The New Mexico Sustainable Forestry Business Plan powerfully aligns the work of agencies and existing institutions with the needs, opportunities, and knowledge of local communities. Together, our team brings decades of experience in forestry and timber management, large-scale finance and industrial development, conservation science and coalition building. The following is the framework for an action plan — a living document for advancing the critical conversations required to succeed.
What is the objective?
The objective of the New Mexico Initiative is to co-create and implement an effective strategy for reviving and sustaining our burned or overly dense unburned forest in a manner that serves long-term forest and watershed health, reduces wildfire threats, and improves the economic well-being of local and Indigenous communities
What is the challenge?
Within 18 to 24 months of the massive 2022 Hermits Peak and Calf Canyon wildfires, up to $100 million in the commercial value of sawlogs will be lost just from private lands if we don’t act fast, in addition to the small diameter biomass that will decay even more quickly. The challenge is to orchestrate a new level of coordination across businesses and governments to scale up effective harvesting, logistics, and processing of forest material into valuable products.
At the same time, vast stretches of our overly dense green forests are in danger of burning, and the burned areas themselves can re-burn. Thus, there is an intense need for a regional forest thinning and restoration plan to build forest and watershed recovery capacity. This will aid New Mexico and serve as a model for forest and community revitalization across the nation. In addition to an economic and ecological issue, this is a social justice issue.
What is the opportunity?
The income from multiple value streams can pay for the clearing of dead timber and the thinning of green wood, which, in turn, helps pay for forest and watershed restoration. This has immense importance in allowing local people access to their forests for firewood cutting, grazing, hunting, and many other traditional uses. Local communities and state and federal agencies can realize huge returns if we dive in and collectively embrace new solutions.
What is the next step?
Continuing the process of building a “Community Forest-to-Market Action Plan” (from January 1 to April 30) for scaling up harvesting, logistics, and processing of forest biomass as the basis for private and public sector investment in a sustainable forest recovery process. Funding is needed to resource OTNA and the SDCMI to facilitate the plan’s completion (we have raised $50,000 of the $275,000 total).
What will this Plan clarify?
What elements of a complete forest-to-market strategy add up to a viable short-term surge and a long-lasting approach to forest, watershed, and community recovery and renewal?
What governance and public engagement strategies are most effective for sustaining forest thinning and other landscape and watershed recovery strategies?
How can these strategies be integrated into a durable, holistic solution that positively influences other parts of rural economies or cultures?
How can this forest-to-market plan be sustainably funded?
What must inform our collective thinking?
Landscape and fine-resolution forest and watershed data with GIS support.
Knowledge of forest and watershed ecology.
Knowledge of land tenure and cultural values and beliefs.
Knowledge of existing conservation and rural development programs and their needs, opportunities, and challenges.
Knowledge of existing forest products activities, opportunities, and challenges.
Knowledge of state and federal legal and institutional frameworks and the associated opportunities and constraints.
Knowledge and application of collaborative conservation and rural development principles and practices.
Knowledge of economic opportunities and constraints (e.g., supply chains, transportation, housing, workforce, etc.)
Knowledge of existing and potential state and federal support programs and institutional structures.
Knowledge of new technologies and opportunities to bring in multiple income streams and additional support for forestry, conservation, and economic development actions.
Identify and learn from existing initiatives and resources, so we are not reinventing the wheel.
What are the components of the Action Plan?
Optimal harvesting-to-processing plan for multiple value streams
Stakeholder roles and participation plan (who is doing what)
Transportation and logistics plan
Community and local culture engagement plan
Alignment with environmental groups and industry
Equipment plan
Project management plan
Preliminary framing of a landscape and watershed recovery plan
Month-by-month expenses and revenues of plan implementation
What benefits can accrue to landowners, the forestry industry, and the region that are only possible with an integrated approach?
Blended funding from public and private investment
New markets for saw logs and other marketable timber
Increased harvesting capacity
Intelligent infrastructure and transportation logistics
Value streams for non-merchantable timber and biomass
Investment capital for all stages of the value chain
Blockchain, carbon markets, and other alternative valuation methods
Long-term ecological health and resilience through coordinated strategies
Coordinated leveraging of resources for equitable distribution of benefits
What principles does this project stand on?
