# Presentation: 521915

## 2007 CROP Participant Meeting 

- History
- USFS Pilots Began 2006
- Address Growing Fuel Load Problem
- Restore Forest Health Ecosystems
- Developed by Mater Engineering 2003
- Targeting unlevelized & erratic resource offerings
- Directly discouraged investor interest
- Public agencies to remove woody biomass from high fire risk forests and restore forest health.

## Focus of CROP

- CROP volume _**proposed to be removed**_
- Forest floor w/target period (5 years out)
- Deliverable is biomass *removal performance* “Not biomass *inventory”*
- Work across boundaries
- Reliable and predictable supply WB

## Potential of CROP

**Coordination of removal between Agencies**
**Use of long-term multi-agency stewardship contracts**
**Heighten public trust** **and support for biomass removal**
**Increase the certainty** **of levelized offerings**
**Invite investment** **back into the forest landscape**

## Current Status

- Completion of 10 CROP pilot projects
- Funded by the USFS, BLM, States and Counties
- CROP evaluations have been conducted
- 9 geographic regions ~30 million acres of public forestland
- 15 states
- 36 National Forests
- 105 ranger districts
- 41 BLM field offices
- 183 counties
- 280 townships

## 2006 National CROP Pilots

_**2006 National CROP Pilots**_

**36 National Forests**
**105 RDs**
**41 BLM Districts**

## S. Oregon CROP : 

_**S. Oregon CROP**_** : **
**Center Point:  Lakeview****100-mi. radius**

_**Tahoe Region CROP**_** : **
**Center Point:  Nevada City, CA****100-mi. radius**

## N. Utah CROP : 

**Center Point:  Manila****100-mi. radius**

_**S. Utah CROP**_**: **
**Center Point: Panguitch ****125-mi. (N & S)****100-mi. (E & W) **

## Colorado CROP : 

_**Colorado CROP**_** : **
**Center Point:  Kremmling****	****100-mile radius**

_**New Mexico CROP**_**: **
**Center Point: Santa Fe ****100-mi. radius **

## Center Point: Saluda 50-mi. radius 

**Center Point: Saluda ****50-mi. radius**** **

_**South Carolina 1 CROP**_**: **
**Center Point: Foreston ****50-mi. radius**** **

## Vermont/ New Hampshire CROP : 

_**Vermont/ New Hampshire CROP**_** : **
**Center Point:  Hanover, NH**
**75-mi. radius**

_**Mississippi CROP**_** : **
**Center Point:  Mt. Olive****100-miles N/S; 60 miles E/W**

## Performance per CROP . . .

| 
Southern Oregon  | 
5-yr. volume  | 
Level from yr-to-yr?  | 
Annual variation |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |
| Biomass (gT) | 1,179,925 | No | 188k – 285k |
| Small log (mmbf) | 284.3 | No | 49-64 |
| Large log (mmbf) | 283.95 | No | 47-67 |

| 

Northern Utah | 
5-yr. volume  | 
Level from yr-to-yr?  | 
Annual variation |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |
| Biomass (gT) | 540,936 | No | 58k – 157k |
| Small log (mmbf) | 165.14 | No | 18-46 |
| Large log (mmbf) | 51.58 | Yes | 9-11 |

| 

Southern Utah | 
5-yr. volume  | 
Level from yr-to-yr?  | 
Annual variation |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |
| Biomass (gT) | 274,512 | No | 40k – 85k |
| Small log (mmbf) | 149.65 | No | 18-51 |
| Large log (mmbf) | 78.15 | Relatively | 12-18 |

| 

Colorado | 
5-yr. volume  | 
Level from yr-to-yr?  | 
Annual variation |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |
| Biomass (gT) | 273,181 | No | 45k – 61k |
| Small log (mmbf) | 279.1 | No | 39-73 |
| Large log (mmbf) | 128.1 | No | 18-37 |

| 
New Mexico  | 
5-yr. volume  | 
Level from yr-to-yr?  | 
Annual variation |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |
| Biomass (gT) | 1,040,968 | No | 157k – 240k |
| Small log (mmbf) | 77.3 | Relatively | 11-17 |
| Large log (mmbf) | 22.65 | Yes | 3-5 |

