The Four Corners Timber 

Harvest and Forest Products 

Industry, 2007

Steven W. Hayes, Todd A. Morgan, Erik C. Berg, Jean M. 

Daniels and Mike T. Thompson

United States

Department

of Agriculture

Forest Service

Rocky Mountain

Research Station

Resource Bulletin

RMRS-RB-13

June 2012
Hayes, Steven W.; Morgan, Todd A.; Berg, Erik C.; Daniels, Jean M.; Thompson, Mike T. 2012. The Four Corners timber 

harvest and forest products industry, 2007. Resour. Bull. RMRS-RB-13. Fort Collins, CO: U.S. Department of 

Agriculture, Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Research Station. 61 p.

Abstract

This report traces the flow of timber harvested in the “Four Corners” States (Arizona, Colorado, New Mexico, and Utah) 

during calendar year 2007, describes the composition and operations of the region’s primary forest products industry, and 

quantifies volumes and uses of wood fiber. Historical wood products industry changes are discussed, as well as trends in 

timber harvest, production, and sales of primary wood products.

Keywords: forest economics, lumber production, mill residue, primary forest products, timber products

Authors

Steven W. Hayes is a Research Forester, Todd A. Morgan is Director of Forest Industry Research, and Erik 

C. Berg is a Research Forester, Bureau of Business and Economic Research, The University of Montana, 

Missoula, Montana.

Jean M. Daniels is a Research Forester, U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Pacific Northwest 

Research Station, Forestry Sciences Laboratory, Portland, Oregon.

Mike T. Thompson is a Forester, U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Research 

Station, Forestry Sciences Laboratory, Ogden, Utah.

You may order additional copies of this publication by sending your mailing 

information in label form through one of the following media. Please specify 

the publication title and series number.

Fort Collins Service Center

Telephone (970) 498-1392

FAX (970) 498-1122

E-mail rschneider@fs.fed.us

Web site http://www.fs.fed.us/rm/publications

Mailing address Publications Distribution

Rocky Mountain Research Station

240 West Prospect Road

Fort Collins, CO 80526

Cover: Map of Four Corners facilities, 2007.
Research Highlights

•	 During calendar year 2007, more than 210.4 million board feet (MMBF)

of timber was harvested from Arizona, Colorado, New Mexico, and Utah.

Most (55.9 percent) of the harvested volume came from tribal and nonindustrial private timberlands, while 40.9 percent came from National Forests. Ponderosa pine was the leading species harvested for timber in the

Four Corners States during 2007, accounting for 34.7 percent of the total.

Lodgepole pine accounted for 24.1 percent, followed by spruces and Douglas-fir at 12.9 and 9.1 percent, respectively.

•	 During 2007, the Four Corners were net importers of timber, with less than

1 percent (983 MBF) of the regional harvest imported for processing from

other States. Mills in the Four Corners imported a total of 12.5 MMBF during 2007, while total exports by Four Corners mills were slightly less than

11.6 MMBF.

•	 Timber-processing capacity (i.e., the volume of timber that could be used

by existing timber processors if demand for products were firm and sufficient raw material were available) in the Four Corners during 2007 was

approximately 351 MMBF, Scribner. Thus, approximately 60 percent of

timber-processing capacity in the region was utilized in 2007.

•	 This report identified 132 primary timber processing facilities active during 2007 in the Four Corners. These facilities included 62 sawmills, 35 log

home or house log manufacturers, 15 log furniture producers, 6 post and

pole facilities, 6 viga and latilla producers, and 8 other facilities.

•	 During 2007, production of lumber and other sawn products exceeded 234

MMBF lumber tally. Lumber production in Arizona was 55 MMBF, Colorado was 116 MMBF, New Mexico was about 40 MMBF, and Utah’s lumber production was nearly 23 MMBF.

•	 Four Corners timber processors produced 259,853 bone dry units (BDU)

of residue during 2007, of which just 9,843 BDU (4 percent) went unused.

Sawmills generated 233,315 BDU—90 percent of all mill residues in the

region.

•	 The Four Corners primary wood product sales value (f.o.b. the producing

mill), including mill residues, totaled nearly $197 million during 2007. A

little over $135 million (69 percent) of sales were within the Four Corners

States, and 44 percent ($86 million) of all sales were lumber and other sawn

products.
Contents

Research Highlights .........................................................................................i

Introduction ......................................................................................................1

Four Corners Regional Summary ..................................................................1

Historic Overview...........................................................................................2

Timber Harvest ..............................................................................................2

Timber Flow and Mill Receipts.......................................................................3

Forest Products Industry Composition and Operations .................................5

Mill Residue: Quantity, Types, and Use .........................................................6

Forest Products Sales and Employment .......................................................7

Arizona..............................................................................................................8

Timber Harvest, Flow, and Use......................................................................8

Forest Industry Sectors................................................................................15

Capacity and Utilization ...............................................................................19

Mill Residue Volumes, Types, and Uses......................................................19

Primary Forest Products Markets and Sales ...............................................20

Colorado .........................................................................................................21

Timber Harvest, Flow, and Use....................................................................22

Forest Industry Sectors................................................................................27

Capacity and Utilization ...............................................................................32

Mill Residue Volumes, Types, and Uses......................................................33

Primary Forest Products Markets and Sales ...............................................33

New Mexico.....................................................................................................35

Timber Harvest, Flow, and Use....................................................................35

Forest Industry Sectors................................................................................41

Capacity and Utilization ...............................................................................45

Mill Residue Volumes, Types, and Uses......................................................45

Primary Forest Products Markets and Sales ...............................................46

Utah .................................................................................................................47

Timber Harvest, Flow, and Use....................................................................47

Forest Industry Sectors................................................................................52

Capacity and Utilization ...............................................................................57

Mill Residue Volumes, Types, and Uses......................................................57

Primary Forest Products Markets and Sales ...............................................59

References......................................................................................................60
USDA Forest Service Resour. Bull. RMRS-RB-13. 2012 1

Introduction

This report details timber harvest and describes the composition and operations

of the primary forest products industry in the “Four Corners” States (i.e., Arizona,

Colorado, New Mexico, and Utah) during calendar year 2007. The report focuses

on trends and changes in timber harvest levels in the forest products industry since

the 1990s. For historical perspective, some discussion is offered of industry changes throughout the last half of the 20th century.

Timber used in the direct manufacture of products is the focus of this report.

Products directly manufactured from timber are referred to as “primary products”

and include lumber, posts and poles, house logs, log furniture, vigas and latillas.

Reconstituted products made from chipping or grinding timber, as well as products

from mill residue (i.e., bark, sawdust, log ends, chips, and planer shavings) generated in the production of primary products, are also included. These reconstituted

primary products include excelsior, wood pellets, bark products, and fuelwood.

Derivative, or “secondary” products (e.g., window frames, doors, trusses, and furniture) made from primary products are not included in this report.

The major source of data for this report was a census of primary forest products

facilities in Arizona, Colorado, New Mexico, and Utah and mills in adjacent States

that received timber from the Four Corners States during calendar year 2007.

Firms were identified through telephone directories, internet queries, directories

of the forest products industries (Lockwood-Post 2008; Random Lengths 2008),

and with the assistance of State forestry agencies and the mills themselves. Firms

cooperating in the Four Corners census, including out-of-State mills, processed

virtually all of the commercial timber harvested from Arizona, Colorado, New

Mexico, and Utah in 2007.

This report is the direct result of a cooperative effort between The University

of Montana’s Bureau of Business and Economic Research (BBER) and the USDA

Forest Service, Interior West Forest Inventory and Analysis (IW-FIA) Program.

Together, BBER and Forest Service research stations have been conducting periodic mill censuses in the Rocky Mountains for over 30 years. The Forest Industries

Data Collection System (FIDACS) was developed by BBER and IW-FIA to collect, compile and make available State- and county-level information on the operations of the forest products industry and the timber it uses. The FIDACS uses

a written questionnaire or phone interview of forest products manufacturers to

collect the following information for each facility for a given calendar year: production capacity and employment; volume of raw material received by county and

ownership; species of timber received; finished product volumes, types, sales values, and market locations; and utilization and marketing of manufacturing residue.

Information collected through the FIDACS is processed, analyzed, and stored at

the BBER in Missoula, Montana. Additional information is available by request;

however, individual firm-level data are confidential and will not be released.

Four Corners Regional Summary

This chapter discusses the Four Corners as a whole, providing a historical overview, as well as information on the forest products industry and timber harvest in

2007. It presents ownership and species composition of harvested timber, types of

timber products harvested and processed, as well as movement of timber within

the Four Corners and between the region and other States. Timber-processing and
2 USDA Forest Service Resour. Bull. RMRS-RB-13. 2012

production capacities, utilization of mill residues, and forest products sales and

employment are also discussed at the regional level.

Historic Overview

Following World War II, with strong housing markets and public policy encouraging timber production on National Forests, timber harvest for industrial products

in the Four Corners States increased from about 700 million board feet (MMBF,

Scribner log scale) annually during the early 1950s to a peak of approximately

1,000 MMBF in the late 1960s. During the 1970s and 1980s, harvest volumes

dropped somewhat with harvest during the late 1980s averaging about 850 MMBF

annually. Timber harvest from the region declined dramatically during the 1990s,

caused largely by decreases in the harvest from National Forests. National Forest

timber harvests in Arizona, Colorado, New Mexico, and Utah followed the course

of most Western States, declining due to threatened and endangered species, appeals and litigation directed at Federal timber sales, and lower Federal budget

levels.

In Arizona and New Mexico, the listing of the Mexican spotted owl had a profound downward impact on National Forest timber harvest levels. The Mexican

spotted owl was listed as threatened by the United States Fish and Wildlife Service

in March of 1993. In August of 1995, a Federal judge enjoined the logging of

new timber sales on National Forests in Arizona and New Mexico pending development of a recovery plan for the owl (Silver and others v. Thomas and others

1995). Between 1990 and 1996, harvest from Arizona National Forests dropped

from 300 MMBF annually to about 28 MMBF, and harvest from New Mexico

National Forests fell from about 125 MMBF to less than 20 MMBF annually. Most

of the material harvested during the period was for fuelwood, not industrial timber

products. The lifting of the injunction in December 1996 resulted in increases in

National Forest timber offerings in 1997 and 1998. The cut from Arizona National

Forests increased to about 61 MMBF in 1997 and 63 MMBF in 1998; the cut

from New Mexico National Forests increased slightly to 23 MMBF in 1997 and

30 MMBF in 1998.

Declines in National Forest timber offerings have negatively impacted both

Colorado’s and Utah’s industry as well, leading to substantially lower total harvest. Though not as sharp nor abrupt as in Arizona and New Mexico, reductions

in National Forest timber harvest have significantly accelerated closures and have

yielded very low levels of capacity utilization at sawmills—the largest timber processing sector in the two States—and played a part in the closure of the two oriented strand board (OSB) operations in Colorado. The actual number of timber

processors in the two States decreased from approximately 182 facilities during

2002 to 91facilities in 2007. Decreases in facilities occurred in all sectors but most

conspicuously in the log home and log furniture industries, where Colorado ranked

second behind Montana in 2002, with Utah fourth in value of output from log

home plants in the Western United States.

Timber Harvest

Harvest volumes presented in this report for calendar year 2007 came from

the FIDACS census of Four Corners and out-of-State mills receiving timber harvested from the region. When available, similar timber harvest characterizations

for the individual States (Arizona, Colorado, New Mexico, and Utah) were used
USDA Forest Service Resour. Bull. RMRS-RB-13. 2012 3

for comparison. Periodic State-level reports (Wilson and Spencer 1967; Setzer and

Wilson 1970; Setzer 1971 a,b; Green and Setzer 1974; Setzer and Barrett 1977;

Setzer and Shupe 1977; Setzer and Throssell 1977a,b; McLain 1985; McLain 1988;

McLain 1989; Keegan and others 1995; Keegan and others 2001a,b; Morgan and

others 2006) provided the bulk of historic timber harvest information. Published

timber harvest reports for recent years were not available, with the exception of

Bureau of Land Management (BLM) forest products offerings and USDA Forest

Service annual “cut and sold” reports. Small differences may exist between the

numbers reported here and those in BLM and Forest Service reports. These differences are due to varying reporting units and conversion factors, rounding error,

scaling discrepancies between sellers and buyers, and other reporting variations.

During calendar year 2007, more than 210.4 MMBF of timber was harvested

from Arizona, Colorado, New Mexico, and Utah. This harvest volume represents

less than 0.1 percent of the approximately 169.5 billion board feet of sawtimber inventory on nonreserved timberlands in the four States (U.S. Department of

Agriculture, FIDO 2009). Timber harvested from Four Corners timberland and

manufactured into wood products came from three broad ownership classes: tribal

lands, nonindustrial private forest (NIPF) land, and public lands. Most (55.9 percent) of the harvested volume came from tribal and NIPF timberlands, while

40.9 percent came from National Forests (table 4C-1). Ponderosa pine was the

leading species harvested for timber in the Four Corners States during 2007, accounting for 34.7 percent of the total (table 4C-2). Lodgepole pine accounted for

24.1 percent, followed by aspen and spruces at 13.3 and 12.9 percent, respectively.

Sawlogs were the leading component of the timber harvest in the Four Corners

(table 4C-3); at 83 percent, no other product type came close in harvested volume.

Trees harvested for fiber logs and industrial fuelwood contributed 7.2 percent to

the total, while house logs accounted for 5.9 percent of the harvest.

Timber Flow and Mill Receipts

During 2007, the Four Corners were net importers of timber, with less than

one-half percent (964 MBF) of the regional harvest imported for processing (table 4C-4). Of this imported volume, over 81 percent (almost 781 MBF) was house

logs. There was some volume traded and utilized between the States in the Four

Corners region, but no identifiable volume was exported from the Four Corners

States for processing in 2007. By ownership, timber from private lands was imported in the largest volumes, with timber from National Forest next. This flow of

Table 4C-1: Four Corners timber harvest by ownership class, 2002 and 2007 (source: Morgan and others 

2006).

2002 2007

Ownership class MBF Scribner

Percentage 

of harvest

MBF 

Scribner

Percentage 

of harvest

Private and tribal timberland 234,456 72.5 117,708 55.9

 Tribal 134,840 41.7 23,714 11.3

 Private 99,616 30.8 93,994 44.7

Public timberland 89,105 27.5 92,700 44.1

 National Forest 84,536 26.1 86,036 40.9

 Other public 4,569 1.4 6,664 3.2

All owners 323,561 100 210,408 100
4 USDA Forest Service Resour. Bull. RMRS-RB-13. 2012

Table 4C-2: Four Corners timber harvest by species, 2002 and 2007 (source: Morgan and others 2006).

2002 2007

Species MBF Scribner

Percentage 

of harvest MBF Scribner

Percentage 

of harvest

Ponderosa pine 186,955 57.8 73,041 34.7

Lodgepole pine 21,822 6.7 50,648 24.1

Aspen 20,399 6.3 28,088 13.3

Spruces 46,850 14.5 27,057 12.9

Douglas-fir 30,165 9.3 19,065 9.1

Firs 16,882 5.2 12,351 5.9

Other speciesa 489 0.2 158 0.1

All species 323,562 100 210,408 100

a

Other species include juniper, other softwoods, and hardwoods other than aspen.

Table 4C-3: Four Corners timber harvest by product, 2002 and 2007 (source: Morgan and others 2006).

2002 2007

Product MBF Scribner

Percentage 

of harvest MBF Scribner

Percentage 

of harvest

Sawlogs 279,317 86.3 174,629 83.0

Fiber logs and industrial fuelwood 14,763 4.6 15,144 7.2

House logs 20,695 6.4 12,495 5.9

Posts and poles 4,104 1.3 5,497 2.6

Vigas 3,655 1.1 2,368 1.1

Other productsa 1,029 0.3 275 0.1

All products 323,562 100 210,408 100

a

Other products include furniture logs, pilings, and utility poles.