We promise to support economically viable forests, watersheds, and community health in alignment with local and Indigenous values and ecological and watershed science.
We will operate with humility and integrity to serve the long-term interests of the land and those who rely on it for their lifeways and traditions.
We will engage with all relevant community members within an open and transparent process that seeks common ground and mutual benefit.
We progress with an understanding that collaboration and coordination to contribute to the common good are more productive than the competition for individual gain.
We will operate in recognition and support of differing values and viewpoints.
We commit to acting in the near term in a way that serves long-term sustainability.
We empower local and Indigenous peoples, businesses, landowners, agencies, NGOs, and local, state, and national governments to work as a team with the entire system in mind.
What does this new level of community collaboration require of all of us?
Following established principles of collaboration and co-creation to build and sustain trust within a transparent, open, and equitable decision-making process.
Apply a fuller set of measures of effectiveness that create “profits” for business and the community beyond purely economic measures.
Information and knowledge sharing with transparency in all our actions.
Equitable support for internal and external engagement in the process.
Emphasize our collective intelligence.
We will employ a transboundary approach, sharing opportunities across multiple institutional, jurisdictional, and landscape or watershed boundaries.
Sharing opportunities across multiple businesses.
Respect and support for multiple values and belief systems.
Effective collaboration between the public and private sectors.
Individuals stepping up to contribute time and knowledge.
Being attentive to circles of competence, staying within boundaries, and seeking additional support when needed.
Funding the whole community, not just individual home, land, and business owners.
Personal growth is facilitated by letting go of assumptions we may have relied on previously.
What specific questions will the Action Plan ask and answer?
What are the value streams that we want to advance?
Cants
Lumber
Wood Pellets
Wood Chips
Animal bedding/shavings
Compost
Firewood
Vigas
Specialty Wood Products
Flooring
Furniture
Fence posts
Treated Posts
Latillas (Wood stays)
OSB and other stranded material
Oriented strand board
Wood wool cement
Carbon fiber-reinforced plastics
Wood mass to biochar
Wood mass to energy
Secondary processing
Recreation
Ecosystem services
Agriculture
Grazing
Water supply
Fire mitigation
Carbon credits
Federal and state funding
Who currently provides forestry and forest products services in the local region and what is their capacity?
Landowners
Watershed Associations
Land Grants
Local and Indigenous Peoples
State and Federal Agencies
Landscape Conservation Collaboratives
Trucking and Transportation
Forestry Industry
Environmental and Economic Development Entities.
Loggers
Mills/processors
Consultants/Experts
Farmers and Ranchers
Who wants to participate in these efforts to revive our forested landscapes?
What new capital, wood supply, markets, labor, or anything else do these entities need to reach their capacity?
What is the need, capacity, and approach for harvesting burnt timber?
What amount of harvestable and merchantable burned timber is in the privately-owned forests in Colfax, Mora, and San Miguel counties?
How do we integrate with state and federal lands?
How long do we have before burned wood has to be removed and used as timber?
How long do we have before burned wood has to be removed and used as biomass?
What amount of harvesting activity do these volumes require monthly and yearly from now on?
How do we do this work to the benefit of Indigenous interests or values?
How do we do this work in support of existing landscape, watershed, and economic development entities?
What is the need, capacity, and approach for harvesting unburnt timber?
What amount of harvestable and merchantable unburnt timber is in the privately-owned forests in Colfax, Mora, and San Miguel counties?
How do we integrate with state and federal lands?
What are the markets for unburnt saw logs?
What are the markets for unburnt small-diameter wood?
What are the ecosystem services and other monetizable benefits?
What amount of harvesting activity will these volumes require monthly and yearly in the future?
How do we do this work to the benefit of the community and indigenous interests and values?
What are the significant barriers and opportunities associated with developing supply chains related to existing conventional forestry practices (e.g., firewood, flooring, timber, vigas, etc.)?
