ar_general_LTSC HANDOUT10_06_08.doc

Arapaho & Roosevelt National Forests Arapaho & Roosevelt Natinal Forests

2150 Centre Avenue, Building E

Fort Collins, CO 80526

Phone: 970-295-6600 Fax: 970-295-6696 Email: dlen@fs.fed.us

Front Range Long-term Stewardship Contract Handout Caring for the Land and Serving the People…

Key Point

Overview Executive Summary

The Arapaho, Roosevelt, Pike and San Isabel National Forests are issuing a Long-Term Stewardship Contract (LTSC). The purpose of the LTSC is to thin timber stands to historic densities in order to prevent catastrophic wildfire and improve overall forest health. The Request for Proposal will be issued in the fall of 2008 and contract award is projected for the end of March 2009. The Forests will provide a minimum of 4000 treatment acres per year for 10 years. The selected contractor might also be in a good position to enter into separate contracts with private land owners to treat adjacent land and meet the overall goal of reducing fire risk along the Front Range of Colorado.

Project Location

The Arapaho and Roosevelt National Forests, comprising of 5 counties (Boulder, Clear Creek, Gilpin, Grand and Larimer), has identified approximately 140,000 forested acres that require treatment to reduce the risks of catastrophic wildfire to area communities or to restore forests to sound ecological health.

Projects treated could occur on areas within both the Arapaho and Roosevelt National Forests (see Five Year Stewardship Contract Map on page 2). Future projects implemented in 2010 and beyond could also occur on the west side of the National Forest, Sulphur Ranger District, Grand County Colorado.

Arapaho & Roosevelt National Forest 5 Year Potential Treatment Area Map

See below the Arapaho and Roosevelt National Forests Five Year Potential Treatment Area Map. The map displays areas by year (2009 to 2013) where planning has or will be completed and possible treatments could be conducted in the upcoming five year period.

2009 Treatment Area Map

Project Maps

Note: Unit Numbers could change when Task Orders are issued

Values at Risk

In the summer of 2002, the Hayman fire, the biggest wildfire in Colorado’s recorded history, burned 140,000 acres, destroyed 133 homes and 466 outbuildings, and left parts of four counties vulnerable to flash floods and mudslides. The cost of fighting the fire and rehabilitating the burned area exceeded $80 million, excluding an estimated $160 million in indirect economic losses and long-term rehabilitation. Also in the 4 year period from 2000 to 2004 the Arapaho and Roosevelt National Forests had the largest fires in recorded history.

And yet, losses throughout the Forest could have been much greater. By chance, no major fire in the last few years has found its way into a major residential area. In the words of Rick Cables, Regional Forester of the Rocky Mountain Region, Colorado has up to this point “dodged a bullet” with regard to loss of life and property. The forest’s luck, however, will not last forever. With the memories of recent fire seasons still fresh in their minds, Front Range residents understand more than ever the need to diminish the dangers posed by fire to life and property, to restore forests’ ecological integrity, to protect the watersheds that sustain the region’s inhabitants and its agricultural lands, and to use economic incentives to drive this critical work The threat to life and property will only increase with population growth along the Front Range in the coming years. Experts have projected that the Front Range Wildland-Urban Interface (WUI) will double over the next 20 years. While it is often the desire to live close to nature that drives people to build homes next to and within the forest, this type of development complicates forest management and can negatively affect forest health. As Front Range communities grow, local leaders must consider how best to protect new development from wildfire while maintaining the ecological health of the forest.

Talking Points

· Project location: Arapaho & Roosevelt NFs - within the Front Range of Colorado

· Project Purpose: Prevent Catastrophic Wildfire; Improve Forest Health

· Project Process:

· Will utilize stewardship contracting authority

· RFP for a long-term (10-year) stewardship contract will be distributed in the fall of 2008 and is projected to be awarded by end of March 2009.

· Minimum treatment estimate: 2000 acres per year for 10 years totaling 20,000 acres for the Arapaho and Roosevelt National Forests

· 2009 treatment sites: Trout Creek, Crystal, Lone Tree, James Creek and Sugarloaf project areas

· Maximum treatment estimate: 6000 potential annual acres… funding dependent.

