10 or 20 years, private capital is unlikely. On federal lands biomass supply planning is problematic, as are long-term contract mechanisms. Changes in agency policies could improve both problems. Large-scale restoration treatments in the short term provide a “triple win”: improved forest conditions, renewable energy feedstocks, and revitalized rural communities. The reduction of carbon emissions from burning wood in a boiler to make energy instead of open burning, whether in wildfires or slash piles, is a bonus. The long-term payoff from large-scale restoration treatments will be enhanced energy security, along with other benefits to society that ought to be mentioned in the same breath as treatment cost

The Need for PJ Restoration in Eastern Nevada

Jeremy Drew — Wed, 19 Oct 2011 00:00:00 PDT

The purpose of a PJ Demonstration Area was to designate a location where funding, agency operations, professional expertise, and private-public partnerships could focus on restoring ecosystem health and resilience of sagebrush and pinyon-juniper (PJ) woodland ecosystems by actively treating pinyon and juniper. RCI was tasked with identifying at least one landscape-level demonstration area within the State of Nevada for the Nevada Pinyon-Juniper Partnership. That Area was designated in eastern Nevada along the Utah border.

To do so, RCI developed mapping of statewide PJ distributions1 and found that there are approximately 9.16 million acres of PJ dominated vegetation in Nevada. In order to determine which of those areas would be suitable for a demonstration area, RCI developed a set of priorities that included:

1. Identification of areas with an ecological need for treatment of PJ to achieve multiple resource values. 2. Identification of areas that were ready for action from a land-management agency standpoint. 3. Identify areas that maximize the potential for multiple positive resource outcomes as a result of restoration treatment of pinyon and juniper. 4. Identify areas that maximized the potential for partnership between Federal and State agencies as well as non-governmental and private organizations. 5. Identify areas that may present an opportunity for utilization of PJ biomass dictated by and generated from restoration treatments.

RCI solicited input from the two major federal land management agencies within the state: the Forest Service and the Bureau of Land Management (BLM). RCI requested each BLM District Office identify PJ restoration areas and identify the restoration objectives for each area. All six Nevada BLM Districts provided input. The Ely District was the only BLM District with significant PJ distributions that had a comprehensive district-wide RMP in place that included the need for restoration of PJ treatment for a variety of resource values. As a result, the Ely District showed the highest potential for planning PJ restoration projects across the largest area.

The State Office of the Forest Service provided a list of potential PJ projects for the entire Humboldt-Toiyabe Forest scheduled for the next five years2. RCI mapped the projects slated for mechanical treatments, as they tend to be the most expensive and offer to greatest opportunity for cost sharing and private-public partnerships. The Ely Ranger District had by far the most PJ projects slated for planning and implementation over the next five years. The Ely Ranger District also indicated that it was already working with the Ely BLM District to implement joint PJ projects in the Ward Mountain Area. This provided a prime opportunity for both major federal land management agencies to implement projects across the same landscape areas.

RCI collected data from the Nevada Department of Wildlife (NDOW) and the Nevada Division of Forestry (NDF). This included:

• The 2004 Greater Sage-Grouse Conservation Plan for Nevada and Eastern California (Sage-grouse Plan) • The 2006 Nevada Wildlife Action Plan (WAP), and • The 2010 the Nevada Division of Forestry (NDF) State Natural Resource Assessment and the State Natural Resource Strategy

Many of the high priority treatment areas identified in these reports, specifically in regards to PJ restoration, fell within the eastern portion of Nevada.

In collecting the available data and inputs from key federal and state agencies, it became clear that there are many areas throughout Nevada in need of restoration treatment of PJ. However, based on the criteria of identifying a large landscape-scale area that is ready for action from an agency-planning standpoint the Ely BLM District and Ely Ranger District proved to be the most advanced opportunity.

1. Data Sources for Mapping included: Southwest Re-GAP Landcover Data, 2004 and California GAP Landcover Data, 1998 2. Humboldt-Toiyabe Forest 5-year Integrated Vegetation Management Plan

What Works for Biomass Harvesting in Pinyon Juniper

Lance Lindbloom — Wed, 19 Oct 2011 00:00:00 PDT

Eastern Redcedar which covers millions of acres in the mid section of the continental US, shares common management, harvesting and utilization challenges as the Utah Juniper. Southern Utah Biomass, a loosely knit organization of private individuals and government personnel has come together to promote development of harvesting and utilization of Pinyon and Juniper. In the last 12 months, two field days have been hosted in Southern Utah. Over $4.5 million in equipment has been brought out to demonstrate and exhibit. People from 18 states, Washington DC, Canada and China have attended these field days.

A direct result that attention from the first field day brought has been the ongoing equipment trials summer of 2011. Dr. Bob Rummer an equipment researcher with the Forest Service initiated a grant proposal that was funded to run in the field trials on Pinyon/Juniper harvesting. Equipment from Canada, Ohio, Oregon, Kansas and Utah have participated in the just completed equipment trials which were funded by a grant received by the Forest Service.

Traditional equipment for harvesting and utilizing is geared to much larger, higher volume stands of forest. Junipers are notorious for their uncharacteristically bushy formation. Pinyons, although a pine, are much smaller and higher branch to stem ratio. Equipment that has been used has either been modified from large timber equipment or equipment that was used for private small scale acreage type harvesting. Currently, there is strong interest in not only the utilization of Pinyon/Juniper but as seen by the two field days and equipment trials, equipment harvesting companies are making the effort to research and develop equipment specifically designed for these type trees. There is a strong interest bringing both individuals and corporations to Utah to be involved.

Collaboration Successes Around the West and Why Collaboration is Important

Mary Mitsos — Wed, 19 Oct 2011 00:00:00 PDT

The use of collaboration as a tool to achieve lasting results has exploded across the country. Nowhere is this more apparent than in the West, especially in regards to public land management issues. This presentation will focus on the roots of collaboration, the importance to public land management and forestry in particular, why it is important and what lessons have been learned.