What other value streams can be nurtured to encompass a complete forest treatment-to-market approach, including new uses of biomass for energy and construction materials?
What are the significant barriers and opportunities associated with developing supply chains related to biomass energy, biochar, building materials, carbon markets, electricity, and other non-traditional uses of forest products?
What new investments in existing or new technologies can be deployed in the region in the short- and long term?
What forest materials need additional capacity to be met outside the region?
Where can that capacity be filled?
What logistics are needed to move the various biomass elements from the forest to the market?
What new logistics solutions are needed for this long-distance transportation?
What new capital is needed to support both local and long-distance logistics?
What are the societal implications of forest, watershed, and community degradation that must be integrated into the commercial solution?
Therefore, what financial and logistical support is sensible to be funded by the state of New Mexico and the federal government?
Through what public-private partnership can the completion and implementation of the Action Plan be supported?
What governance and commercial innovations are needed to sustain this collaboration?
How do we best integrate local and Indigenous values into our process?
How can relations with and between local, state, and federal governments be improved?
What new governance arrangements need to be undertaken to create these improvements?
What corporate or coop structures are needed to reflect holistic, collaborative frameworks?
How do we fund whole communities and not just individuals, businesses, homes, and landowners?
How do the financial elements of this forest-to-market solution add up to an economically viable and environmentally-sound approach for everyone involved?
What are the needs and opportunities for investors in this Forest and Community Action Plan?
Who are the investors that want to make these investments?
The Action Plan specifics are cataloged in Sections A and B:
Section A: We have established dialogue agendas for all relevant stakeholder groups, including business, public sector, academic, environmental, and community leaders. We have organized and informed 408 individuals to date.
Section B: When asked and answered, what questions provide the “Foundational Assessments” for a whole systems design?
Section A: Specific stakeholder groups include:
Federal government
New Mexico federal delegation
New Mexico state government
Local government/chambers
New Mexico state forestry
New Mexico’s economic development
Land Grants
New Mexico tribal leadership
Environmental organizations
Landscape conservation collaboratives
Water stakeholders
Forestry industry
Mills and Forest Products
Loggers
Trucking
Academia
Citizens
Community leaders
Investors/lenders
Foundations
Landowners
Local non-forestry businesses
Media
Outside NM technology developers
Scientific and research organizations
What questions will we ask individuals within each stakeholder group?
For Local and Indigenous peoples
How does forest and watershed renewal align with your values and lifeways?
What opportunities or threats do you see to your values and lifeways from our approach or the status quo?
How can newer, more efficient, diversified approaches to forestry further your values or interests?
How do threats from previous or potential wildfires impact your culture and lifeways?
What opportunities, threats, or disadvantages do you see from a regional forestry strategy
What key questions have we missed?
For landowners
What are the questions we want to answer by April 30th
Forest management
What are the primary land stewardship issues landowners face?
What quality of life goals do we want front and center in a regional
forest-to-market approachWhat environmental concerns do we want to address in a regional
forest-to-market approach?
What assistance is needed for relating to the state and federal government more effectively?
What are the issues in accessing state and federal funds?
What are the management plan challenges?
What are the issues in assessing loss?
What are the issues in implementing fire recovery approaches?
How can we relate most productively with The Enchanted Circle and other
landscape cooperatives?
What is the status of each landowner’s forest management plan?
What is the total forestry harvesting volume needed to be done annually?
How much new labor is needed?
What are the opportunities to manage shared equipment?
Burn wagons
Firewood processing gear, Los Alamos
Trucks
- What are the opportunities to establish collective forest treatment contracts?
- Which log roads need maintenance?
- How do we better integrate stewardship of public and private lands?
- Let’s connect with the New Mexico State Lands Office
How can smaller landowners participate in this Action Plan?
How do we integrate federal recovery funding granted to individual landowners into a coherent strategy?
Market development
What challenges identifying contractors need to be addressed?
Bonding and legitimacy of payroll protocols render many small contractors ineligible for government funding
What challenges identifying markets for what materials need to be addressed?Which forest material has proven to be easier to find contractors?