Table 4C-4: Four Corners timber products imports and exportsa, 2007.

Timber product Imports Exports

Net imports 

(net exports)

---Thousand board feet, Scribner---

Sawlogs 3,536 3,431 105

House logs 2,220 1,445 775

Other productsb 6,747 6,644 103

All products 12,503 11,520 983

a Imports and exports are with other States and North American countries.

b

Other products include post and poles, fiber logs, firewood, furniture logs, vigas and industrial fuel 

wood.

timber into the region created a difference in the volume of timber harvested from

the Four Corners and the volume received by the region’s mills. The large majority of timber used by primary forest products firms in the Four Corners came from

within the four-State region. Additional volume came from Idaho, Montana, and

Oregon, with some smaller volumes from Wyoming and Canada.

While the 2007 harvest exceeded 210.4 MMBF, total receipts by Four Corners

mills were slightly more than 211 MMBF, a volume equivalent to 101 percent
USDA Forest Service Resour. Bull. RMRS-RB-13. 2012 5

of the harvest. Sawlogs accounted for the vast majority (83 percent) of timber

received by Four Corners mills (table 4C-5), followed by house logs (6 percent).

The NIPF landowners supplied the largest share (45 percent) of timber received by

mills in the four States, followed by National Forest System (NFS) lands (41 percent) and then tribal owners (11 percent). Timber-processing capacity (the volume

of timber that could be used by existing timber processors if demand for products

were firm and sufficient raw material were available) in the Four Corners during

2007 was approximately 351 MMBF, Scribner. Thus, approximately 60 percent of

timber-processing capacity in the region was utilized in 2007.

Forest Products Industry Composition and Operations

The FIDACS census identified 132 primary timber processing facilities active

during 2007 in the Four Corners. These facilities included 62 sawmills, 35 log

home or house log manufacturers, 15 log furniture producers, 6 post and pole

facilities, 6 viga and latilla producers, and 8 other facilities. Colorado and Utah

had the most facilities and the largest shares of the log home and log furniture sectors. Arizona and New Mexico had fewer facilities but more of the viga and latilla

sector.

Primary timber processors in the Four Corners produced an array of products

including: dimension lumber, board and shop lumber, mine timbers, railroad ties,

pallet stock, dunnage, excelsior, posts, poles, vigas, latillas, finished house logs,

log homes, and log furniture, as well as wood pellets, fuelwood, bark, mulch,

and pulp chips from mill residues. During 2007, production of lumber and other

sawn products exceeded 233.7 MMBF lumber tally. State contributions included Colorado (116 MMBF), Arizona (55 MMBF), New Mexico (40 MMBF), and

Utah (23 MMBF). Production of house logs, vigas, and latillas totaled more than

Table 4C-5: Timber received by the Four Corners primary forest products industry by ownership class and product, 2007.

Ownership class Sawlogs

Fuelwood/ 

bioenergy House logs Post/pole Other productsb All products

-----------------Thousand board feet, Scribner------------------

Private and tribal timberland 104,270 2,402 3,089 1,942 6,473 118,175

 Private 82,940 802 2,680 1,567 6,473 94,461

 Tribal 21,330 1,600 409 375 - 23,714

Public timberland 70,463 3,625 10,182 3,555 5,391 93,216

 National Forest 67,826 3,625 10,114 2,430 2,492 86,487

 Other ownersa 2,637 - 68 1,125 2,899 6,729

All owners 174,734 6,027 13,271 5,497 11,863 211,391

-----------------Percentage of product by ownership----------------

Private and tribal timberland 59.7 39.9 23.3 35.3 54.6 55.9 

 Private 47.5 13.3 20.2 28.5 54.6 44.7 

 Tribal 12.2 26.5 3.1 6.8 - 11.2 

Public timberland 40.3 60.1 76.7 64.7 45.4 44.1 

 National Forest 38.8 60.1 76.2 44.2 21.0 40.9 

 Other ownersa 1.5 - 0.5 20.5 24.4 3.2 

All owners 82.7 2.9 6.3 2.6 5.6 100 

a

Other owners include other public ownerships and Canadian imports.

b

Other products include logs for log furniture, vigas, latillas, and fiber logs.
6 USDA Forest Service Resour. Bull. RMRS-RB-13. 2012

5.4 million lineal feet (MMLF), and more than 2.3 million pieces of log furniture,

and posts and poles were produced by facilities in the Four Corners.

Mill Residue: Quantity, Types, and Use

A substantial portion of the wood fiber, including bark processed by primary forest product plants, ends up as mill residue. Three types of wood residues

are typically generated by the primary wood products industry: coarse or chippable residue consisting of edging, slabs, trim, log ends, and pieces of veneer; fine

residue consisting primarily of planer shavings and sawdust; and bark. The 2007

census collected information on volumes and uses of mill residue. Actual residue

volumes, reported in bone-dry units (BDU), were obtained from facilities that sold

all or most of their residues. All mills reported how their residues were used on a

percentage basis. One BDU is the equivalent of 2,400 pounds of oven-dry wood.

Four Corners timber processors produced 259,853 BDUs of residue during

2007, of which just 9,843 BDUs (3.8 percent) went unused (table 4C-6). Coarse

residues were the region’s largest residue component (55 percent of all residues),

with just over 2 percent going unused. About 40 percent of coarse residue was used

by the pulp and board sector, 35 percent went to the energy sector, and an additional 23 percent went to other uses. Fine residue made up the second largest component (28 percent) in 2007, with sawdust comprising 18.5 percent and shavings

9.4 percent. All but 5,140 BDUs (7 percent) of fine residue were used, primarily as

animal bedding and mulch. Four Corners facilities generated 44,087 BDUs of bark

while processing timber in 2007, of which all but 3 percent was utilized. About

55 percent of bark was used as mulch, while 23 percent went to energy. During

2007, sawmills generated 233,315 BDUs—90 percent of all mill residues in the

region. Residue volume factors, which express mill residue generated per unit of

lumber produced, were derived from production and residue output volumes provided by mills (table 4C-7).

Table 4C-6: Production and disposition of Four Corners mill residues, 2007.

Residue type Total utilized

Pulp and 

board Energy

Mulch/ 

bedding

Unspecified 

use Unused

Total 

produced

----------------------------Bone-dry unitsa--------------------------------

Coarse 140,066 57,300 50,062 - 32,704 3,323 143,389

Fine 67,237 - 22,512 42,281 2,444 5,140 72,377

 Sawdust 43,222 - 16,005 25,195 2,022 4,856 48,078

 Planer shavings 24,015 - 6,507 17,086 422 284 24,299

Bark 42,707 - 10,213 24,107 8,387 1,380 44,087

All residues 250,010 57,300 82,787 66,388 43,535 9,843 259,853

----------------------------Percentage of residue type by use--------------------------------

Coarse 97.7 40.0 34.9 0.0 22.8 2.3 55.2

Fine 92.9 0.0 31.1 58.4 3.4 7.1 27.9

 Sawdust 89.9 0.0 33.3 52.4 4.2 10.1 18.5

 Planer shavings 98.8 0.0 26.8 70.3 1.7 1.2 9.4

Bark 96.9 0.0 23.2 54.7 19.0 3.1 17.0

All residues 96.2 22.1 31.9 25.5 16.8 3.8 100

a

Bone-dry unit = 2,400 lb oven-dry wood.
USDA Forest Service Resour. Bull. RMRS-RB-13. 2012 7

Forest Products Sales and Employment

Mills responding to the FIDACS survey summarized their calendar year 2007

shipments of finished wood products, providing information on volume, sales

value, and geographic destination. Mills usually distributed their products either

through their own distribution channels or through independent wholesalers and

selling agents. Because of subsequent transactions, the geographic destination reported here may not reflect the final delivery points of shipments.

The Four Corners primary wood product sales value (f.o.b. the producing mill),

including mill residues, totaled nearly $197 million during 2007 (table 4C-8). A

little over $135 million (69 percent) of these sales were within the Four Corners

States, and 44 percent ($86 million) of all sales were lumber and other sawn products. Other products, which include excelsior, firewood, and mill residue, accounted for $50 million (25.6 percent of total sales). Colorado led the region with more

than $104 million in sales, of which approximately $30 million came from the

other products sector. Total sales for Arizona, New Mexico, and Utah ranged from

$26 to $38 million for each State (tables A18, N17, U16).

While the forest products industry continues to provide substantial employment

opportunities in the Southwest, the number of workers has declined radically over

the past 5 years. Forest products firms, including logging companies, employed

about 2,700 people in the Four Corners area in 2007, compared to 3,800 in 2002.

Of this total, approximately 1,000 individuals were employed in logging in 2007

(5.0 workers per MMBF harvested), compared to 1,600 in 2002 (QCEW 2004,

2007; REIS 2004, 2007). Primary timber processing facilities employed 1,700

workers in 2007 (8.3 workers per MMBF consumed) vs. 2,200 in 2002.

Table 4C-7: Four Corners sawmill residue factors, 2002 and 2007 (source: Morgan 

and others 2006).

2002 2007

Type of residue BDU per MBF BDU per MBF

Coarse 0.56 0.56

Sawdust 0.19 0.19

Planer shavings 0.16 0.10

Bark 0.28 0.17

Total 1.19 1.02

a

Bone-dry unit (BDU = 2,400 lb oven-dry wood) of residue generated for every 1,000 

board feet of lumber manufactured.
8 USDA Forest Service Resour. Bull. RMRS-RB-13. 2012

Arizona

This chapter reviews Arizona’s 2007 timber harvest and forest products industry

activities and changes that occurred since the 2002 industry census conducted by

Morgan and others (2006). Details of timber harvest, flow, and use are followed by

descriptions of the primary processing sectors, capacity and utilization statistics,

and mill residue characteristics. The chapter concludes with information on primary wood products industry sales by Arizona mills.

Timber Harvest, Flow, and Use

In 2007,Arizona had approximately 3.4 million acres of nonreserved timberland

(U.S. Department of Agriculture, FIDO 2009), with National Forests accounting

for 71 percent, private and tribal owners accounting for 28 percent, and other public

agencies accounting for the remaining 1 percent (table A1). All private timberland

Table 4C-8: Destination and sales value of Four Corners primary wood products and mill residues, 2007.

Product

Within

4-Corner 

States

Other 

Rocky 

Mtn 

Statesa Far Westb Northeastc Southd

North 

Centrale

Mexico, 

Canada, 

or otherf Total

-----------------------------------Thousand 2007 dollars-----------------------------------

Lumber, mine timbers, 

and other sawn products 68,159 3,554 1,280 139 3,371 5,236 4,547 86,286

House logs and log 

homes 25,463 1,656 504 862 6,604 1,347 40 36,476

Posts, poles, vigas, 

latillas, and log furniture 16,192 1,985 1,765 1,166 1,374 1,111 - 23,593

Other productsg 25,396 2,924 7,245 386 8,328 3,881 2,186 50,346

Total 135,210 10,119 10,794 2,553 19,677 11,575 6,773 $196,701

-------------------------Percentage of regional sales by product--------------------------

Lumber, mine timbers, 

and other sawn products 50.4 35.1 11.9 5.4 17.1 45.2 67.1 43.9 

House logs and log 

homes 18.8 16.4 4.7 33.8 33.6 11.6 0.6 18.5 

Posts, poles, vigas, 

latillas, and log furniture 12.0 19.6 16.4 45.7 7.0 9.6 - 12.0 

Other productsg 18.8 28.9 67.1 15.1 42.3 33.5 32.3 25.6 

Total 68.7 5.1 5.5 1.3 10.0 5.9 3.4 100 

a

Other Rocky Mountains includes Idaho, Montana, Nevada.

b

Far West includes Alaska, California, Hawaii, Oregon, and Washington.

c

Northeast includes Connecticut, Maine, Massachusetts, New Hampshire, New Jersey, New York, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, and 

Vermont.

d

South includes Alabama, Arkansas, Delaware, Florida, Georgia, Kentucky, Louisiana, Maryland, Mississippi, North Carolina, Oklahoma, 

South Carolina, Tennessee, Texas, Virginia, and West Virginia.

e

North Central includes Illinois, Indiana, Iowa, Kansas, Michigan, Minnesota, Missouri, Nebraska, North Dakota, Ohio, South Dakota, and 

Wisconsin.

f

Other areas consist of products being shipped outside the United States.

g

Other products include excelsior, mill residues, mulch, and fuel pellets; they do not include paper products.
USDA Forest Service Resour. Bull. RMRS-RB-13. 2012 9

was classified as NIPF timberland. With the exception of several Native American

tribes, Arizona had no large tracts of timberland owned by entities operating primary wood processing facilities. Sawtimber volume on nonreserved timberlands

was estimated at 5.3 billion cubic feet or approximately 29.8 billion board feet

Scribner in 2008 (U.S. Department of Agriculture, FIDO 2009).

Timber Harvest

Arizona’s 2007 timber harvest was 53.8 MMBF Scribner, only 42 percent of

the 2002 harvest, and about 15 percent of the annual harvest during the late 1980s

(Keegan and others 2001a). The decline in Arizona’s total annual timber harvest

since 1990 was largely due to the decline in National Forest timber harvest. The

major factor that contributed to the harvest increase from 1998 to 2002 was the

salvage of 90 MMBF of dead, mostly fire-killed timber, accounting for 70 percent of the 2002 harvest volume. In 1998 dead trees accounted for just 3 percent

(2.4 MMBF) of the total harvest. Although substantial acreages of both public

and tribal forests burned between 1998 and 2002, tribal landowners were able to

respond relatively quickly and harvested over 82 MMBF of fire-killed timber in

2002. Once the areas affected by the large fires were salvaged, the annual harvest

fell to below pre-fire levels.

As National Forest and total timber harvest in the State declined, a disproportionate and diminishing share of Arizona’s timber harvest came from National Forest

timberlands in recent years (table A2). In 1966, 1974, and 1984 National Forests

accounted for 60 percent or more of harvested volume (Setzer and Throssell 1977a;

McLain 1988), whereas in 2002 and 2007 National Forests accounted for 16 and

40 percent of harvest volume, respectively (Morgan and others 2006). National

Forests provided the majority (93 percent) of house logs harvested in 2007, but

tribal and NIPF landowners provided the majority of sawlogs and other products

Table A1: Arizona nonreserved timberland by ownership class (source: 

Forest Inventory and Analysis Program, 2008).

Ownership class Thousand acres

Percentage of 

nonreserved 

timberland

National Forest 2,395 71

Private and tribal 959 28

Other public 31 1

Total 3,385 100

Table A2: Proportion of Arizona timber harvest by ownership class, selected years (sources: Setzer 1971; Setzer and 

Throssell 1977; McLain 1988; Keegan and others 2001a; Morgan and others 2006).

Ownership class 1966 1974 1984 1998 2002 2007

----------Percentage of harvest------------

Private and tribal timberland 25.0 41.0 33.5 63.0 84.4 59.0

 Private 1.0 - 33.5 3.0 1.6 51.0

 Tribal 24.0 41.0 - 60.0 82.8 8.0

Public timberland 75.0 59.0 66.5 37.0 15.6 41.0

 National Forest 75.0 59.0 66.2 37.0 15.6 40.0

 Other public - - 0.3 - - 1.0

All owners 100 100 100 100 100 100
10 USDA Forest Service Resour. Bull. RMRS-RB-13. 2012

(table A3). Sawlogs accounted for 95 percent (51 MMBF) of the total volume

harvested.