**Performance per CROP . . .**

***. . . not bad, but work needed!***

## Performance per CROP . . .

| 

S. Carolina - 1 | 
5-yr. volume  | 
Level from yr-to-yr?  | 
Annual variation |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |
| Biomass (gT) | 433,620 | No | 73k – 103k |
| Small log (mmbf) | 65.2 | Yes | 10-12 |
| Large log (mmbf) | 38 | Relatively | 5-9 |

| 

S. Carolina - 2 | 
5-yr. volume  | 
Level from yr-to-yr?  | 
Annual variation |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |
| Biomass (gT) | 354,000 | Yes | 69k – 71k |
| Small log (mmbf) | 102.12 | Yes | 19-21 |
| Large log (mmbf) | 194.86 | No | 31-47 |

**Performance per CROP . . .**

***. . . not bad, but work needed!***

## How are we doing Nationally

**8,934,964 gT of biomass** (<7” dbh ) –
**2233.9 mmbf of small logs** (+7”-12” dbh) –
**2221 mmbf of large logs** (>12”) –
- Over **3,000 direct fulltime, family-wage jobs would be created.  **

**Notes:**
-Enough annual biomass volume to construct over 10 new 15 Mw power plants requiring 160,000 gT of biomass/yr.
-enough annual volume to support 17 new dedicated small log processing mills requiring 25 mmbf of wood supply per year.
-enough annual volume to support 7 new large log processing mills requiring 60 mmbf of wood supply per year.
- Were solid wood manufacturing facilities to be constructed to handle the resource removal within the CROP landscapes, This figure does not include the jobs that would be created for processing the biomass volume to be removed within the CROP landscapes over the next five years,

## How are we doing-con’td

**Over 60% to be removed will be biomass (<7” dbh) and small diameter (7”- 12” dbh) material**
**200,000 high risk acres could emit up to 16 million tons of carbon into the atmosphere when fire occurs, **
**Or remove in a coordinated fashion within the CROP & prevent approximately 2.4 billion tons of carbon being emitted into the atmosphere*****.***

## Realized Results

**Public agencies now requesting CROP evaluations**,* *_*and providing matching funding to accomplish the work*_.
**Immediate investor interest and activation of investment **
**Construction of new wood processing and energy facilities **
**Decreased litigation and appeals as a result of the CROP**.

## The Deliverables

- Overview of CROP results in PowerPoint
- Resource offering maps (ROMS) for each specie
- All CROP models are constructed using a standard excel spreadsheet
- CROP model data updates are proposed to be conducted annually

**Notes:**
-PPT version now created for each CROP landscape in an easy-to-access web/ internet format.  The PowerPoint overview is provided to agencies within the CROP landscapes, and is intended for use by stakeholders, investors, decision-makers, and the public at large.
-proposed for removal over the next five years is provided by diameter size, volume, location, year offered, phase in NEPA, and road accessibility.  These ROMS are in an easy-to-access web/internet format for agency use. 
-making information updates (internal and external) easy.  All data is linked to the ROMS, making information updates immediately/visually reconfigured to quickly show new impacts.  We expect this to help facilitate on-going and annual coordination and levelization of supply between public agencies in a given investor landscape. 
-with coordination and levelization of resource removal to occur between public agencies at CROP landscape scale. 

## Next Steps

- Recommend to Biomass Steering Committee
- All CROP data placed on internet website
- Initiate major multi-agency communication effort
- Initiate major training effort for Forest Service and BLM field personnel
- Design multi-agency levelization protocol to be used by all agencies
- Work with regional areas to establish CROP Advisory Councils
- Design multi-agency CROP monitoring protocol