Key Point

Pre and Post Stand Conditions

Background Scientists agree that most of the ponderosa pine forests located in the Front Range ecological zone known as the Lower Montane are unnaturally dense and in need of fuels reduction treatment. The Lower Montane life zone is currently far outside its historical range of variability. Pre-settlement conditions in these forests showed scattered open meadows and more large, older, fire-resistant ponderosa pines, spaced fairly far apart (with approximately 40 to 50 trees per acre) and with a rich understory. However, as a result of logging, fire suppression, historic livestock grazing, and a wetter-than-average climate over the last 30 years, the forests of the Lower Montane are now extremely dense (with 200 to 400 trees per acre) and are often lacking in understory and forest openings. While frequent surface fires used to be the norm for this life zone, dense ladder fuels are now capable of carrying fire up to the canopy and causing unnaturally severe crown fires. Hazardous fuels reduction through selective thinning of mostly smaller trees can effectively reduce the occurrence of extensive crown fires and restore the historical surface fire regime.

The Arapaho and Roosevelt National Forests will be implementing projects within the lower Montane and upper Montane zones to reduce risks to communities in the Wildland-Urban Interface and apply ecological restoration treatments in both of these zones. The table below displays the acres needing hazardous fuel treatments.

Front Range Forests Requiring Treatment by County (Acres)

(private, state & federal)

Advantages to Healthy Stand

Healthy stands within a forest provide a range of benefits and advantages when compared to overstocked and declining stands. Managing forests and thinning fuel loads can reduce the risk of catastrophic wildfire. There are different types of treatments, ranging from the removal of ladder fuels, to decreasing the number of live trees per acre; each providing a different level and type of fuels treatment or ecological restoration.

In addition, managed forests are known to produce high quality water. In the dry Front Range of Colorado, forests play an especially crucial role in providing life sustaining water to nearly four million people. Fuels reductions treatments can protect watersheds by mitigating the potential for post-fire flooding. While studies show the impact of thinning Ponderosa pines on water yield as low, the potential does exist to enhance water yields by thinning additional species at different elevations. Dependant on species, elevation and treatment type; at times thinning can improve, usually slightly, water yield by reducing the number of stems per acre. A stand that has been actively managed and treated to provide for healthy ecosystem conditions across National Forests will help maintain and improve habitat for both terrestrial and aquatic wildlife and fish. In particular, management targeting healthy forest conditions should ensure the viability and conservation of threatened and endangered (T&E) species and help prevent the addition of sensitive and at-risk species to the list of T&E species.

Mountain Pine Beetle Mountain pine beetle infestations are at epidemic scales, killing entire hillsides of lodgepole pine. The epidemic’s core area is the Arapaho, White River and Medicine Bow-Routt, National Forests and adjacent forested lands. This beetle also affects other pine species such as limber pine and ponderosa pine in other areas. However, so far the majority of the trees affected currently in this epidemic are lodgepole pine trees.

Triggered by drought, the current epidemic began in 1997. Bark beetle populations grew dramatically across a landscape of mature, dense, homogenous lodgepole pine. The Long-term drought has weakened tree resistance. Multiple warm winters have helped beetles survive and multiply. The vast tracts of mature lodgepole pine forests are more prone to beetle kill than more vigorous younger forests.

The aerial survey results for northern Colorado reveal that there was about 500,000 new acres infested in 2007; these are acres that had not previously been affected by the bark beetle epidemic. This catastrophic event has affected more than 1.5 million acres from the first signs of outbreak in 1997.

Mountain Pine Beetle Impacted Acres

These numbers are based on the total number of acres in the county were beetle activity was recorded for 2007 and the difference with 2006. It does not reflect cumulative acres nor does it indicate how many acres are on new acres vs how many acres overlap between years.

Hazardous Fuels Planning

Thinning of the small diameter trees will improve the torching index (the wind speed that will be required to cause a ground fire to torch trees in the stand). Thinning dominant and co-dominate trees will improve the crowning index (the wind speed that will be required to sustain a crown fire). These indices are useful for several purposes in fuels reduction project planning. These include the ability to identify the areas of greatest concern for possible treatment and their relationship to other areas of concern. The maps give us the ability to compare analysis areas such as watersheds to determine which are the highest priorities for treatment. These maps are also quite useful in communicating to the public about the condition of areas they may live near or have concerns about.