Historically, 80 percent or more of the State’s annual timber harvest came

from three counties: Apache, Coconino, and Navajo. In 2007, Apache County led

Arizona’s timber harvest with 59 percent of total volume. Coconino County followed with 27 percent (table A4). In 2002 Navajo led with 50 percent followed by

Gila and then Coconino County (Morgan and others 2006). In 1984, Apache led

followed by Coconino and Navajo (McLain 1988). In 1974, Coconino County led

the State with almost 38 percent of the harvest, followed by Navajo with 34 percent

and Apache with 19 percent (Setzer and Throssell 1977a). Similarly, Coconino

County was the largest timber producer in 1969, contributing 32 percent of the harvest, followed by Apache and Navajo with 25 and 23 percent, respectively (Setzer

1971a).

Table A3: Arizona timber products harvested by ownership class, 2007.

Ownership class Sawlogs House logs Other productsa All products

----------------Thousand board feet, Scribner------------------

Private timberland 26,830 20 444 27,294

National Forest 21,141 407 175 21,723

Tribal timberland 2,800 10 1,600 4,410

State 350 - - 350

All owners 51,121 437 2,219 53,777

---Percentage of harvested product by ownership---

Private timberland 52.5 4.6 20.0 50.8

National Forest 41.4 93.1 7.9 40.4

Tribal timberland 5.5 2.3 72.1 8.2

State 0.7 - - 0.7

All owners 95.1 0.8 4.1 100

a

Other products include industrial fuelwood, furniture logs, fiber logs, and viga logs.

Table A4: Arizona timber harvest by county, selected years (sources: McLain 1988; Keegan and others 2001a; Morgan 

and others 2006).

County 1984 1998 2002 2007 1984 1998 2002 2007

---MBF Scribner--- -------Percentage-------

Apache 171,128 15,641 6,350 31,610 44.7 20.5 5.0 58.8 

Coconino 150,727 15,314 14,889 14,353 39.4 20.1 11.6 26.7 

Gila 931 5,405 39,960 1,960 0.2 7.1 31.2 3.6 

Graham - - 1,100 1,100 - - 0.9 2.0 

Greenlee 4,623 1,515 - - 1.2 2.0 - -

Maricopa - - - 0 - - - a

Navajo 52,745 38,384 64,027 3,094 13.8 50.3 49.9 5.8 

Pima - 33 - - - a - -

Santa Cruz - - - 48 - - - 0.1

Yavapai 2,220 20 1,895 1,612 0.6 a 1.5 3.0

Totalb 382,674 76,312 128,220 53,777 100 100 100 100

a

Less than 0.05 percent.

b

Percentage detail may not sum to 100% due to rounding.
USDA Forest Service Resour. Bull. RMRS-RB-13. 2012 11

Ponderosa pine continued to be the leading species harvested among all product types in Arizona in 2007 (table A7), accounting for 86 percent of total harvest

(table A5). Douglas-fir, white and subalpine firs, and Engelmann spruce were harvested in relatively small quantities (table A6). Engelmann spruce comprised only

17 percent of the 2007 house log harvest, Ponderosa pine harvest spiked in 2002 at

95 percent of total harvest partly because of the salvage of fire- and beetle-killed

ponderosa pine (Morgan and others 2006). In 1984, ponderosa pine accounted for

more than 90 percent of the harvest (347 MMBF of 383 MMBF harvested), but

McLain (1988) reported that live trees accounted for 97 percent of this volume.

Timber Flow

The majority (97 percent) of Arizona’s 2007 timber harvest was processed

in State. However, Arizona was a net exporter of timber. Slightly more than

1.7 MMBF was exported for processing in Colorado, Nevada, and Utah, while a

very small amount of timber was imported from Montana, Oregon, and Utah for

processing in Arizona (table A8).

Timber processors in Arizona received 52,133 MBF of timber in 2007.

Ownership sources of timber delivered to Arizona mills in 2007 varied slightly

with more volume coming from National Forest land than in 2002. More than

60 percent of all receipts came from private and tribal timberlands with a little

less than 40 percent from National Forests (table A9), which supplied timber to 11

Arizona mills (65 percent) in 2007. National Forests provided Arizona log home

manufacturers with 96 percent of the house log volume processed in Arizona, with

NIPF landowners providing the remaining 4 percent (table A10).

Table A5: Proportion of Arizona timber harvest by species, selected years (sources: Setzer 1971; Setzer and Throssell 1977; 

McLain 1988; Keegan and others 2001a; Morgan and others 2006).

Species 1969a 1974a 1984 1998 2002 2007

--------------Percentage of harvest----------------

Ponderosa pine 74.2 69.6 90.6 87.5 94.8 86.4

Engelmann spruce 0.9 2.1 2.3 3.1 1.2 5.5

Dougles-fir 5.3 5.6 4.5 6.9 2.4 3.6

White fir 3.6 4.8 2.4 1.3 1.5 3.1

Pinyon pine, juniper, limber pine, aspen 16.0 17.9 0.2 1.2 < 0.05 1.4

All speciesb 100 100 100 100 100 100

a

Harvest data for 1969 and 1974 include fuelwood; 1984,1998, 2002, 2007 do not include fuelwood.

b

Percentage detail may not add to 100 due to rounding.

Table A6: Arizona timber harvest by species, selected years (sources: McLain 1988; 

Keegan and others 2001a; Morgan and others 2006).

Species 1984 1998 2002 2007

--------------MBF Scribner---------------

Ponderosa pine 346,851 66,804 121,614 46,483

Engelmann spruce 8,667 2,340 1,551 2,948

Douglas-fir 17,217 5,264 3,129 1,915

White fir 9,214 961 1,900 1,662

Other speciesa 722 943 26 769

All speciesb 382,674 76,312 128,220 53,777

a

Other species include juniper, other softwoods, and hardwoods.

b

May not sum due to rounding.
12 USDA Forest Service Resour. Bull. RMRS-RB-13. 2012

Table A7: Arizona timber harvest by species and product, 2007.

Species Sawlogs House logs

Other 

productsb All products

---------------Thousand board feet, Scribner-----------------

Ponderosa pine 43,955 331 2,197 46,483

Engelmann spruce 2,874 75 - 2,949

Douglas-fir 1,912 3 - 1,915

True firsa 1,661 - - 1,661

Other speciesc 719 28 22 769

All species 51,121 437 2,219 53,777

--------------Percentage of product by species-------------

Ponderosa pine 86.0 75.7 99.0 86.4

Engelmann spruce 5.6 17.2 - 5.5

Douglas-fir 3.7 0.7 - 3.6

True firsa 3.2 - - 3.1

Other speciesc 1.4 6.4 1.0 1.4

All species 95.1 0.8 4.1 100

a

True firs include white and subalpine fir. 

b

Other products include industrial fuelwood, furniture logs, fiber logs, and viga logs. 

c

Other species include juniper,other softwoods, and hardwoods.

Table A8: Arizona timber products imports and exports, 2007.

Timber product Imports Exports

Net imports 

(net exports)

---Thousand board feet, Scribner---

Sawlogs - 1,683 (1,683)

House logs 50 35 15 

Other productsa 24 - 24 

All products 74 1,718 (1,644)

a

Other products include furniture logs, fiber logs, and viga logs.

Table A9: Ownership of timber products received by Arizona forest products industry, 1998, 2002 and 2007 (source: Keegan and 

others 2001a; Morgan and others 2006).

1998 2002 2007

Ownership class

MBF

Scribner

Percentage 

of total

MBF

Scribner

Percentage 

of total

MBF

Scribner

Percentage 

of total

Private and tribal timberland 48,102 71.1 58,108 76.3 31,706 60.8

 Tribal 45,964 68.0 56,150 73.8 4,400 8.4

 Private 2,138 3.2 1,958 2.6 27,306 52.4

National Forests 19,510 28.9 18,006 23.7 20,427 39.2

All owners 67,612 100 76,114 100 52,133 100
USDA Forest Service Resour. Bull. RMRS-RB-13. 2012 13

Timber Use

Arizona’s 2007 timber harvest—approximately 11,300 thousand cubic feet

(MCF), exclusive of bark (fig. A1)—was used by several manufacturing sectors

both within and outside Arizona. Of this volume, 9,113 MCF was delivered as

logs to sawmills, 73 MCF went to log home manufacturers, and 2,114 MCF went

to other plants, including post, pole, viga, latilla, and wood pellet manufacturers,

as well as residue-utilizing facilities including bioenergy facilities, pulp mills, reconstituted board plants, and mulch and animal bedding producers. Volumes are

presented in cubic feet rather than board feet Scribner because both mill residues

and timber products are displayed.

The following conversion factors were used to convert Scribner board foot volume to cubic feet:

•	 5.98 board feet per cubic foot for house logs;

•	 5.61 board feet per cubic foot for sawlogs;

•	 1.05 board foot per cubic foot for all other products.

Of the 9,113 MCF of timber received by sawmills, 3,672 MCF (40 percent)

was processed into finished lumber or other sawn products, and about 182 MCF

was lost to shrinkage. The remaining 5,259 MCF (58 percent) yielded mill residue. About 5,198 MCF of sawmill residue was utilized by other sectors within

Arizona and in other States—1,455 MCF for biomass energy; and 3,743 MCF for

pulp, livestock bedding, or mulch. Only 61 MCF (<1 percent) of sawmill residue

remained unused. Of the 73 MCF of timber received by log home manufacturers,

31 MCF (43 percent) became house logs. The remaining 42 MCF became mill

residue. About 8 MCF of house log residue was used by other sectors; and about

34 MCF remained unused. Of the 2,114 MCF of timber received by other manufacturers, all was utilized for solid wood products such as posts, vigas, or latillas,

or used in residue-related products like mulch, livestock bedding, fuel pellets, or

for biomass energy production.

Table A10: Timber received by Arizona forest products industry by ownership class and product, 2007.

Ownership class Sawlogs House logs Other productsa All products

--------------Thousand board feet, Scribner---------------

Private and tribal timberland 29,630 20 2,056 31,706

 Private 26,830 20 456 27,306

 Tribal 2,800 - 1,600 4,400

Public timberland 19,808 432 187 20,427

 National Forest 19,808 432 187 20,427

All owners 49,438 452 2,243 52,133

--------------Percentage of product by owner-------------

Private and tribal timberland 59.9 4.4 91.7 60.8

 Private 54.3 4.4 20.3 52.4

 Tribal 5.7 - 71.3 8.4

Public timberland 40.1 95.6 8.3 39.2

 National Forest 40.1 95.6 8.3 39.2

All owners 94.8 0.9 4.3 100

a

Other products include industrial fuelwood, furniture logs, fiber logs, and viga logs.
14 USDA Forest Service Resour. Bull. RMRS-RB-13. 2012

Figure A1: Arizona timber harvest and flow, 2007.

Arizona Timber Harvest and Flow, 2007

Figure A1 --Arizona timber harvest and flow, 2007

Sawmills

9,113 MCF

Other plantsa

2,114 MCF

Finished house logs 

and log homes

31 MCF

Finished lumber and 

other sawn products

3,672 MCF

Total Harvest

11,300 MCF

House log and log 

home manufacturers

73 MCF

Other products

7,320 MCF

Residue utilized

by other plants

8 MCF

Residue utilized

by other plants

5,198 MCF

Unutilized 

residue

34 MCF

a

Other plants include post, pole, viga, latilla, and wood pellet manufacturers, as well as residue-utilizing facilities 

including bioenergy facilities, pulp mills, reconstituted board plants, and mulch and animal bedding producers.

Unutilized 

residue

61 MCF

Shrinkage

182 MCF
USDA Forest Service Resour. Bull. RMRS-RB-13. 2012 15

Forest Industry Sectors

Arizona’s primary forest products industry in 2007 consisted of 17 active manufacturers in six counties (table A11). Facilities tended to be located near the forest

resource along the northern side of the Mogollon Plateau, with concentrations in

southern Apache and Navajo counties (fig. A2). The sawmill sector, manufacturing

lumber and other sawn products, was the largest sector operating in 2007 with 8

facilities—three less than were operating in 2002. Five facilities produced house

logs and log homes, the same as reported in 2002. A viga and latilla manufacturer,

a log furniture producer, one bark producer, and a fuel pellet manufacturer were

also actively purchasing or utilizing timber in 2007. These four firms were indicative of the increased diversity of timber-processors that developed in Arizona since

the end of the 1980s. One paper mill utilizing recycled material also operated in

Arizona during 2007 but did not receive any timber or mill residue. As recently

as 1998 this facility used some roundwood pulpwood and mill residues and was

included in previous reports (McLain 1988; Keegan and others 2001a).

Primary wood products sales increased as did the variety of producers since

2002, with finished product sales in 2007 about 5 percent higher than in 2002

(table A12). The 2007 sales increase over 2002, however, did not occur in the

sawmill industry, but in the more recently developing log home and other products

Table A11: Active Arizona primary wood products facilities by county and product, 2007 (sources: 

McLain 1988; Keegan and others 2001a; Morgan and others 2006).

County Lumber

Log homes and 

house logs

Other 

productsa

Pulp 

and 

paper Total

Apache 1 1 2

Coconino 2 2

Gila 1 1

Maricopa 3 1 4

Navajo 1 1 3 5

Yavapai 2 1 3

2007 Total 8 5 4 0 17

2002 Total 11 5 7 0 23

1998 Total 6 4 2 1 13

1990 Total 14 3 1 1 19

1984 Total 20 0 2 1 23

a

Other products include posts, poles, vigas, latillas, fuel pellets, log furniture, and biomass energy.

Table A12: Finished product sales of Arizona’s primary wood products sectors, selected years. (sources: WWPA 

various years; Keegan and others 2001a; Morgan and others 2006).

Sector 1984 1990 1998 2002 2007

--------Thousands of 2007 dollars--------

Sawmills $176,934 $144,784 $30,640 $27,677 $20,458

Log home and other sectorsa 248 570 2,393 7,193 16,076

Totalb $177,182 $145,354 $33,033 $34,870 $36,534

a

Other sectors include producers of posts, poles, vigas, latillas, log furniture, and fuel pellets.

b

All sales are reported F.O.B. the manufacturer’s plant. Sales of mill residues, mulch, and paper not included for 

comparison to previous years.
16 USDA Forest Service Resour. Bull. RMRS-RB-13. 2012

sectors where sales increased 572 percent since 1998. In 1990, the four firms manufacturing products other than lumber accounted for only $570,000, less than 0.5

percent of total wood products sales that year (Keegan and others 2001a). In 2007,

sales from the house log and other products manufacturers exceeded $16 million,

and accounted for 44 percent of finished products sales.

Sawmill Sector

The number of sawmills in Arizona decreased in the past five years by over

25 percent, while total lumber production decreased by 34 percent from about

83 MMBF in 2002 to less than 55 MMBF in 2007 (table A13). A number of the

State’s largest sawmills closed between 1998 and 2007, shifting a larger proportion

of the State’s lumber production into small mills producing less than 10 MMBF annually. Consequently, average annual lumber production per mill decreased from

13.5 MMBF in 1998 to 7.5 MMBF in 2002, and 6.9 MMBF for 2007 (table A14).

Figure A2: Map of Arizona 

facilities.
USDA Forest Service Resour. Bull. RMRS-RB-13. 2012 17

The State’s four largest sawmills in 2007 produced an average of 12.7 MMBF, accounting for 93 percent of the lumber production, while the remaining four mills

had an average lumber production of less than 1 MMBF (table A15).

On average, Arizona sawmills produced approximately 1.12 board feet of

lumber for every board foot Scribner of timber processed for an average overrun of 12 percent in 2007. Overrun was 27 percent in 2002 (Morgan and others

2006) and 46 percent in 1998 (Keegan and others 2001a). The overrun decline

was likely due to the dramatic shift of timber processed and the resulting size,

condition, and product mix that could be recovered from the harvested timber. In

1998, about 64 percent of the lumber produced by Arizona’s sawmills was dimension and studs, 35 percent was board and shop lumber, and less than one percent

was timbers (Keegan and others 2001a). In 2002, only 22 percent of the lumber

Table A13: Arizona sawmills by production size class, selected years (sources: Setzer and 

Wilson 1970; WWPA 1992, 1993; Keegan and others 2001a; Morgan and others 2006).