What issues with contractors need to be addressed?
What issues with processors need to be addressed?
What types and volumes of material needs new local processing capacity?
Which forest material needs a costs-for-services agreement?
What innovations in wood-to-energy, wood-to-biochar, and wood-to-new products should be further evaluated?
Where should new milling capacity be established?
What are the implications/limitations of weather on the location choice?
Jonathan Grassmick suggested the benefit of a new mill in Eagles Nest, but agreed that Cimarron location is great, or Wagon Mound
What are the implications of elevation and grade direction to the location choice?
What are the implications of road network on the locations choice?
What entity and organizational structure best supports this overall forest-to-market system?
What involvement of the large landowners should be considered?
Volume guarantees
Investment in facilities and infrastructure
Short-term advances against costs reimbursed by product supply
What concerns for privacy, confidentiality, and appropriate treatment of information need to be addressed within a collaborative planning process?
What education for landowners is needed?
How can we establish a fair and impartial process for timber valuation?
What elements would comprise a productive and fair regional forest material “exchange”?
Fire prevention and mitigation
How can prescribed fire be used productively and safely as a management strategy?
How is fear of fire handicapping our effectiveness?
How can we improve the process for obtaining burn and smoke permits?
How can we coordinate a regional fire management strategy?
How does each landowners priorities fit into the larger landscape approach?
How do we utilize geospatial information for guiding the location of fuel breaks and related strategies?
What are the optimal uses of fuel breaks within the overall forest management strategy?
What are the factors that need to be incorporated into a fuel breaks strategy?
Where are the prevailing winds?
What is the optimal scale of prescribed burns?
Where are the optimal locations to focus forest thinning activities?
What are the associated costs at various scales?
Burnt forest issues
What has to happen for soil and erosion control?
What can be done with the forest slash safely and viably?
What are the uses for burnt forest material?
What is needed to restore the roads?
What is needed to restore the acequias?
What is needed to restore the fences?
What is needed to restore the water system?
What are the trespass issues that need to be addressed?
ATV
Poaching for game
Taking firewood
Partying
Vandalism
What are the infrastructure elements of a forest-to-market system?
Harvesting services
Harvesting equipment
Trucking
Wood sorting yards
Mill and processing capacity
Capitalization
Questions for individual landowners
Is the high density of burned or unburned trees a severe challenge on your lands?
What concerns do you have about how adjacent forests to your lands are being managed?
What harvesting activity are you doing now, and how?
What is your on-staff and available contracting capacity for forest harvesting?
How many acres would you treat if a viable approach were developed within this comprehensive forest-to-market strategy?
In what timeframe do you want to have this acreage treated?
How do you want to participate in the Action Plan development?
How do you want to participate in the Action Plan implementation?
What is your individual political influence and what can we activate as a group?
Will you engage with SDCMI to make the case for this Action Plan with decision makers?
Will you contribute financially to this effort?
Will you agree to this participation agreement?
I promise to respond to the SDCMI emails or phone messages within 48 hours,or sooner when time is of the essence.
I promise to invest up to 1-2 hours a week when asked reading and writing so that my input is effectively contributed to this effort?
What else needs to be investigated?
Wood-fired boiler systems unused in:
Ft. Baird, outside of Silver City
Santa Fe Community College
The Jamez Schools
For state and federal forestry staff
How do we best build upon and augment the legacy of collaborative landscape-scale forestry already underway?
Specifically, which programs do you suggest building on, and what models do you suggest we emulate both in terms of local initiatives and national programs?
What pitfalls should be avoided – what has worked and what has not?
How are private lands best integrated into these state and federal planning efforts?
How can progress on private lands assist the overall forest management and stewardship goals?
How can the USFS and NMFD assist in the stewardship of private lands?
How can we better synthesis public and private land stewardship?
What barriers to progress in New Mexico’s forests and forest industry need to be addressed?
How can we better inform contractors of emergency harvesting activities to retain commercial value and maximize ecological or social benefits?