BEFORE

AFTER

Results of Roundtable Analysis: Front Range Forests Requiring Forest Treatment

Sample Task Order Summary Data

James Creek - Mechanical

Manual

1,029

1,521

1,934

Volume and Cruise Information is an estimate and not to be construed as a guarantee or limitation of the timber volumes to designated cutting.

Key Point

Partnership Opportunities Sources of Sub-Contractors

· The Fedbizopps website - where the solicitation is posted electronically - has an Interested Vendors List. To view the list: 1) go to www.fedbizopps.gov, 2) type the solicitation number (AG-82X9-S-08-0120) in the Quick Search Box, 3) click on Front Range Long Term Stewardship Contract, and 4) click on Interested Vendors List.

· To register as an interested vendor: 1) go to www.fedbizopps.gov, 2) type the solicitation number (AG-82X9-S-08-0120) in the Quick Search Box, 3) click on Front Range Long Term Stewardship Contract, 4) click on Add Me to Interested Vendors 5) click on register now, 6) you will be asked to provide information about your company and will create a username and password, 7) You will receive a separate email instructing you how to verify your username and password, 8) once verification is complete, repeat steps 1 thru 4, and 9) enter username and password and follow the prompts.

Federal and State Collaboration Front Range Fuels Treatment Partnership (FRFTP) Colorado’s Front Range Fuels Treatment Partnership (FRFTP) was created following the record fire season of 2002. Made up of representatives from the Pike & San Isabel National Forests, Arapaho & Roosevelt National Forests, Colorado State Forest Service (CSFS), Rocky Mountain Research Station (RMRS), and Rocky Mountain National Park, the interagency Partnership’s goals are to reduce wildland fire risks through fuels treatment projects that are economically feasible, socially acceptable, and ecologically sustainable; to protect communities from wildland fires; and to restore fire-adapted ecosystems.

In 2004, the Partnership cooperated with the other groups to broaden its capacity and expertise with the creation of a “roundtable” comprised of representatives from state and federal agencies, local governments, environmental conservation organizations, academic and scientific communities, and industry and user groups. The FRFTP Roundtable developed of a long-term vision and roadmap for achieving comprehensive forest restoration and fire risk mitigation goals within Front Range forests and to engage local communities in the effort. Building on the work of the FRFTP, the Roundtable pulled together leading local experts to examine ecological and fire risk mitigation needs, economic constraints, and policy issues that must be addressed to reduce fire risk and restore Front Range forests to good health.

Wood Utilization The utilization of biomass is critical to the success of this project. A variety of wood utilization facilities currently take wood from the Arapaho and Roosevelt National Forests. The largest timber purchaser is Inter-Mountain Resources located in Montrose, Colorado. The other timber purchaser is Bighorn Lumber in Laramie, Wyoming. Morgan Timber Products has been awarded and implemented 2 stewardship contracts. Material from these stewardship conracts was processed by either Morgan (post, poles and fencing boards) or Renewable Fiber (animal bedding or compost).

The other wood processing facilities that are new to the area are Confluence Energy in Kremmling, Colorado and Rocky Mountain Pellet Company in Walden, Colorado. Both of these facilities produce wood pellets. The plants are relatively new and have not used any significant amount of wood from the Arapaho and Roosevelt National Forests but could in the future.

The recent “Jefferson County Biomass Facility Feasibility Study” supported the use and viability of forest supported biomass energy in the Front Range of Colorado. In addition, the Governor’s Office is supportive of such endeavors. Initial biomass infrastructure needs in the rural areas surrounding the project site (e.g., boiler, mill, pellet plant) would require start-up funds. The receipts from the treatment could provide steady source supply to the facility once operational. The proximity of these towns to the forest is within a viable transport range for processing and use. Denver and surrounding municipalities are all within a relatively close proximity to the site. Depending on the location of a facility proposed by the Jefferson County group, it too might be able to serve as a viable outlet for materials.

Your Notes…

Your Notes Stand Conditions

Partnership Opportunities

Overview

� http://www.state.co.us/oemc/biomass/reports/Jeffco%20Biomass%20Final%20Report_01-21-05.pdf