Year Under 10 MMBFa Over 10 MMBFa Total

-----------------Number of sawmills------------------

2007 8 c 8

2002 9 2 11

1998 2 4 6

1990 5 9 14

1966 13 10 23

---Percentage of lumber output--- Volume (MBFb)

2007 100 c 54,860

2002 25 75 82,658

1998 1 99 80,970

1990 4 96 388,000

1966 11 89 437,000

a

Size class is based on reported lumber production. MMBF denotes million board feet 

lumber tally.

b

MBF = thousand board feet lumber tally.

c

All mills were included in <10 MMBF to avoid disclosing individual operations.

Table A14: Number of Arizona sawmills and average lumber 

production, selected years (sources: McLain 1988; Setzer and 

Wilson 1970; Keegan and others 2001a; Morgan and others 

2006).

Year Number of sawmills Average lumber production 

MMBFa

2007 8 6.9

2002 11 7.5

1998 6 13.5

1990 14 27.7

1984 20 19.2

1966 23 19.0

1962 28 11.6

1960 38 8.7

a

MMBF = million board feet lumber tally.
18 USDA Forest Service Resour. Bull. RMRS-RB-13. 2012

produced by Arizona’s sawmills was dimension and studs; while 69 percent was

board and shop lumber, and timbers, cants, or pallet stock constituted 19 percent

of production (Morgan and others 2006). For 2007, only 4 percent of the lumber

produced by Arizona’s sawmills was dimension and studs; while 3 percent was

board and shop lumber, and timbers, cants, or pallet stock constituted 93 percent

of production.

Historically, the sawmill sector has accounted for more than 99 percent of wood

products sales in Arizona. By 2002 that proportion had slipped to 79 percent, as

timber harvest levels declined and the number of sawmills decreased. Sales from

sawmills accounted for just 56 percent ($20.5 million) of finished products sales

in 2007, decreasing from $27.7 million in 2002 (Morgan and others 2006). Of the

sawmill products mine timbers, cants, and pallet stock accounted for $18.8 million

(91.8 percent), board and shop lumber accounted for just under $1 million (4.5 percent) of sawmill sales in 2007, and dimension lumber was $ .76 million (3.7 percent) of sales. This was quite a shift in product balance from historical sales.

Log home Sector

Arizona’s log home sector remained relatively unchanged from 2002. The number of house log manufacturers did not change from 2002 to 2007 (table A11).

Only firms that process timber and manufacture house logs or log homes, not log

home distributors, were included in the 1990, 1998, 2002 and 2007 censuses. In

2007, Arizona’s five log home manufacturers processed 452 MBF Scribner of timber, produced about 139 MLF of house logs, and generated about $1.8 million

in product sales. 2002 sales were higher by10 percent ($2 million), and both the

volume of timber processed and volume of house logs produced decreased 8 and

17 percent respectively for 2007.

Other Products Sector

As with the sawmill sector fewer Arizona mills produced other primary wood

products, with three less facilities operating in 2007 than in 2002 (table A11).

Finished products sales by manufacturers of posts, poles, vigas, latillas, fuel pellets, and log furniture exceeded $14 million in 2007. A specific sales value was

not reported in 2002 to avoid disclosure of firm level data (Morgan and others

2006); however, sales from the sector were estimated to have increased more than

180 percent from 2002 to 2007. Additional detail about the sector must be withheld

to protect the confidentiality of firm level information.

Table A15: Arizona lumber production by mill size, 2007.

Size classa

Number 

of mills Volume 

Percentage 

of total

Average 

per mill 

MBFb MBFb

Over 5 MMBF 4 50,890 93 12,723

Under 5 MMBF 4 3,970 7 993

Total 8 54,860 100 6,858

a

Size class is based on reported lumber production. MMBF denotes million board feet lumber 

tally.

b

MBF = thousand board feet lumber tally.
USDA Forest Service Resour. Bull. RMRS-RB-13. 2012 19

Capacity and Utilization

Two aspects of capacity were examined for calendar year 2007 in Arizona and

the other Four Corners States: production capacity and timber-processing capacity. Production capacity is defined as the amount of finished product that could

be produced given sufficient supplies of raw materials and firm market demand

for the products, considering normal maintenance and down time. Primary wood

products producers specified annual and 8-hour shift production capacities in units

of output (for example, MBF of lumber, MLF of house logs, number of vigas, etc.)

for each firm. Product recovery ratios were calculated for each firm using reported

timber input and product output volumes. Timber-processing capacity was defined

as the volume of timber reported in MBF Scribner that could be processed given

sufficient supplies of raw materials and firm market demand for the products, and

was estimated for each firm by applying the product recovery ratios to production

capacity.

Arizona’s annual sawmill production capacity was 77,850 MBF of lumber in

2007. Producing 54,860 MBF of lumber, sawmills utilized about 70 percent of

their lumber production capacity. Across all industry sectors, total timber-processing capacity was 84,857 MBF Scribner. Accounting for changes in log inventories,

a total of 58,231 MBF Scribner was processed by Arizona firms in 2007, with

timber-processing capacity utilization about 69 percent. Sawtimber-processing

capacity was 141,480 MBF Scribner in 1998, with 53,458 MBF Scribner (38 percent) utilized (Keegan and others 2001a). In 2002, sawtimber-processing capacity

fell to 98,025 MBF Scribner, with 71,260 MBF Scribner (73 percent) utilized.

The decreased sawtimber-processing capacity and increased capacity utilization

resulted from the permanent closure of two large sawmills, which were operating

well below capacity in 1998.

Mill Residue Volumes, Types, and Uses

In 1998, Arizona’s lone paper mill was the largest consumer of mill residues that

were generated in the State. However, that mill shifted to using recycled material

and did not use either roundwood pulpwood or mill residues in 2007. This change

affected not only the ways and amounts of residues that were utilized, but it also

impacted other sectors’ ability to operate profitably. Sawmills, the leading timber

processors, were also the main residue producers in Arizona. These facilities had

to develop new markets for their residues, utilize the residues in-house, or consider

cutting production to avoid generating more residue than could be disposed of

affordably.

In 2007, Arizona mills produced 67,329 BDU, approximately 6,464 MCF of

mill residue, with 98.5 percent utilized (table A16). Both residue production and

the proportion utilized decreased from 1998. In 1998, Arizona sawmills generated

8,687 MCF, utilizing 99.9 percent (Keegan and others 2001a). Arizona’s drop in

residue utilization between 1998 and 2007 signaled a reversal of the long-term

trend of increased residue utilization noted by Keegan and others (2001a) and was

largely attributable to changes at the State’s paper mill. The decrease in total residue volume generated, however, was attributable to sawmills processing less volume but creating more residues per unit of lumber produced because of the balance

of products produced. In 1998, sawmills produced about 1.12 BDU per MBF of

lumber; in 2007 that residue factor had increased to 1.22 BDU per MBF of lumber

(table A17).
20 USDA Forest Service Resour. Bull. RMRS-RB-13. 2012

Three types of wood fiber residue have been produced by Arizona mills: coarse

residue (chips) consisting of slabs, edging, trim, peelings, and log ends; fine residue consisting of planer shavings and sawdust; and bark. Coarse residue was the

State’s largest residue component at 37,523 BDUs (55.7 percent) of all residues in

2007, with 99 percent utilized. Out-of-State pulp and paper facilities used about

14,000 BDUs of the coarse material, with the remaining utilized volume going to

energy and unspecified uses (table A16). Fine residues comprised the second largest component at 16,202 BDUs (24.1 percent) of mill residues. Only 95.9 percent

of fine residue was utilized in 2007, primarily as mulch or animal bedding. Bark

accounted for 20 percent of all residues and was largely used for mulch or unspecified products in 2007, with 13,536 BDU (99.5 percent) utilized.

Primary Forest Products Markets and Sales

Sales from Arizona’s primary wood products industry in 2007 totaled $38.2

million, including finished products and mill residues (table A18). Lumber, mine

Table A16: Production and disposition of Arizona mill residues, 2007.

Residue type

Total 

utilized

Pulp and 

board Energy

Mulch/ 

bedding

Unspecified 

use Unused

Total 

produced

----------------------------Bone-dry unitsa--------------------------------

Coarse 37,223 14,000 14,573 - 8,650 300 37,523

Fine 15,537 - - 15,537 - 665 16,202

 Sawdust 8,676 - - 8,676 - 640 9,316

 Planer shavings 6,861 - - 6,861 - 25 6,886

Bark 13,536 - 2 5,814 7,720 68 13,604

Total 66,296 14,000 14,575 21,351 16,370 1,033 67,329

----------------------------Percentage of residue type--------------------------------

Coarse 99.2 37.3 38.8 - 23.1 0.8 55.7

Fine 95.9 - - 95.9 - 4.1 24.1

 Sawdust 93.1 - - 93.1 - 6.9 13.8

 Planer shavings 99.6 - - 99.6 - 0.4 10.2

Bark 99.5 - 0.0 42.7 56.7 0.5 20.2

Total 98.5 20.8 21.6 31.7 24.3 1.5 100

a

Bone-dry unit = 2,400 lb oven-dry wood.

Table A17: Arizona sawmill residue factors, 1998, 2002 and 2007 (sources: 

Keegan and others 2001a; Morgan and others 2006).

Type of residue 1998 2002 2007

------BDU/MBF lumber tallya--------

Coarse 0.50 0.44 0.68

Sawdust 0.22 0.15 0.17

Planer shavings 0.19 0.14 0.12

Bark 0.21 0.23 0.25

Total 1.12 0.96 1.22

a

Bone-dry unit (BDU = 2,400 lb oven-dry wood) of residue generated for 

every 1,000 board feet of lumber manufactured.
USDA Forest Service Resour. Bull. RMRS-RB-13. 2012 21

Table A18: Destination and sales value of Arizona’s primary wood products and mill residues, 2007.

Product Arizona

Other

4-Corner 

States

Other Rocky 

Mtn Statesa Far Westb Northeastc Southd

North 

Centrale Otherf Total

------------------------------------------Thousand 2007 dollars------------------------------------------

Lumber, mine timbers, and other 

sawn products $7,930 $9,557 $563 - - $1,584 $788 $90 $20,512

House logs and log homes 1,189 328 - - 119 - 219 - 1,855

Other productsg 5,307 8,092 - 2,440 - - - - 15,839

Total $14,426 $17,977 $563 $2,440 $119 $1,584 $1,007 $90 $38,206

--------------------------------------Percentage of regional sales by product-------------------------------------

Lumber, mine timbers, and other 

sawn products 55.0 53.2 100.0 - - 100.0 78.3 - 53.7

House logs and log homes 8.2 1.8 - - - - 21.7 - 4.9

Other productsg 36.8 45.0 - 100.0 - - - - 41.5

Total 37.8 47.1 1.5 6.4 0.3 4.1 2.6 0.2 100

a

Other Rocky Mountains includes Idaho, Montana, Nevada.

b

Far West includes Alaska, California, Hawaii, Oregon, and Washington.

c

Northeast includes Connecticut, Maine, Massachusetts, New Hampshire, New Jersey, New York, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, and Vermont.

d

South includes Alabama, Arkansas, Delaware, Florida, Georgia, Kentucky, Louisiana, Maryland, Mississippi, North Carolina, Oklahoma, South Carolina, 

Tennessee, Texas, Virginia, and West Virginia.

e

North Central includes Illinois, Indiana, Iowa, Kansas, Michigan, Minnesota, Missouri, Nebraska, North Dakota, Ohio, South Dakota, and Wisconsin.

f

Other areas consist of products being shipped outside the United States.

g

Other products include posts, poles, vigas, latillas, log furniture, mill residues, mulch, and fuel pellets.

timbers, and other sawn products accounted for 54 percent ($20.5 million) of total

sales; house logs and log homes accounted for 5 percent ($1.9 million); while other

products and mill residues accounted for 41 percent ($15.8 million). The other

Four Corners States (Colorado, New Mexico, and Utah) were the leading markets

for lumber, log homes, and other products which accounted for 47 percent of total

sales. Arizona was second with in-State sales accounting for 37.8 percent of total

sales, lumber playing a significant role. The Far West States were a major market

area for other products, including mill residues.

Colorado

This chapter focuses on Colorado’s timber harvest and forest products industry

during 2007. Details of timber harvest, flow, and use are followed by descriptions of the primary processing sectors, capacity and utilization statistics, and mill

residue characteristics. The chapter concludes with information on primary wood

products industry sales by Colorado mills. Comparisons with previous years are

provided where possible. Limited historical information is available about timber harvesting and mill production and residues in Colorado. The last comprehensive report on the State’s industrial roundwood production and mill residues

was conducted in 2002 (Morgan and others 2006) and data for previous years include 1962 (Spencer and Farrenkopf 1964), 1969 (Setzer 1971b), 1974 (Setzer and

Shupe 1977), and 1982 (McLain 1985). More recently, Lynch and Mackes (2001)
22 USDA Forest Service Resour. Bull. RMRS-RB-13. 2012

provided a brief discussion of Colorado timber harvest in their study of wood use

in Colorado from 1997 to 2000.

Timber Harvest, Flow, and Use

In 2008, Colorado had approximately 11.4 million acres of nonreserved timberland (Forest Inventory and Analysis 2009), with National Forests accounting for

69 percent, private owners accounting for 22 percent, and other public agencies

accounting for the remaining 10 percent (table C1). All private timberland was

classified as NIPF timberland. Colorado had no large tracts of timberland owned

by entities operating primary wood processing facilities. Standing sawtimber volume on timberland was estimated at 16.3 billion cubic feet or approximately 85.8

billion board feet Scribner in 2008 (U.S. Department of Agriculture, FIDO 2009).

Timber Harvest

Colorado’s 2007 commercial timber harvest was 86.5 MMBF Scribner, an 8.5

percent increase over 2002’s harvest of 79.7 MMBF Scribner. The 2007 harvest

was 21 percent less than the 1999 harvest of 110 MMBF reported by Lynch and

Mackes (2001) and nearly 16 percent less than the 1982 harvest of 103 MMBF

Scribner (McLain 1985). Only modest increases in Colorado’s total annual timber

harvest occurred despite increased salvage of dead timber, accounting for 55 percent (47.8 MMBF) of the 2007 harvest volume, more than doubling the 26 percent

(20 MMBF) harvest of dead timber in 2002 (Morgan and others 2006). In 1982

dead trees accounted for just 8 percent of the total harvest volume (McLain 1985).

As in most of the Western States, decreasing Federal timber harvests have led to

smaller total harvest volumes and greater shares of annual timber harvest coming

from other ownership sources. However the National Forest’s share of Colorado’s

timber harvest in 2007 was almost 50 percent. While in recent years private and

tribal landowners provided the majority of Colorado’s timber harvest, for 2007

they were down slightly at 48 percent. Lynch and Mackes (2001) indicated that

National Forests provided about 47 percent of the 1999 harvest. In 2002, the

National Forest’s share of Colorado’s timber harvest had dropped to 38 percent

(table C2). In 1974 and 1982, National Forests accounted for 90 and 80 percent, respectively, of harvested volume (Setzer and Shupe 1977, McLain 1985). National

Forests did provide the majority (78.5 percent) of house logs and other products

harvested in 2007, but NIPF landowners provided the majority of sawlogs, and

post and poles (table C3). Sawlogs accounted for about 84 percent (73 MMBF) of

the total volume harvested, house logs and other products accounted for about 5

and 7 percent respectively, and posts and poles were about 3 percent of the harvest

in 2007.

Table C1: Colorado nonreserved timberland by ownership class (source: 

Forest Inventory and Analysis program, 2008).