What can we learn from the experience of the recent fire mitigation and recovery efforts going forward?
How can the NM Forestry Division and the U.S. Forest Service improve their collaboration toward shared goals?
What role do we want to consider the SDCMI having in the “wood products industry” line of effort or related lines of effort?
How does the wood products industry line and related lines tie into the Forest Service Planning Rule 2012 or other collaborative or ecosystem planning efforts?
How do we most productively synch with other lines of effort?
Is Planning Rule 2012 the best framing, or are there other legal guidance of framing we should be following? In essence – how do we best tie into your existing frameworks?
How do you suggest SDCMI collaborate with other large landscape and community forest conservation efforts?
How does SDCMI tie in with the 2020 New Mexico Forest Action Plan?
What is the most appropriate balance between post-fire recovery and future fire mitigation?
What are the most appropriate physical and system boundaries to embrace in the SDCMI process?
How do we define these boundaries, and whom must we align with?
What funding or other support opportunities can we tie into, and how can state and federal agencies assist?
How do we assist state and federal agencies to attain funding and logistical support?
What misinformation is a challenge, what information do you need to spread, and how can we use our networks to inform and educate the public and decision-makers?
What else do you need from us?
What have we missed or need to consider differently?
For forestry industry leaders
What capacity increases can your enterprise add to local and regional forest restoration efforts, and what capital, staffing, supply, and markets would enable you to profit from meeting the need?
What are the opportunities to coordinate resources, equipment, and activities across forestry businesses?
What concerns about cooperation do you want to make sure are addressed?
What are your concerns about the current system, and how can it be improved to better assist you in expanding your work?
How can state and federal financial and logistical support better serve your needs?
For Local Non-Forestry Business Managers
How does forest and watershed health impact your business and your community?
How have wildfires impacted your business and livelihood?
In what ways would you like your business to contribute to and benefit from a scaled-up forestry industry and local economy?
What are the significant barriers to improving forest and watershed health?
What are the significant opportunities for improving forest and watershed health?What key questions have we missed?
For local public sector and community leaders
How do forests and watershed health impact your community?
How does forest and watershed health impact your ability to accomplish your mission?
How have the recent fires impacted your community and your work?
What are the significant barriers to improving forest and watershed health?
What are the significant opportunities for improving forest and watershed health?
What additional resources do you need from the state and federal government?
How can a private sector effort aid in your work?
What goals would your community want to see advanced from this forestry action plan?
What concerns do you want to ensure are addressed in this Action Plan?
What dynamics are going on in the community that can be problematic for progress?
What resource limits would need to be addressed for this initiative to be successful? Potential issues include, but are not limited to:
Housing
Labor force
Road capacity
Transportation networks
More effective and relevant state and federal support
What adjustments to your current role or mission would enable you to focus more on long-term collective benefit?
What key questions have we missed?
For environmental groups
How do you define and conceive forest and watershed health?
How does forest or watershed health impact your work and programmatic mission?
How have the recent fires impacted your mission or operations?
If anything were possible, what forest/watershed issues would be your focus, and how would you address them?
What are the significant barriers to improving forest and watershed health?
What are the significant opportunities for improving forest and watershed health?
What concerns for the vitality of the environment, watersheds, and wildlife do you want to have a role in addressing within the forest management-to-market strategy SDCMI proposing?
What key questions have we missed?
For foundations and philanthropists
What forest and watershed issues do you see as the region’s greatest challenge?
How have the recent fires impacted your actions, role, and mission?
What needs are not being addressed under the current system?
What would help you make your work more effective?
What resources can you provide to this Initiative, and what questions and guidance do you have toward applying those resources?
What key questions have we missed?
For new technology developers
What is the technology that could be productively included in this Initiative?
How do you describe the current status of your technology and its deployment?
What capital or support is needed to advance your technology?
What key questions have we missed?
For all stakeholders
What’s needed that this initiative is not addressing?
What resources do you have in your control that may be helpful to this Initiative?
What resources do you know outside your control that you want to ensure we are aware of?
