They also are important partners in facilitating forest management. Withoutthis harvesting and processing infrastructure to add value to woody materialsremoved from the forest, it may not be cost-effective to conduct some foresttreatments needed to improve forest ecosystem health, protect homes andinfrastructure, and maintain the aesthetic and recreational resources of theforest.Although millions of acres of forest exist in <strong>Colorado</strong>, only a small portionis harvested each year. As a result, the state’s forest industry comprisesonly a minor portion of <strong>Colorado</strong>’s gross domestic product, and existinginfrastructure for processing wood products has been reduced by close tohalf since 1980 (CSFS 2007). A 2001 study by <strong>Colorado</strong> State University andthe USFS found that <strong>Colorado</strong> uses more than $4 billion in wood productseach year, yet only 8 percent of these products are from <strong>Colorado</strong>’s forests(Lynch and Mackes 2001). 40 The remaining 92 percent is imported from otherstates, Canada and Mexico. New ways to use harvested wood, especiallysmall-diameter trees, are needed. According to the CSFS, much of the state’sdemand for wood products could be met by small-diameter timber and otherwoody material produced by forest restoration projects. This could include:$62 million in roundwood for fencing, utility poles, etc.; $32 million in woodenergy such as fi rewood and wood pellets; $14 million in mulch, chips andsawdust; and $1.6 million in Christmas trees. 41<strong>Colorado</strong> uses extensive amounts of wood products annually, but it dependson imports from other states and countries to meet its needs. As a result,signifi cant amounts of money from <strong>Colorado</strong>’s economy are transferredelsewhere to purchase and transport wood. Despite the presence of abundantforests capable of providing many types of wood products and seriousconcerns about forest health and catastrophic fi res, <strong>Colorado</strong> continues toimport more than 90 percent of the wood it uses. In many cases, the woodbeing used is transported great distances from forests that are similar incomposition to <strong>Colorado</strong>’s forests and even less capable of producing woodfi ber. Thus excellent opportunities exist for using trees from <strong>Colorado</strong> forests.In particular, small-diameter trees removed to improve forest health andreduce fi re hazard could be utilized for some products. Additionally, policyand management questions related to <strong>Colorado</strong>’s use of imported woodshould be addressed (Lynch/Mackes 2001 42 ).Analysis: <strong>Forest</strong> management can contribute to a sustainable wood productsindustry by providing local contractors and businesses with job opportunitiesand materials for processing. The wood products industry, in turn, canfacilitate the accomplishment of forest management objectives by supplyinghuman resources to do the work and, often, by reducing the cost of neededtreatments. To identify those forested lands most suited to managementfor timber, biomass and other wood products, the CSFS recommendedhighlighting available acres by developing an analysis screen that removesdesignated wilderness areas, designated roadless areas, national parks andmonuments and lands with a slope greater than 50 percent.40This study did not include woody biomass used for bioheating and renewable energy.41Please see the <strong>Colorado</strong> <strong>Forest</strong> Products website at http://csfs.colostate.edu/cowood/cfp.html.42Wood Use at the Turn of the Twenty-First Century, Lynch and Mackes, 2001 is available at http://www.fs.fed.us/rm/pubs/rmrs_rp32.pdf.52
The application of this screen reveals that 15.9 million acres are available formanagement of wood products, including biomass. The majority of theseacres are in piñon-juniper, aspen and ponderosa pine. Private landownerscontrol the majority of these acres (6.7 million), followed by the USFS (4.8million) and the BLM (3.2 million).This map data is coarse and represents a broad view of acres available formanagement. The CSFS is working to complete a refi ned biomass availabilitymap that will show the ranking of the relative potential of lands to producebiomass for uses ranging from sources of heat to solid wood products. Themap should be available by July 2010.Map 22 – Acres Available for Management of Wood Products and Biomass53
- Page 1 and 2:
Colorado Statewide ForestResource A
- Page 3:
Table of ContentsI. Executive Summa
- Page 6 and 7: II.BackgroundThe Colorado Statewide
- Page 8 and 9: National Guidance for Statewide For
- Page 10 and 11: III. Overview of Colorado’s Fores
- Page 12 and 13: Spruce-Fir 9Spruce-fi r is among th
- Page 14 and 15: Mixed Conifer 14The mixed conifer f
- Page 16 and 17: Oak ShrublandsOak shrublands cover
- Page 18 and 19: Windbreaks, shelterbelts and their
- Page 20 and 21: Owner Spruce-Fir Lodgepole Aspen Mi
- Page 22 and 23: forest management costs per acre ha
- Page 24 and 25: include standard ownership data and
- Page 26 and 27: The second metric is an estimate of
- Page 28 and 29: Map 4 - Colorado Forest Legacy Area
- Page 30 and 31: NATIONAL THEME: Protect Forests fro
- Page 32 and 33: Map 7 - Wildland Fire Susceptibilit
- Page 34 and 35: Map 8 - Wildland Fire Intensity Ind
- Page 36 and 37: ot (CSFS 2001 and 2002). Some insec
- Page 38 and 39: Map 10 - Insect and Disease Mitigat
- Page 40 and 41: is legally mandated, as well as dal
- Page 42 and 43: change, including species extinctio
- Page 44 and 45: transport of materi als that can ad
- Page 46 and 47: Map 15 - Post-Fire Erosion RiskMap
- Page 48 and 49: environment, many homes and other s
- Page 50 and 51: Owner 0.5 mile 1 mile 2 mile TotalU
- Page 52 and 53: Map 18 - Wildland-Urban Interface w
- Page 54 and 55: Map 20 - Wildland-Urban Interface w
- Page 58 and 59: Forest TypeAcres for Wood Products
- Page 60 and 61: of fragmentation to help forest man
- Page 62 and 63: Forest Type Low Moderate High Very
- Page 64 and 65: Map 25 - Important Habitat for Econ
- Page 66 and 67: ACRESImp. Habitat for Econ.Imp. Spe
- Page 68 and 69: Forest Type Low Moderate High Very
- Page 70 and 71: Map 28 - Community Forestry Opportu
- Page 72 and 73: Enhance Public Benefits from Trees
- Page 78 and 79: VI. ReferencesAlexander, K. [Intern
- Page 80 and 81: Neely, B., Comer, P., Moritz, C., L
- Page 82 and 83: VII. Statewide Assessment Steering
- Page 84 and 85: APPENDIX A - Colorado Statewide For
- Page 86 and 87: • Identify and conserve high prio
- Page 88 and 89: assessments and resource strategies
- Page 90 and 91: National Theme: Protect Forests fro
- Page 92 and 93: Protect, conserve, and enhance wild
- Page 94: States are encouraged to draw from