Ownership class

Thousand 

acres

Percentage of 

nonreserved 

timberland

National Forest 7,824 69

Private 2,456 22

Other public 1,117 10

Total 11,397 100
USDA Forest Service Resour. Bull. RMRS-RB-13. 2012 23

During 2007, Grand County led Colorado’s timber harvest with just over 35 percent (30.4 MMBF Scribner) of the volume; Delta and Mesa Countiesfollowed with

15 and 6 percent, respectively (table C4). For the 2002 harvest, Garfield County

led Colorado’s timber harvest with just under 12 percent (9.3 MMBF Scribner) and

Mesa and Las Animas Counties followed with 11 and 9 percent. In 1982, Jackson

and Montezuma Counties led the harvest with more than 15 MMBF (14 percent)

of the harvest each (McLain 1988).

Lodgepole pine was the leading species harvested in Colorado, accounting for

52 percent of the harvested volume in 2007 (table C5). This major shift in species

harvested from past years mainly stemmed from massive numbers of lodgepole

pine trees either killed by or threatened by mountain pine beetle attack. Aspen

and cottonwood accounted for 20 percent, spruces, including Engelmann and blue

spruce, accounted for almost 12 percent, while ponderosa pine accounted for 8 percent. Ponderosa pine was the most frequently harvested species by volume in 2002

(28 percent), followed by spruces at 25 percent, then aspen/cottonwood 19 percent

and lodgepole pine at only 15 percent (Morgan and others 2006). In 1982, spruces

were the leading species harvested, accounting for slightly more than 40 percent,

Table C2: Colorado timber harvest by ownership class, 1982, 2002 and 2007 (source: McLain 1985; Morgan and others 

2006).

1982 2002 2007

Ownership class

MBF 

Scribner

Percentage 

of total

MBF 

Scribner

Percentage 

of total

MBF 

Scribner

Percentage 

of total

Private and tribal timberland 14,814 14.3 45,723 57.4 41,334 47.8

 Private 14,814 14.3 45,223 56.7 40,810 47.2

 Tribal - 0.0 500 0.6 524 0.6

Public timberland 88,618 85.7 33,989 42.6 45,206 52.2

 National Forest 83,106 80.3 30,631 38.4 43,179 49.9

 State lands 4,977 4.8 2,749 3.4 1,837 2.1

 Other public 535 0.5 609 0.8 190 0.2

All owners 103,448 100 79,711 100 86,540 100

Table C3: Colorado timber products harvested by ownership class, 2007.

Ownership class Sawlogs Post & pole House logs

Other 

productsa All products

-------Thousand board feet, Scribner--------

National Forest 34,610 1,295 3,621 3,653 43,179

Private timberland 35,939 1,473 931 2,467 40,810

Other public lands 1,957 - 38 32 2,027

Tribal timberland 500 - 24 - 524

All owners 73,006 2,768 4,614 6,152 86,540

-----Percentage of harvested product by ownership----

National Forest 47.4 46.8 78.5 59.4 49.9

Private timberland 49.2 53.2 20.2 40.1 47.2

Other public lands 2.7 - 0.8 0.5 2.3

Tribal timberland 0.7 - 0.5 - 0.6

All owners 84.4 3.2 5.3 7.1 100

a

Other products include furniture logs, fiber logs, viga logs, and logs delivered to primary manufacturers that became 

firewood.
24 USDA Forest Service Resour. Bull. RMRS-RB-13. 2012

Table C4: Colorado timber harvest by county, selected years (sources: Setzer and Shupe 1977; McLain 1985; Morgan and others 2006).

County 1974 1982 2002 2007 1974 1982 2002 2007

--------MBF Scribner-------- --Percentage of harvest--

Adams - - 8 2 - - a a

Alamosa 397 800 - - 0.2 0.8 - -

Archuleta 24,856 300 1,640 260 11.6 0.3 2.1 0.3

Boulder 90 514 44 3 a 0.5 0.1 a

Chaffee - 252 595 48 - 0.2 0.7 0.1

Clear Creek - 500 - - - 0.5 - -

Conejos 6,007 1,221 740 618 2.8 1.2 0.9 0.7

Costilla - - 3,684 4,986 - - 4.6 5.8

Custer 2,383 2,526 300 717 1.1 2.4 0.4 0.8

Delta 1,324 933 2,376 13,195 0.6 0.9 3.0 15.2

Dolores 12,687 7,801 5,907 3,275 5.9 7.5 7.4 3.8

Douglas 213 1,600 40 417 0.1 1.5 0.1 0.5

Eagle 5,221 1,500 200 - 2.4 1.5 0.3 -

Elbert 265 - - - 0.1 - - -

El Paso 285 470 240 49 0.1 0.5 0.3 0.1

Fremont - 1,100 1,673 348 - 1.1 2.1 0.4

Garfield 2,218 500 9,321 1,924 1.0 0.5 11.7 2.2

Gilpin - - 20 - - - a -

Grand 18,406 618 3,113 30,387 8.6 0.6 3.9 35.1

Gunnison 12,431 2,336 4,249 4,110 5.8 2.3 5.3 4.7

Huerfano 2,192 1,800 500 500 1.0 1.7 0.6 0.6

Jackson 20,786 16,273 4,373 2,916 9.7 15.7 5.5 3.4

Jefferson - 1,881 361 21 - 1.8 0.5 a

La Plata 39,950 1,271 2,312 321 18.7 1.2 2.9 0.4

Lake - - 844 - - - 1.1 -

Larimer 5,219 2,497 3,145 528 2.4 2.4 3.9 0.6

Las Animas 993 1,600 7,057 2,300 0.5 1.5 8.9 2.7

Logan 33 - - - a - - -

Mesa 5,252 1,765 8,660 4,973 2.5 1.7 10.9 5.7

Mineral 11,876 6,531 372 683 5.5 6.3 0.5 0.8

Moffat 158 - 124 - 0.1 - 0.2 -

Montezuma 4,169 15,001 4,495 3,242 1.9 14.5 5.6 3.7

Montrose 2,714 7,735 3,029 1,625 1.3 7.5 3.8 1.9

Ouray - 2,565 30 8 - 2.5 a a

Park 252 2,456 4,369 2,432 0.1 2.4 5.5 2.8

Pitkin 331 - - - 0.2 - - -

Pueblo 176 - 306 48 0.1 - 0.4 0.1

Rio Blanco 370 10 730 - 0.2 a 0.9 -

Rio Grande 10,857 9,277 557 100 5.1 9.0 0.7 0.1

Routt 10,442 1,976 1,143 2,008 4.9 1.9 1.4 2.3

Saguache 11,426 4,802 520 1,459 5.3 4.6 0.7 1.7

San Juan - - 274 - - - 0.3 -

San Miguel - 2,131 1,020 - - 2.1 1.3 -

Summit - 193 289 2,606 - 0.2 0.4 3.0

Teller 46 713 1,049 432 a 0.7 1.3 0.5

Total 214,025 103,448 79,711 86,540 100 100 100 100

a

Less than 0.05 percent.
USDA Forest Service Resour. Bull. RMRS-RB-13. 2012 25

while ponderosa pine accounted for 22 percent (McLain 1985). Lodgepole pine

and aspen were the leading species harvested for sawlogs in 2007, accounting for

almost 58 and 16 percent, respectively (table C6). Spruces comprised 67 percent of

the house log harvest, lodgepole pine was the leading species harvested for posts

and poles, and aspen and cottonwood accounted for 93 percent of other products

volume harvested.

Table C5: Colorado timber harvest by species, selected years (sources: Setzer and Shupe 1977; McLain 1985; Morgan and others 

2006).

Species 1974 1982 2002 2007 1974 1982 2002 2007

------- MBF Scribner ------- ---- Percentage of harvest ----

Lodgepole pine 42,187 15,500 12,457 45,026 19.7 15.0 15.6 52.0 

Aspen 4,825 12,737 15,292 17,319 2.3 12.3 19.2 20.0 

Sprucea 91,638 41,877 19,908 10,203 42.8 40.5 25.0 11.8 

Ponderosa pine 34,306 22,716 22,526 6,899 16.0 22.0 28.3 8.0 

Douglas-fir 26,927 6,574 6,959 3,946 12.6 6.4 8.7 4.6 

True firsb 14,142 3,986 2,512 3,132 6.6 3.9 3.2 3.6 

Other speciesc - 58 58 14 - 0.1 0.1 0.0 

All species 214,025 103,448 79,711 86,539 100 100 100 100 

a

Spruce includes Engelmann and blue spruce.

b

True firs include white and subalpine fir. 

c

Other species includegambel oak and western redcedar.

Table C6: Colorado timber harvest by species and product, 2007.

Species Sawlogs House logs

Posts 

and poles

Other 

productsa

All 

products

--------Thousand board feet, Scribner---------

Lodgepole pine 42,187 1,277 1,317 246 45,026 

Aspen 11,535 65 5 5,715 17,319 

Spruceb 7,025 3,090 82 5 10,203 

Ponderosa pine 5,667 41 1,019 171 6,899 

Douglas-fir 3,472 136 335 2 3,946 

True firsc 3,118 4 10 - 3,133 

Other speciesd 2 - - 12 14 

All species 73,006 4,614 2,769 6,152 86,540 

------Percentage of product by species-------

Lodgepole pine 57.8 28.5 8.9 4.0 52.0 

Aspen 15.8 0.1 206.4 92.9 20.0 

Spruceb 9.6 1.8 0.2 0.1 11.8 

Ponderosa pine 7.8 22.1 6.2 2.8 8.0 

Douglas-fir 4.8 7.3 0.1 0.0 4.6 

True firsc 4.3 0.2 - - 3.6 

Other speciesd 0.0 - 0.4 0.2 0.0 

All species 84.4 5.3 3.2 7.1 100 

a

Other products include furniture logs, fiber logs, viga logs, and logs delivered to primary manufacturers that became firewood.

b

Spruce includes Engelmann and blue spruce.

c

True firs include white and subalpine fir. 

d

Other species include gambel oak and western redcedar.
26 USDA Forest Service Resour. Bull. RMRS-RB-13. 2012

Timber Flow

The majority (98 percent) of Colorado’s 2007 timber harvest was processed

in-State; during 2007 Colorado was a net importer of about 7.3 MMBF of timber.

About 1.6 MMBF were exported for processing in Utah, and New Mexico; while

8.9 MMBF were imported from Utah, New Mexico, Wyoming, Arizona, Montana,

Oklahoma, and Canada for processing in Colorado (table C7).

Timber processors in Colorado received 93,871 MBF of timber in 2007, including 8,968 MBF that was harvested outside the State. Private and tribal timberlands provided 48 percent of the timber delivered to Colorado mills in 2007, with

44,325 MBF coming from private lands and 534 MBF from tribal lands (table C8).

National Forests provided about 46.6 percent (43,790MBF) of timber receipts,

with 27—less than half—of Colorado’s timber processors receiving timber cut

from National Forests. During 2007, National Forests provided Colorado log

home manufacturers with 84 percent of the house log volume processed in-State,

NIPF landowners provided 14 percent, and less than 1 percent came from Canada.

Private timberlands supplied the majority of sawlogs and posts and poles processed in Colorado, while public timberlands provided the majority of timber for

other products.

Timber Use

Colorado’s 2007 timber harvest—approximately 21,578 MCF, exclusive of bark

(fig. C1)—was used by several manufacturing sectors both within and outside of

Colorado. Of this volume, 13,362 MCF went as logs to sawmills, 918 MCF went

to log home manufacturers, and 7,298 MCF went to post, pole, viga, latilla, log

furniture, and excelsior manufacturers.

The following conversion factors were used to convert Scribner board foot volume to cubic feet:

• 5.08 board feet per cubic foot for house logs;

• 5.27 board feet per cubic foot for sawlogs;

• 2.21 board foot per cubic foot for all other products.

Of the 13,362 MCF of timber received by sawmills, 5,027 MCF (38 percent)

was processed into finished lumber or other sawn products, and about 150 MCF

was lost to shrinkage. The remaining 8,185 MCF (61 percent) yielded mill residue.

About 8,076 MCF of sawmill residue was utilized, and about 123 MCF (1 percent)

remained unused. Of the 918 MCF of timber received by log home manufacturers, about 603 MCF (66 percent) was manufactured into house logs, while the

remaining 315 MCF became mill residue. About 305 MCF of house log residue

was utilized, and about 10 MCF remained unused. Of the 7,298 MCF of timber

Table C7: Colorado timber products imports and exports, 2007.

Timber product Imports Exports

Net imports

(net exports)

--Thousand board feet, Scribner--

Sawlogs 2,103 - 2,103 

House logs 1,738 120 1,618 

Other productsa 5,127 1,517 3,610 

All products 8,968 1,637 7,331 

a

Other products include furniture logs, fiber logs, viga logs, and logs delivered to primary 

manufacturers that became firewood.
USDA Forest Service Resour. Bull. RMRS-RB-13. 2012 27

received by other manufacturers, nearly 6,409 MCF was utilized in solid wood

products (such as posts, poles, vigas, latillas, and log furniture) or was used in the

production of excelsior. About 885 MCF of residues from these other sectors were

utilized and 4 MCF went unused.

Forest Industry Sectors

Colorado’s primary forest products industry in 2007 consisted of 64 active manufacturers in 28 counties (table C9). Facilities tended to be located near the forest

resource in the central and southwestern portions of the State (fig. C2). The sawmill sector, manufacturing lumber and other sawn products, was the largest sector

operating in 2007 with 30 mills; 19 facilities produced house logs and log homes.

There were nine log furniture producers, five post and pole firms, and an excelsior

producer also operating in 2007. Morgan and others (2006) identified 133 primary

wood-processing plants in 2002: 50 sawmills, 46 house log plants, 10 post and

pole facilities, and 27 facilities producing log furniture and other products including a shake mill, and an excelsior manufacturer. Changes in Colorado’s industry

structure over the past 20 years were similar to those experienced throughout the

West, with the number of sawmills decreasing and the number and diversity of

Table C8: Timber received by Colorado forest products industry by ownership class and product, 2007.

Ownership class Sawlogs

Posts

and poles House logs

Other 

productsa

All 

products

-------Thousand board feet, Scribner--------

Private and tribal timberland 38,192 1,084 927 4,657 44,859 

 Private 37,692 1,084 893 4,657 44,325 

 Tribal 500 - 34 - 534 

Public timberland 36,917 280 5,275 6,510 48,982 

 National Forest 34,610 280 5,237 3,663 43,790 

 State lands 2,157 - 13 2,832 5,002 

 Other public 150 - 25 15 190 

Other owners - - 30 - 30 

 Other mills - - - - -

 Canada - - 30 - 30 

All owners 75,109 1,364 6,232 11,167 93,871 

--------Percentage of product by owner--------

Private and tribal timberland 50.8 79.5 14.9 41.7 47.8 

 Private 50.2 79.5 14.3 41.7 47.2 

 Tribal 0.7 - 0.5 - 0.6 

Public timberland 49.2 20.5 84.7 58.3 52.2 

 National Forest 46.1 20.5 84.0 32.8 46.6 

 State lands 2.9 - 0.2 25.4 5.3 

 Other public 0.2 - 0.4 0.1 0.2 

Other owners - - 0.5 - 0.0 

 Other mills - - - - -

 Canada - - 0.5 - 0.0 

All owners 80.0 1.5 6.6 11.9 100 

a

Other products include furniture logs, fiber logs, viga logs, and logs delivered to primary manufacturers that became 

firewood.
28 USDA Forest Service Resour. Bull. RMRS-RB-13. 2012

Figure C1: Colorado timber harvest and flow, 2007.

Colorado Timber Harvest and Flow, 2007 

Figure C1- Colorado timber harvest and flow, 2007.

Sawmills

13,362 MCF

Other plantsa

7,298 MCF

Finished house logs 

and log homes

603 MCF

Finished lumber and 

other sawn products

5,027 MCF

Total Harvest

21,578 MCF

House log and log 

home manufacturers

918 MCF

Other products

6,409 MCF

Utilized 

residue

9,266 MCF

a Other plants include post, pole, viga, latilla, log furniture, and excelsior manufacturers.