What resources do you want assistance accessing?
What is your vision for how the federal government, the state, and the region should respond?
Based on what you understand about the Sangre de Cristo Mountain Initiative, do you want to participate actively?
Based on what you understand about the Sangre de Cristo Mountain Initiative, do you want the state and federal governments to embrace and support the project?
What do you see that support should look like?
What key questions have we missed?
Section B: What do we need to know to inform the short- and long-term recovery of our forests and watersheds?
What are the silvicultural prescriptions and feedstock volumes?
What is the current status of the state’s stand-based inventory?
What entity owns and manages each forest stand, i.e., federal, state, county, tribal, or private?
What types of trees and sizes, including species, age, health, stand structure, and photosynthetic activity?
What are the slopes and aspects (direction)?
What percentage of the forest is burned or likely to burn soon?
What is the current condition of the stand and its anticipated condition/deterioration over the coming months while harvesting activity can be scaled up?
What cultural, ecological, and hydrological values need to be addressed?
What is the current forest management plan for the entire forest, and is it up to date?
What is the current forest management plan for the stand, and is it up to date?
What activity is going on in each forest? What species are harvested? Who is currently harvesting each forest? How does each entity type approach its forestry management activities? Community or Indigenous values or resources?
Which stands are not being managed to meet the forest restoration goals, particularly overstocking?
Where is the forest composition relative to historic baseline conditions?
What was the historic range of variation and how do we move closer to those conditions?
What is the silvicultural prescription?
What are the species, tree sizes, log volumes, and logging residues to be removed based on the silvicultural prescription?
What quantity and type of byproducts (e.g., forest slash) are generated at each forest? Are they shipped, and if so, where and how?
What quantity and type of waste products are generated at each forest, and how and where are they disposed of?
What are the most significant unmet opportunities?
What material and volumes from each stand need new market solutions?
What other factors should be added to this analysis?
Which entities are in the best position for conducting the harvesting activities in each forest, based on multiple factors, including:
Accessibility, as outlined below
Are there outside resources you suggest engaging? If so, who?
How do the feedstock volumes add up at the regional level?
How does each stand relate to other stands in the region such that the aggregate regional volume of common material is identified?
How do in-forest existing and potentially new logistics assets indicate accessibility for harvesting?
What are the roads in each forest stand, and what entity owns and maintains those roads?
How have they been damaged, or how are they likely to be damaged by wildfire?
What are the characteristics of in-forest road access, including the legal guidelines?
What is the condition of these roads?
What are the seasonal characteristics of these roads?
What are the characteristics of the critical infrastructure elements in the forest? What do we have? What’s missing?
Where are new roads and cleared land needed to render forest material removal viable?
Given the characteristics and regulations of the in-forest logistics, what percentage of the forest stands are physically accessible?
Which entities are in the best position to conduct the transportation activities from each forest?
What is the composition of the existing regional logistics infrastructure for forest materials?
What is the region’s publicly accessible road network?
What is the general condition of forest road access?
Road access points of opportunity?
What are the weight and clearance restrictions on these area roads?
Where are the existing railroad main lines, branch lines, spur lines, sidings, and loading infrastructure?
Where are the existing rail- and truck-served infrastructure assets for transload, distribution, and storage?
Who owns each facility and network section, and what services and capacities do they have?
What is the status of the rail line that runs from Belen, NM to Triinidad, CO?
Owned by BNSF
Belen is yard south of Albuquerque where BNSF’s freight transcon could
easily insert cars cutting off one leg of the triangle by going over Raton
Pass
Trinidad CO is where the Raton Pass/Amtrak line diverges from BNSF’s
freight line between Denver and Amarillo.
This sets the stage for a pragmatic contract operator
BNSF does operate locals between Belen and Albuquerque, but they are probably lacking in excess capacity and
unreliable.
What level of sub-contract operator might BNSF agree to?
Anacostia & Pacific, Watco, Genesee &Wyoming, for example
Where does freight service currently begin down the line and up the line?
Where can new rail line construction enhance forestry operations and minimize transportation costs and impacts?