Unutilized 

residue

123 MCF

Unutilized 

residue

10 MCF

Unutilized 

residue

4 MCF

Utilized 

residue

885 MCF

Utilized 

residue

8,076 MCF

Shrinkage

150 MCF
USDA Forest Service Resour. Bull. RMRS-RB-13. 2012 29

Table C9: Active Colorado primary wood products facilities by county and product, 2007 (sources: McLain 

1985; Morgan and others 2006).

County Lumber

Log homes and 

house logs Post and pole

Log furniture and 

other productsa Total

Arapahoe 1 1

Archuleta 3 3

Boulder 1 1 2

Conejos 2 2

Custer 1 1

Delta 3 3

Denver 1 1

Eagle 1 1

El Paso 1 1

Fremont 2 1 3

Garfield 2 1 3

Grand 1 1 2 1 5

Huerfano 1 1

Jefferson 1 1

La Plata 1 3 4

Larimer 3 1 1 1 6

Las Animas 1 1

Mesa 1 1

Mineral 1 1

Montezuma 3 1 1 5

Montrose 2 4 1 7

Park 3 3

Rio Grande 1 1

Routt 2 2

Saguache 1 1

Summit 1 1 2

Teller 1 1

Weld 1 1

2007 Total 30 19 5 10 64

2002 Total 50 46 10 27 133

1982 Total 84 5 4 2 95

a

Other products include excelsior.

other manufacturers increasing (Keegan and others 2001a,b; Morgan and others

2004 a,b; Morgan and others 2006).

Historic sales values for Colorado’s primary wood products producers were not

provided by Setzer (1971b), Setzer and Shupe (1977), or McLain (1985). In 2007,

sales value of finished products from Colorado’s primary wood products industry

totaled $101 million. This compares to 2002 sales of $109 million in 2007 dollars (table C10). Sales from sawmills accounted for 44 percent, about the same as

2002; house log and log home manufacturers accounted for 24 percent, a 5 percent

drop from 2002; and other products manufacturers accounted for about 33 percent,

an increase from 2002 of about 5 percent of finished products sales.
30 USDA Forest Service Resour. Bull. RMRS-RB-13. 2012

Figure C2: Map of Colorado facilities.

Table C10: Finished product sales of Colorado’s primary wood products sectors, 

2007 (source: Morgan and others 2006).

Sector 2002 2007

--------Thousands of 2007 dollarsa--------

Sawmills $47,193 $45,043

Log homes 31,808 19,460

Other sectorsb 30,136 36,652

Total $109,137 $101,155

a

All sales are reported f.o.b. the manufacturer’s plant.

b

Other sectors include producers of posts, poles, log furniture, and excelsior.
USDA Forest Service Resour. Bull. RMRS-RB-13. 2012 31

Sawmill Sector

The number of sawmills in Colorado decreased from 84 in 1982 (McLain 1985)

to 50 in 2002 and to 30 in 2007 (table C11), with 20 sawmills closing between

2002 and 2007. Total lumber production in the State increased 39 percent from

about 83 MMBF in 2002 (Morgan and others 2006) to115 MMBF, the average

production per mill increased 129 percent from 1.7 MMBF to 3.9 MMBF. This

increase is a function of fewer mills producing more volume. The State’s nine largest sawmills in 2007 produced an average of 11,788 MBF, and seven of these mills

produced between 2,000 MBF and 5,000 MBF. The remaining 21 mills produced

less than 442 MBF of lumber (table C12).

Technological improvements have made Colorado mills more efficient. For example, thinner kerf saws reduce the proportion of the log that becomes sawdust.

Additionally, mill-delivered log diameters are believed to have decreased over the

past 25 years, with reduced old-growth harvesting and increased use of restoration

and fuels treatments that favor retention of larger trees and the removal of smaller

stems. As log diameters decrease, the Scribner log rule, which is used in Colorado,

under estimates—by an increasing amount—the volume of lumber that can be

recovered from a log, thus increasing overrun. On average, Colorado sawmills

produced approximately 1.54 board feet of lumber for every board foot Scribner of

timber processed for an average overrun of 54 percent in 2007, slightly higher than

the 47 percent overrun in 2002 (Morgan and others 2006). Overrun was estimated

to be 17 percent in 1982, using WWPA’s (1983) lumber production and McLain’s

(1985) sawlog consumption. This overrun increase was attributed to improved

milling technology and the increased use of smaller diameter timber.

Table C11: Number of Colorado sawmills and average 

lumber production, selected years (source: McLain 

1985; WWPA 1983; Morgan and others 2006).

Year

Number of 

sawmills

Average lumber 

production 

MMBFa

2007 31 3.8

2002 50 1.7

1982 84 1.4b

a

MMBF = million board feet lumber tally.

b

Total production 118 MMBF. 

Table C12: Colorado lumber production by mill size, 2007.

Size classa

Number 

of mills Volume

Percentage 

of total

Average 

per mill 

MBFb MBFb

Over 2 MMBF 10 108,289 93 10,829

Under 2 MMBF 21 7,843 7 373

Total 31 116,132 100 3,746 

a

Size class is based on reported lumber production. MMBF denotes million board feet 

lumber tally.

b

MBF = thousand board feet lumber tally.
32 USDA Forest Service Resour. Bull. RMRS-RB-13. 2012

Salesfrom sawmills declined from 2002 to 2007, accounting forjust 43.5 percent

($44 million) of Colorado timber processors’ finished products sales in 2007; this

parallels 2002 numbers of 43 percent ($41.5 million) (Morgan and others 2006). In

comparison; sawmill sales accounted for 56 and 49 percent of timber processors’

finished product sales in Arizona and New Mexico, respectively, during 2007, and

historically accounted for 90 percent or more of sales throughout the Interior West

(Keegan and others 2001a,b,c; Morgan and others 2004b). Dimension lumber and

studs accounted for $28.1 million (64 percent) of sawmill product sales in 2007;

other sawn products accounted for $7.3 million (17 percent); mine timbers, cants,

and railroad ties accounted for $5 million (11 percent); board and shop lumber accounted for $2.2 million (5 percent); and other miscellaneous products accounted

for nearly $1.4 million (3 percent) of finished product sales from sawmills.

Log Home Sector

Colorado’s log home sector experienced substantial growth and then a decline

over the past 25 years. Twenty-seven less facilities were identified in 2007 than in

2002, whereas 41 more house log manufacturers were identified in 2002 than in

1982 (table C9). Only firms that processed timber and manufactured house logs

or log homes, not log home distributors, were included in the 1982, 2002 and

2007 censuses. In 2007, Colorado’s 19 log home manufacturers processed almost

6 MMBF Scribner of timber, produced about 1.3 million lineal feet (MMLF) of

house logs, and generated $19.5 million in productsales. By sales value, Colorado’s

log home industry is the third largest in the Western United States behind Montana

and Idaho.

Other Products Sectors

Following the same trend as the log home sector, Colorado’s producers of posts

and poles and other primary wood products significantly expanded production

from 1982 to 2002; production then declined from 2002 to 2007. There were 21

less manufacturers operating in this sector in 2007 compared to 2002, while 31

more facilities operated in 2002 than in 1982 (table C9). In 2007, nine of these

other products facilities manufactured log furniture, five were post and pole producers, and one was an excelsior plant. Finished products sales by manufacturers

of posts and poles exceeded $9 million, and sales by manufacturers of log furniture

and excelsior exceeded $30 million in 2007. Additional detail about this sector is

withheld to protect the confidentiality of firm level information.

Capacity and Utilization

Colorado’s annual sawmill production capacity was 205.5 MMBF of lumber in

2007. Sawmills produced 115.4 MMBF of lumber in 2007, utilizing 56 percent of

their lumber production capacity. This was an increase from the historically low

level of 35 percent production capacity utilization of reported in 2002 (Morgan and

others 2006). Timber-processing capacity among Colorado sawmills was 121,927

MBF Scribner, with 72,007 MBF Scribner of timber processed, making utilization

of timber-processing capacity among sawmills about 59 percent in 2007. Across

all industry sectors, total timber-processing capacity was 144,308 MBF Scribner.

Accounting for changes in mills’ log inventories, a total of 93,894 MBF Scribner

was processed by Colorado firms in 2007, making timber-processing capacity utilization about 65 percent across all sectors. The greater timber-processing capacity

utilization of all sectors compared to sawmills alone would indicate that processors
USDA Forest Service Resour. Bull. RMRS-RB-13. 2012 33

other than sawmills were operating near their total timber capacity and are better

positioned to utilize the mix of timber being offered in Colorado.

Mill Residue Volumes, Types, and Uses

Sawmills, the leading timber processors, were also the main residue producers in Colorado. In 2007, sawmills produced 1.04 BDU of residue per MBF of

lumber (table C13). Across all sectors, Colorado timber processors produced

121,982 BDU, approximately 11,729 MCF of mill residue, with 98.7 percent utilized (table C14). Total residue production declined from 22,749 MCF in 1974 and

12,420 MCF in 1982, but increased from 9,115 MCF in 2002, while the proportion

utilized increased from 40 percent in 1974 to 64 percent in 1982 (McLain 1985),

to 98 percent in 2002 (Morgan and others 2006). Colorado’s decreased residue

production stemmed from increased milling efficiencies working in concert with

decreased timber volumes processed. Increased residue utilization between 1974

and 2007 was attributable to decreased residue production and the evolution of

better markets for residue-related products.

Coarse residue was the State’s largest residue component at 57 percent

(69,552 BDU) of all residues in 2007, with 99 percent utilized. Out-of-State pulp,

paper, and reconstituted board facilities used 43,300 BDUs of the coarse material; the remaining volume was used for energy production and unspecified uses

(table C14). Fine residues comprised the second largest component at 30 percent

(36,639 BDUs) of mill residues. Almost 98 percent of fine residue was utilized in

2007, primarily for energy, with a little over one-third of fine residues going to

mulch or animal bedding facilities. Bark accounted for 13 percent of all residues

and was largely burned for energy or used for mulch in 2007, with 15,596 BDUs

(98 percent) utilized.

Primary Forest Products Markets and Sales

Sales from Colorado’s primary wood products industry during 2007 totaled

nearly $104 million, including finished products and mill residues (table C15).

Lumber, mine timbers, and other sawn products accounted for 43 percent (over

$45 million) of total sales; house logs and log homes accounted for 19 percent

(over $19 million); while other products and mill residues accounted for 29 percent

(slightly over $30 million). Colorado was the leading market area for lumber, log

homes, posts, poles, and log furniture, within-State sales accounting for 47 percent

of total sales. The other Four Corners States (Arizona, New Mexico, and Utah)

Table C13: Colorado’s sawmill residue factors, 2002 and 2007 

(source: Morgan and others 2006).

Type of residue 2002 2007

----BDU/MBF lumber tallya----

Coarse 0.42 0.60

Sawdust 0.17 0.21

Planer shavings 0.13 0.09

Bark 0.29 0.14

Total 1.01 1.04

a

Bone-dry unit (BDU = 2,400 lb oven-dry wood) of residue generated 

for every 1,000 board feet of lumber manufactured.
34 USDA Forest Service Resour. Bull. RMRS-RB-13. 2012

accounted for about 18 percent of total sales; the majority of revenues were generated from sales of lumber and log home products. The Southern U.S. accounted

for over 13 percent of total sales, 18 percent of log home sales and 26 percent of

other products sales. The North Central States, Far West, and Northeast were major

market areas for other products, including excelsior and mill residues.

Table C14: Production and disposition of Colorado mill residues, 2007.

Residue type Total utilized

Pulp and 

board Energy

Mulch/ 

bedding

Unspecified 

use Unused

Total 

produced

----------------------------Bone-dry unitsa--------------------------------

Coarse 68,949 43,300 11,070 - 14,579 603 69,552

Fine 35,857 - 22,508 13,349 - 782 36,639

 Sawdust 25,378 - 16,001 9,377 - 598 25,976

 Planer shavings 10,479 - 6,507 3,972 - 184 10,663

Bark 15,596 - 9,916 5,564 116 195 15,791

Total 120,402 43,300 43,494 18,913 14,695 1,580 121,982

----------------------------Percentage of residue type--------------------------------

Coarse 99.1 62.3 15.9 - 21.0 0.9 57.0

Fine 97.9 - 61.4 36.4 - 2.1 30.0

 Sawdust 97.7 - 61.6 36.1 - 2.3 21.3

 Planer shavings 98.3 - 61.0 37.3 - 1.7 8.7

Bark 98.8 - 62.8 35.2 0.7 1.2 12.9

Total 98.7 35.5 35.7 15.5 12.0 1.3 100

a

Bone-dry unit = 2,400 lb oven-dry wood.

Table C15: Destination and sales value of Colorado’s primary wood products and mill residues, 2007.

Product Colorado

Other 

4-Corner 

States

Other 

Rocky 

Mtn Statesa Far Westb Northeastc Southd

North 

Centrale Otherf Total

------------------------------------------------Thousand 2007 dollars-------------------------------------------------------

Lumber, mine timbers and 

other sawn products $32,874 $7,380 $1,905 $200 $28 $1,165 $1,490 - $45,042

House logs and log homes 9,929 3,581 656 304 274 3,588 1,128 - 19,460

Posts, poles, and log furniture 3,742 1,825 679 529 697 1,045 625 - 9,142

Other productsg 2,383 5,886 2,898 4,701 386 7,913 3,800 2,186 30,153

Total $48,928 $18,672 $6,138 $5,734 $1,385 $13,711 $7,043 $2,186 $103,797

---------------------------------------Percentage of product sales by region-----------------------------------------------

Lumber, mine timbers and 

other sawn products 73.0 16.4 4.2 0.4 0.1 2.6 3.3 - 43.4 

House logs and log homes 51.0 18.4 3.4 1.6 1.4 18.4 5.8 - 18.7 

Posts, poles, and log furniture 40.9 20.0 7.4 5.8 7.6 11.4 6.8 - 8.8 

Other productsg 7.9 19.5 9.6 15.6 1.3 26.2 12.6 7.2 29.0 

Total 47.1 18.0 5.9 5.5 1.3 13.2 6.8 2.1 100 

a

Other Rocky Mountains includes Idaho, Montana, Nevada.

b

Far West includes Alaska, California, Hawaii, Oregon, and Washington.

c

Northeast includes Connecticut, Maine, Massachusetts, New Hampshire, New Jersey, New York, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, and Vermont.

d

South includes Alabama, Arkansas, Delaware, Florida, Georgia, Kentucky, Louisiana, Maryland, Mississippi, North Carolina, Oklahoma, South 

Carolina, Tennessee, Texas, Virginia, and West Virginia.

e

North Central includes Illinois, Indiana, Iowa, Kansas, Michigan, Minnesota, Missouri, Nebraska, North Dakota, Ohio, South Dakota, and 

Wisconsin.

f

Other areas consist of products being shipped outside the U.S.

g

Other products include excelsior, firewood, and mill residues.
USDA Forest Service Resour. Bull. RMRS-RB-13. 2012 35

New Mexico

This chapter focuses on New Mexico’s timber harvest and forest products industry during 2007, and discusses changes that occurred since the 2002 industry

census conducted by Morgan and others (2006). Details of timber harvest, flow,

and use are followed by descriptions of the primary processing sectors, capacity

and utilization statistics, and mill residue characteristics. This chapter concludes

with information on New Mexico’s primary wood products industry sales.

Timber Harvest, Flow, and Use

In 2003, New Mexico had approximately 4.4 million acres of nonreserved timberland (O’Brien 2003), with National Forests accounting for 64 percent, private

and tribal owners accounting for 33 percent, and other public agencies accounting for the remaining 3 percent (table N1). All private timberland was classified

as NIPF timberland. With the exception of several Native American tribes, New

Mexico had no large tracts of timberland owned by entities operating primary

wood processing facilities. Sawtimber volume on nonreserved timberlands was

estimated at 5.1 billion cubic feet or approximately 29.1 billion board feet Scribner

in 2008 (U.S. Department of Agriculture, FIDO 2009).

Timber Harvest

New Mexico’s 2007 commercial timber harvest was 39,770 MBF Scribner,

53 percent of the 2002 harvest, and 40 percent of the 1997 harvest (Morgan and

others 2006; Keegan and others 2001b). The reduction in New Mexico’s total

annual timber harvest since the late 1980s was primarily due to the decline of

National Forest timber harvest. As National Forest and total timber harvest in the

State declined, a disproportionate and diminishing share of New Mexico’s timber

harvest came from National Forest timberlands (table N2). In 1966, 1969, 1974,

and 1986 National Forests accounted for 50 percent or more of harvested volume

(Setzer and Wilson 1970; Setzer 1971c; Setzer and Barrett 1977; McLain 1989),

whereas in 2002 and 2007 National Forests accounted for 14 percent of the harvest volume (Morgan and others 2006). Unlike other States in the region where

National Forests provided the majority of house logs harvested, the majority of

each of the timber products harvested in New Mexico came from private and tribal

timberlands, and National Forests provided less than 20 percent of each product,

except the other products category, which was almost 40 percent from National

Forest (table N3). Sawlogs accounted for almost 83 percent (33 MMBF) of the

total volume harvested.

Table N1: New Mexico nonreserved timberland by ownership 

class (source: O’Brien 2003).

Ownership class Thousand acres

Percentage of 

nonreserved 

timberland

National Forest 2,810 64

Private and tribal 1,448 33

Other public 146 3

Total 4,404 100
36 USDA Forest Service Resour. Bull. RMRS-RB-13. 2012

In 2007, as in 2002, Otero County led New Mexico’s timber harvest with slightly more than 47 percent of total volume; Colfax and Sandoval Counties followed,

with 24 and 6 percent, respectively (table N4). Otero County has accounted for an

increasing share of New Mexico’s timber harvest, with 7 percent in 1966, 10 percent in 1986, 38 percent in 1997, and 42 percent in 2002. Historically, Rio Arriba

has been among the State’s top three timber-producing counties, accounting for

15 percent or more of annual harvest volumes until 2007 when it only contributed

4.4 percent. Colfax County, however, was not a significant contributor to New

Mexico’s annual harvest until 2007, only periodically accounting for more than 10

percent of harvest in previous censuses (Setzer and Wilson 1970; McLain 1989;

Keegan and others 2001b; Morgan and others 2006).

Ponderosa pine continued to be the leading species harvested in New Mexico,

accounting for nearly 47 percent of the harvest in 2007; Douglas-fir retained its

long-held position as the second most harvested species (table N5). White and subalpine firs and Engelmann spruce together accounted for about 20 percent of the

2007 harvest. Ponderosa pine was the leading species harvested for sawlogs, vigas,

and house logs in 2007 (table N6). Douglas-fir and true firs were substantial components of the sawlog harvest, while Engelmann spruce was a minor component

Table N2: New Mexico timber harvest by ownership class, 1997, 2002 and 2007 (source: Keegan and others 2001b; Morgan 

and others 2006).

1997 2002 2007

Ownership class

MBF 

Scribner

Percentage 

of total

MBF 

Scribner

Percentage 

of total

MBF 

Scribner

Percentage 

of total

Private and tribal timberland 85,903 88.0 64,201 86.3 33,001 83.0

 Private 61,853 63.4 36,821 49.5 14,971 37.6

 Tribal 24,050 24.6 27,380 36.8 18,030 45.3

Public timberland 11,723 12.0 10,160 13.7 6,769 17.0

 National Forest 11,723 12.0 10,160 13.7 5,644 14.2

 State timberland - - - - 1,125 2.8

All owners 97,626 100 74,361 100 39,770 100

Table N3: New Mexico timber products harvested by ownership class, 2007.

Ownership class Sawlogs Vigas House logs

Other 

productsa All products

--------Thousand of board feet, Scribner---------

Tribal timberland 18,030 - - - 18,030

Private timberland 11,388 1,758 95 1,730 14,971

National Forest 3,409 435 - 1,800 5,644

State timberland - - - 1,125 1,125

All owners 32,827 2,193 95 4,655 39,770

-----Percentage of harvested product by ownership------

Tribal timberland 54.9 - - - 45.3

Private timberland 34.7 80.2 100.0 37.2 37.6

National Forest 10.4 19.8 - 38.7 14.2

State timberland - - - 24.2 2.8

All owners 82.5 5.5 0.2 11.7 100

a

Other products include posts, poles, furniture logs, fiber logs, and logs delivered to primary manufacturers 

that became firewood.
USDA Forest Service Resour. Bull. RMRS-RB-13. 2012 37

of house logs at 13 percent. Engelmann spruce and Douglas-fir were also small

components of the viga harvest. Ponderosa pine was the leading species harvested

for other products, while aspen and other species were also significant components

to the other product category, which includes posts, poles, furniture logs, and fire

wood logs.

Table N4: New Mexico timber harvest by county, selected years (sources: Setzer and Wilson 1970; McLain 1989; Keegan and others 

2001b; Morgan and others 2006).

County 1966 1986 1997 2002 2007 1966 1986 1997 2002 2007

------------MBF Scribner------------- -------Percentage-------

Bernalillo 691 - 490 100 - 0.3 - 0.5 0.1 -

Catron 25,588 29,494 2,973 250 1,500 10.6 17.7 3.0 0.3 3.8 

Cibola - 13,857 7,973 15 - - 8.3 8.2 a -

Colfax 32,853 4,000 18,450 3,777 9,423 13.6 2.4 18.9 5.1 23.7 

Eddy - 548 - - - - 0.3 - - -

Grant 538 663 - - 279 0.2 0.4 - - 0.7 

Lincoln - 1,450 198 - 1,800 - 0.9 0.2 - 4.5 

Los Alamos 54 - - - - a - - - -

McKinley 36,692 - 2,000 - - 15.1 - 2.0 - -

Mora 957 3,830 2,040 10,864 215 0.4 2.3 2.1 14.6 0.5 

Otero 17,335 16,982 36,866 30,825 18,835 7.2 10.2 37.8 41.5 47.4 

Rio Arriba 37,156 69,367 17,107 17,869 1,733 15.3 41.7 17.5 24.0 4.4 

Sandoval 66,619 5,932 4,360 1,200 2,190 27.5 3.6 4.5 1.6 5.5 

San Juan - 8,159 500 - - - 4.9 0.5 - -

San Miguel 9,140 2,075 2,259 8,100 795 3.8 1.2 2.3 10.9 2.0 

Santa Fe - 2,865 - 670 1,000 - 1.7 - 0.9 2.5 

Socorro 2,739 - 1,025 220 - 1.1 - 1.0 0.3 -

Taos 6,767 7,066 1,245 175 2,000 2.8 4.2 1.3 0.2 5.0 

Torrance - - 120 175 - - - 0.1 0.2 -

Valencia 4,548 - 20 120 - 1.9 - a 0.2 -

Totalb 242,313 166,342 97,626 74,361 39,770 100 100 100 100 100

a

Less than 0.05 percent.

b

Percentage detail may not sum to 100% due to rounding.

Table N5: New Mexico timber harvest by species, selected years (sources: Setzer and 

Wilson 1970; McLain 1989; Keegan and others 2001b; Morgan and others 2006).

Species 1966 1986 1997 2002 2007

--------Percentage of harvest---------

Ponderosa pine 49 68 57 50 47

Douglas-fir 17 16 26 22 25

True firsa 5 9 11 16 17

Other speciesb 15 4 <0.5 2 8

Engelmann spruce 14 3 7 10 3

All species 100 100 100 100 100

a

True firs include white and subalpine fir.

b

Other species include limber pine and aspen.
38 USDA Forest Service Resour. Bull. RMRS-RB-13. 2012

Timber Flow

The vast majority (93 percent) of New Mexico’s 2007 timber harvest was processed in State; however, New Mexico was a net exporter of timber. Almost 3

MMBF were exported for processing in Colorado, while a small amount of timber

was imported from Colorado for processing in New Mexico (table N7).

Timber processors in New Mexico received 37,917 MBF of timber in 2007, including 1,125 MBF that was harvested outside the State. Timber receipts dropped

nearly 45 percent since 2002, when New Mexico mills received 68,858 MBF of

timber. Ownership sources of timber delivered to New Mexico mills changed

slightly since 2002, with the proportion from private and tribal lands decreasing

from 85 percent to 79 percent in 2007 (table N8). National Forests supplied timber

to 10—less than a half—of New Mexico’s mills in 2007, accounting for 18 percent

of mill receipts, which was an increase from 2002 when National Forests supplied

just 15 percent of the timber received by New Mexico mills. Unlike other States

in the region, National Forests did not provide New Mexico forest products manufacturers with a large portion of timber products, supplying less than 11 percent

of sawlogs, 26 percent of vigas, no house logs, but 60 percent of other products,

mostly post and poles and firewood logs to the industry in 2007 (table N9).

Timber Use

New Mexico’s 2007 timber harvest—approximately 10,813 MCF, exclusive of

bark (fig. N1)—was used by several manufacturing sectors both within and outside

of New Mexico. Of this volume, 5,673 MCF went as logs to sawmills, 485 MCF

went to log home and viga manufacturers, and 4,655 MCF went to other plants,

Table N6: New Mexico timber harvest by species and product, 2007.

Species Sawlogs Vigas

House 

logs

Other 

productsa All products

-------Thousand of board feet, Scribner-------

Ponderosa pine 14,334 1,416 43 2,786 18,579

Douglas-fir 9,283 379 - 281 9,943

White fir 6,699 170 40 - 6,909

Lodgepole pine 1,444 - - 113 1,557

Other speciesb 9 - - 1,475 1,484

Engelmann spruce 1,058 228 12 - 1,298

All species 32,827 2,193 95 4,655 39,770

--------Percentage of product by species-------

Ponderosa pine 43.7 64.6 45.3 59.9 46.7

Douglas-fir 28.3 17.3 - 6.0 25.0

White fir 20.4 7.8 42.1 - 17.4

Lodgepole pine 4.4 - - 2.4 3.9

Other speciesb 0.0 - - 31.7 3.7

Engelmann spruce 3.2 10.4 12.6 - 3.3

All species 82.5 5.5 0.2 11.7 100

a

Other products include posts, poles, furniture logs, fiber logs, and logs delivered to primary manufacturers 

that became firewood.

b

Other species include alligator juniper, Rocky Mountain juniper, two-needle pinyon, Western redcedar, and 

Aspen.
USDA Forest Service Resour. Bull. RMRS-RB-13. 2012 39

including post, pole, log furniture, and excelsior manufacturers. The following

conversion factors were used to convert Scribner board foot volume to cubic feet:

• 5.75 board feet per cubic foot for sawlogs;

• 5.17 board feet per cubic foot for house logs and vigas;

• 1.02 board foot per cubic foot for all other products.

Of the 5,673 MCF of timber received by sawmills, 2,600 MCF (46 percent) was

manufactured into finished lumber or other sawn products, and about 114 MCF

Table N7: New Mexico timber products imports and exports, 2007.

Timber product Imports Exports

Net imports

(net exports)

-------Thousand board feet, Scribner-------

Sawlogs - 1,548 (1,548)

House logs - 15 (15)

Other productsa 1,125 1,415 (290)

All products 1,125 2,978 (1,853)

a

Other products include posts, poles, furniture logs, fiber logs, and logs delivered to primary 

manufacturers that became firewood.

Table N8: Ownership of timber products received by New Mexico mills, 1997, 2002 and 2007 (sources: Keegan and others 2001b; Morgan 

and others 2006).

1997 2002 2007

Ownership class

MBF 

Scribner

Percentage 

of total

MBF 

Scribner

Percentage 

of total

MBF 

Scribner

Percentage 

of total

Private and tribal timberland 82,238 90.6 58,698 85.2 30,023 79.2

Private 57,788 63.6 31,318 45.5 11,993 31.6

Tribal 24,450 26.9 27,380 39.8 18,030 47.6

National Forests 8,562 9.4 10,160 14.8 6,769 17.9

State Lands - - - - 1,125 3.0

All owners 90,800 100 68,858 100 37,917 100

Table N9: Timber received by New Mexico forest products industry by ownership class and product, 2007.

Ownership class Sawlogs Vigas House logs Other productsa All products

----------Thousand of board feet, Scribner-----------

Tribal timberland 18,030 - - - 18,030

Private timberland 9,840 1,258 80 815 11,993

National Forest 3,409 435 - 2,925 6,769

State lands - - - 1,125 1,125

All owners 31,279 1,693 80 4,865 37,917

-------Percentage of product by owner--------

Tribal timberland 57.6 - - - 47.6

Private timberland 31.5 74.3 100.0 16.8 31.6

National Forest 10.9 25.7 - 60.1 17.8

State lands - - - 23.1 3.0

All owners 82.5 4.5 0.2 12.8 100

a

Other products include posts, poles, fiber logs, and logs delivered to primary manufacturers that became firewood.
40 USDA Forest Service Resour. Bull. RMRS-RB-13. 2012

Figure N1: New Mexico timber harvest and flow, 2007.

New Mexico Timber Harvest and Flow, 2007

Figure N1–New Mexico timber harvest and flow, 2007

Sawmills

5,673 MCF

Other plantsa

4,655 MCF

Finished house logs 

and log homes

306 MCF

Finished lumber and 

other sawn products

2,600 MCF

Total Harvest

10,813 MCF

House log and viga 

manufacturers

485 MCF

Other products

4,427 MCF

Utilized 

residue

3,016 MCF

a

Other plants include post, pole, bark, firewood, and excelsior manufacturers.

Unutilized 

residue

350 MCF

Unutilized 

residue

1 MCF

Utilized 

residue

227 MCF

Utilized 

residue

2,610 MCF

Shrinkage

114 MCF
USDA Forest Service Resour. Bull. RMRS-RB-13. 2012 41

was lost to shrinkage. The remaining 2,959 MCF (52 percent) yielded mill residue.

About 2,610 MCF of sawmill residue was utilized, and about 350 MCF (12 percent) remained unused. Of the 485 MCF of timber received by log home and viga

manufacturers, about 306 MCF (63 percent) was used for house logs, while the

remaining 179 MCF became mill residue. All of the 179 MCF of house log residue

was utilized. Of the 4,655 MCF of timber received by other manufacturers, about

4,427 MCF was utilized in solid wood products such as posts, poles, fuel wood,

log furniture, or was used in the production of excelsior. About 227 MCF of residues from these other sectors were utilized, and 1 MCF went unused.

Forest Industry Sectors

New Mexico’s primary forest products industry in 2007 consisted of 24 active

manufacturers in 12 counties (table N10). Facilities tended to be located near the

forest resource in north-central New Mexico and in Otero County (fig. N2). The

sawmill sector, manufacturing lumber and other sawn products, was the largest

sector operating during 2007, with 12 facilities—9 less mills than were operating

in 2002. Five facilities produced vigas and latillas, a decrease of three since 2002.

The number of other products manufacturers operating in 2007 remained at seven,

with one post and pole manufacturer, one log home producer, two bark product facilities, one firewood producer and two wood shaving/excelsior facilities. Keegan

and others (2001b) noted that two particleboard plants and a medium density fiberboard (MDF) facility operated in New Mexico in 1986. One particleboard plant

closed in the early 1990s, the MDF plant closed in 1996, and the particleboard facility operating in 1997 was deemed inoperable in 2002 and was thus not included

in the current analysis.