Where can new rail loading facilities enhance forestry operations and minimize transportation costs and impacts?
Are these new developments commercially viable, or do they need public subsidization?
What are the performance characteristics and costs of available equipment types for harvesting, in-forest logistics, and regional transportation?
What are the harvesting equipment choices?
What are the transportation equipment choices?
What are the specifications of the trucks that can be utilized in each stand in support of each material-removal activity?
What transportation range can each vehicle type be viable?
What are the equipment costs for each vehicle type?
What is the status of diesel-alternative energy technology for each vehicle type?
What existing and new capacity is needed for short- and long-term harvesting?
Which entities are in the best position to conduct harvesting activities in each forest?
What community factors should be identified and weighed in decision-making?
What demographic and economic statistics of nearby communities should inform the project, e.g., population demographics, primary industries, unemployment, and economic conditions?
What other related industries in the region should be considered in tandem with the forest products logistics strategy, e.g., mines, mills, oil, gas, renewables, agriculture, and product and chemical manufacturing?
What are the economic development goals of the local communities?
Which communities and residents should be included in evaluating and siting new facilities and infrastructure?
What are the metrics and goals of the various business stakeholders for each component of the system?
What are the requirements and metrics for forest harvesting companies?
What are the requirements and metrics for forestry materials transportation companies?
What are the requirements and metrics for forestry materials storage companies?
What are the requirements and metrics for forestry materials distribution companies?
What are the requirements and metrics for forestry materials processing companies?
What is the optimal conception of existing and potential new processing facilities, including mills?
Where are the in-state and out-of-state timber (lumber, pellets, paper, paperboard, energy, biomass) processing facilities?
How do existing mills fit into a regional strategy?
What is the optimal size and location of the mills?
What does each existing facility need to reach its capacity expansion goals?
How do we coordinate processing capacity for optimal benefit?
How do biomass and other income streams improve the viability of mill operations?
Where are the out-of-area mills in the west?
What inbound freight, such as papermaking chemicals and animal feeds, exists for forestry and connected and parallel industries?
What new associated product manufacturing facilities are made viable by this coordinated forestry planning?
Where can new processing facilities be optimally located to fill the needs and maximize economic and ecological benefits?
What trends and projections in technology development should be considered in future supply chain design?
What are the direct and indirect benefits of improved thinning and forest management?
Thin forests closer to pre-settlement densities reduce fire risk and improve ecological function
Move systems closer to historic range of variation
Remove fire-damaged trees to allow community access and to support other kinds of ecological and watershed restoration
Improve water balance to allow for downstream flow to mitigate drought and climate change
Address juniper expansion and promote more pinon in PJ ecosystems
Soil stabilization and landscape restoration pre- and post-fire
Improved wildlife habitat and landscape level diversity
Improve grazing and other traditional lifeways
Provide more livelihoods consistent with local and Indigenous values
Sustain or improve the community, landscape, and watershed integrity
Address new climatic and ecosystem realities – shifting systems to desired future conditions
What are the timing aspects of a whole system forestry approach?
What do recent forest fires mean to the temporal concerns of forestry?
How does the urgency of ecological restoration demand our focused attention on optimizing existing service providers versus pulling in resources from across the nation?
How do existing service providers need to be supported and augmented?
What does the surge in harvesting mean for future supply and, therefore, commercial concerns
Is there a basis for installing “mobile” facilities, including new technology-focused ones, that can be subsequently moved to other forest regions?
What are the Consequences of Delay?
How can the work on the urgent priority areas be done to serve the next set of priorities?
How do we address small-diameter timber and alternative markets such as biomass energy and biochar?
What is the best treatment of ground cover in the aftermath of fires for the long-term vitality of forests, and how is this integrated into forestry operations?
How do we address high oak densities post-fire to accelerate recovery to later serial stages?
What changes in genetic or ecological composition are needed to anticipate climate change?
What are the best approaches to stump treatment?
What are the desired future conditions for our landscapes, watersheds, and communities, given shifting climatic realities?