Primary wood products sales as well as the number of producers continued to

decrease, with finished product sales in 2007 falling 51 percent since 2002 (table N11). The overall drop in sales was due to the dramatic decrease in sawmilling

Table N10: Active New Mexico primary wood products facilities by county and product, 2007 

(sources: McLain 1989; Keegan and others 2001b; Morgan and others 2006).

County Lumber Vigas and latillas Othera Total

Bernalillo 1 1

Catron 1 1

Colfax 1 2 3

Grant 1 1 2

Lincoln 1 1

Mora 1 1

Otero 2 2 4

Rio Arriba 1 1

San Miguel 2 1 3

Sandoval 1 1 2

Santa Fe 2 1 3

Taos 1 1 2

2007 Total 12 5 7 24

2002 Total 21 8 7 36

1997 Total 22 15 7 44

1986 Total 26 5-10 10 41-46

a

Other products include posts, poles, log homes, firewood, and bark products. 
42 USDA Forest Service Resour. Bull. RMRS-RB-13. 2012

sales but also in the viga and latilla sectors. Among other products, sales increased

15 percent since 2002. In 1997 and in 2002, lumber accounted for 74 percent of

total wood product sales but in 2007 it was only 49 percent. In 2007, sales from

other product manufacturers accounted for 39 percent of finished products sales

versus nearly 17 percent of sales in 2002.

Sawmill Sector

With the net loss of nine sawmills since 2002, total lumber production in New

Mexico dropped 51 percent from about 81.5 MMBF in 2002 to less than 40 MMBF

in 2007; most of the State’s lumber production shifted to mills producing less than

10 MMBF annually by 2007 (table N12). Closure of those nine mills caused average annual lumber production to fall 15 percent from 3.9 MMBF to 3.3 MMBF per

mill (table N13). In 2007, the State’s six largest sawmills produced an average of

6.4 MMBF, accounting for 97 percent of lumber production in New Mexico. The

remaining 6 mills had an average annual lumber production of less than 204 MBF

Figure N2: Map of New 

Mexico facilities.
USDA Forest Service Resour. Bull. RMRS-RB-13. 2012 43

per mill (table N14). The continued declines in New Mexico’s sawmill sector were

a direct result of decreasing timber harvests in the State; however, the implementation of restoration and hazardous fuel reduction treatments in the State could spur

a recovery of the sawmill sector (Fiedler and others 2002).

On average, New Mexico sawmills produced approximately 1.28 board feet of

lumber for every board foot Scribner of timber processed in 2007. Overrun averaged 26 percent in 2002 (Morgan and others 2006). The slight overrun increase

from 2002 to 2007 was likely due to the increased proportion of lumber production

by larger mills, which typically are more efficient and use smaller logs, and saw a

larger proportion of dimension and stud wood. In 2007, lumber produced by New

Mexico’s sawmills consisted of: 63 percent dimension and studs, 35 percent timbers, and 2 percent board and shop lumber and cants. Dimension lumber accounted

for $6.3 million (50 percent) of sawmill product sales in 2007, timbers were about

Table N11: Finished product sales of New Mexico’s primary wood products,selected years (sources: McLain 

1989; Miller Freeman, Inc. 1998; Keegan and others 2001b; Morgan and others 2006). 

Product 1986 1997 2002 2007

----Thousand 2007 dollars----

Lumber and sawn products $114,881 $53,122 $38,941 $12,616

Vigas and latillas 4,453 12,555 5,225 3,149

Other productsa 5,566 5,744 8,804 10,102

Totalb $124,900 $71,421 $52,970 $25,867

a

Other products include posts, poles, log homes, log furniture, and bark products. 

b

All sales are reported f.o.b. the manufacturer’s plant.

Table N12: New Mexico sawmills by production size class, selected years (sources: Setzer and 

Wilson 1970; McLain 1989; Keegan and others 2001b; Morgan and others 2006).

Year Under 10 MMBFa Over 10 MMBFa Total

-------------------Number of sawmills----------------

2007 12 c 12

2002 18 3 21

1997 18 4 22

1986 17 9 26

1966 58 6 64

1962 85 c 85

1960 117 c 117

---Percentage of lumber output--- Volume (MBFb)

2007 c c 39,823

2002 12 88 81,515

1997 10 90 108,675 

1986 12 88 232,000 

1966 38 62 262,848 

1962 c c 242,500 

1960 c c 224,400 

a

Size class is based on reported lumber production. MMBF denotes million board feet lumber 

tally.

b

MBF = thousand board feet lumber tally.

c

In 1960, 1962 and 2007 all mills were included in <10 MMBF to avoid disclosing individual 

operations.
44 USDA Forest Service Resour. Bull. RMRS-RB-13. 2012

$5.9 million (48 percent), and board and shop lumber and cants accounted for $285

thousand (2 percent).

Viga and Latilla Sector

New Mexico’s viga and latilla sector continued to contract between 2002 and

2007. Three fewer viga and latilla manufacturers were identified in 2007 than

in 2002, and sales dropped by more than $2 million (40 percent). In 2007, the

five firms remaining in the sector processed 2,412 MBF Scribner of timber versus 3,393 MBF processed in 2002 (Morgan and others 2006). At just over 828

thousand lineal feet of vigas and latillas produced in 2007, production dropped

substantially from 2002 when more than 1 million lineal feet were produced. The

continued contraction of the sector in 2007 emphasized the reversal of the previous

decade’s sector growth noted by Keegan and others (2001b). However, because

of the part-time nature of many viga and latilla operations, the sector may again

show increased production and sales in the future if demand for traditional styles

of construction should increase and if sufficient timber were available.

Other Products Sector

The same mills generally produced other primary wood products in 2007 as

in 2002; no new facilities opened during this 5-year period. Product sales by

Table N13: Number of New Mexico sawmills and average 

lumber production, selected years (sources: McLain 1989; 

Setzer and Wilson 1970; Keegan and others 2001b; 

Morgan and others 2006).

Year

Number of 

sawmills

Average 

production 

per mill

MMBFa

2007 12 3.3

2002 21 3.9

1997 22 4.9

1986 25 9.2

1966 64 4.1

1962 85 2.9

1960 117 1.9

a

MMBF = million board feet lumber tally.

Table N14: New Mexico lumber production by mill size, 2007.

Size classa

Number 

of mills Volume 

Percentage 

of total Average per mill 

MBFb MBFb

Over 1 MMBF 6 38,600 97 6,433 

Under 1 MMBF 6 1,223 3 204 

Total 12 39,823 100 3,319 

a

Size class is based on reported lumber production. MMBF denotes million board feet lumber tally.

b

MBF = thousand board feet lumber tally.
USDA Forest Service Resour. Bull. RMRS-RB-13. 2012 45

manufacturers of posts, poles, log homes, fire wood, bark and mulch, and wood

shavings producers exceeded $10 million in 2007; this was an increase of almost

14 percent over the period. Inflation-adjusted sales from the sector were about

$8.8 million in 2002. Additional detail about the sector is withheld to protect the

confidentiality of firm level information.

Capacity and Utilization

New Mexico’s annual lumber production capacity was 67,425 MBF in 2007.

Sawmills produced 39,823 MBF of lumber and utilized about 59 percent of their

production capacity. Across all industry sectors, total timber-processing capacity

was 61,941 MBF Scribner. Accounting for changes in log inventories, a total of

36,803 MBF Scribner was processed by New Mexico firms in 2007, with total

timber-processing capacity utilization about 59 percent. Sawtimber-processing

capacity was 170,000 MBF Scribner in 1997, with 48 percent utilized (Keegan

and others 2001b). In 2002, sawtimber-processing capacity fell to 88,162 MBF

Scribner, with 65,116 MBF Scribner (74 percent) utilized (Morgan and others

2006). Decreased capacity and capacity utilization in the sawmill sector resulted

from the permanent closure of large sawmills, which were operating well below

capacity in 2002.

Mill Residue Volumes, Types, and Uses

In 1997, Arizona’s lone paper mill and the particleboard plant in New Mexico

were the largest consumers of mill residues generated in New Mexico. As previously indicated, the paper mill shifted to using recycled material and the particleboard plant closed, thus affecting residue utilization and other aspects of timberprocessing in New Mexico and Arizona. Sawmills, New Mexico’s leading timber

processors, were the main residue producers in the State. Sawmills had to develop

new markets for their residues, utilize more of the residues in-house, or consider

cutting production to avoid generating more residue than could be disposed of affordably. The lack of outlets for mill residues also negatively impacted the ability

of sawmills to process small-diameter timber (Fiedler and others 2002), which

typically creates more residue per unit of lumber produced.

During 2007, New Mexico mills produced 42,896 BDUs (approximately 5,820

MCF) of mill residue with 91.4 percent being utilized (table N15). Both residue

production and the proportion utilized decreased from 2002, when New Mexico

sawmills generated 9,120 MCF, utilizing 95.7 percent (Morgan and others 2006).

New Mexico’s drop in residue utilization between 2002 and 2007 signaled a reversal of the long-term trend of increased residue utilization noted by Keegan and others (2001b) and was largely attributable to closure of the particleboard plant and

changes at the Arizona paper mill. The decrease in total residue volume generated

was due to two factors: a substantially smaller volume of timber being processed

and sawmills creating fewer residues per unit of lumber produced. In 1997, sawmills produced about 1.22 BDUs per MBF of lumber; by 2007 that residue factor

had dropped to 1.03 BDUs per MBF of lumber (table N16).

Coarse residue (chips) was the State’s largest residue component at 54.5 percent

(23,367 BDU) of all residues in 2007, with 100 percent utilized. Energy facilities used about 22,369 BDUs of the coarse material, with the remaining utilized

volume going to unspecified uses (table N15). Fine residues—sawdust and planer

shavings—comprised the second largest component at 23.4 percent (10,032 BDU)
46 USDA Forest Service Resour. Bull. RMRS-RB-13. 2012

of mill residues. Only 65.4 percent of fine residue was utilized in 2007, primarily

as mulch and animal bedding. Bark accounted for 22.1 percent of all residues and

was largely used for mulch, with 9,294 BDUs (98.0 percent) utilized in 2007.

Primary Forest Products Markets and Sales

Sales from New Mexico’s primary wood products industry in 2007 totaled

slightly over $26 million, including finished products and mill residues(table N17).

Lumber, mine timbers, and other sawn products accounted for 48 percent ($12.6

million) of total sales; other products and mill residues accounted for 40 percent

($10.3 million); while vigas and latillas accounted for 12 percent ($3.1 million).

New Mexico was the leading market area for vigas, latillas, and other products,

accounting for 86.8 percent of viga and latilla sales and 40.7 percent of other products sales. The other Four Corners States (Arizona, Colorado, and Utah) as well as

New Mexico accounted for 46 percent of lumber sales, and other areas (outside the

United States) mostly Mexico accounted for more than 35 percent.

Table N15: Production and disposition of New Mexico mill residues, 2007.

Residue type

Total 

utilized

Pulp and 

board Energy

Mulch/ 

bedding

Unspecified 

use Unused

Total 

produced

----------------------------Bone-dry unitsa--------------------------------

Coarse 23,359 - 22,369 - 990 8 23,367

Fine 6,562 - - 6,562 - 3,470 10,032

 Sawdust 3,862 - - 3,862 - 3,470 7,332

 Planer shavings 2,700 - - 2,700 - - 2,700

Bark 9,294 - 291 9,003 - 203 9,497

Total 39,215 - 22,660 15,565 990 3,681 42,896

----------------------------Percentage of residue type--------------------------------

Coarse 100.0 - 95.7 - 4.2 0.0 54.5

Fine 65.4 - - 65.4 - 34.6 23.4

 Sawdust 52.7 - - 52.7 - 47.3 17.1

 Planer shavings 100.0 - - 100.0 - - 6.3

Bark 97.9 - 3.1 94.8 - 2.1 22.1

Total 91.4 - 52.8 36.3 2.3 8.6 100.0

a

Bone-dry unit = 2,400 lb oven-dry wood.

Table N16: New Mexico sawmill residue factors, 1997, 2002 and 2007 (source: Keegan 

and others 2001b; Morgan and others 2006).

Type of residue 1997 2002 2007

------BDU/MBF lumber tallya--------

Coarse 0.52 0.56 0.58

Sawdust 0.29 0.20 0.17

Planer shavings 0.18 0.15 0.06

Bark 0.23 0.21 0.22

Total 1.22 1.12 1.03

a

Bone-dry unit (BDU = 2,400 lb oven-dry wood) of residue generated for every 1,000 

board feet of lumber manufactured.
USDA Forest Service Resour. Bull. RMRS-RB-13. 2012 47

Utah

This chapter focuses on Utah’s timber harvest and forest products industry during 2007. Details of timber harvest, flow, and use are followed by descriptions of

the primary processing sectors, capacity and utilization statistics, and mill residue

characteristics. The chapter concludes with information on primary wood products industry sales by Utah mills. Comparisons to previous years are provided

where possible. Limited historical information is available about timber harvesting and mill production and residues in Utah. The last comprehensive study of the

State’s industrial roundwood production and mill residues was conducted in 2002

(Morgan and others 2006), and data for previous years include 1966 (Setzer and

Wilson 1970), 1969 (Setzer 1971d), 1970 (Green and Setzer 1974), 1974 (Setzer

and Throssell 1977b), and 1992 (Keegan and others 1995).

Timber Harvest, Flow, and Use

In 2008, Utah had approximately 4.1 million acres of nonreserved timberland

(U.S. Department ofAgriculture, FIDO 2009) with National Forests accounting for

73 percent, private and tribal owners accounting for 18 percent, and other public

agencies accounting for the remaining 9 percent (table U1). All private timberland

was classified as NIPF timberland. Utah had no large tracts of timberland owned

by entities operating primary wood processing facilities. Sawtimber volume on

nonreserved timberlands was estimated at 4.8 billion cubic feet or approximately

Table N17: Destination and sales value of New Mexico’s primary wood products and mill residues, 2007.

Product

New 

Mexico

Other 

4-Corner 

States

Other Rocky 

Mtn Statesa Far Westb

North

-eastc Southd

North 

Centrale Otherf Total

------------------------------------------Thousand 2007 dollars-------------------------------------------------

Lumber, mine timbers and other 

sawn products $4,035 $1,804 $1,080 $1,080 - $161 - $4,456 $12,616

Vigas and latillas 2,733 316 - - - 100 - - 3,149

Other productsg 4,207 3,136 1,210 1,288 - 415 81 - 10,337

Total $10,975 $5,256 $2,290 $2,368 - $676 $81 $4,456 $26,102

---------------------------------Percentage of product sales by region-----------------------------------------

Lumber, mine timbers and other 

sawn products 32.0 14.3 8.6 8.6 - 1.3 - 35.3 48.3

Vigas and latillas 86.8 10.0 - - - 3.2 - - 12.1

Other productsg 40.7 30.3 11.7 12.5 - 4.0 0.8 - 39.6

Total 42.0 20.1 8.8 9.1 - 2.6 0.3 17.1 100.0

a

Other Rocky Mountains includes Idaho, Montana, Nevada.

b

Far West includes Alaska, California, Hawaii, Oregon, and Washington.

c

Northeast includes Connecticut, Maine, Massachusetts, New Hampshire, New Jersey, New York, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, and Vermont.

d

South includes Alabama, Arkansas, Delaware, Florida, Georgia, Kentucky, Louisiana, Maryland, Mississippi, North Carolina, Oklahoma, South Carolina, 

Tennessee, Texas, Virginia, and West Virginia.

e

North Central includes Illinois, Indiana, Iowa, Kansas, Michigan, Minnesota, Missouri, Nebraska, North Dakota, Ohio, South Dakota, and Wisconsin.

f

Other areas consist of products being shipped outside the United States.

g

Other products include posts, poles,log homes, log furniture, bark products, firewood, and mill residues.
48 USDA Forest Service Resour. Bull. RMRS-RB-13. 2012

24.8 billion board feet Scribner in 2008 (U.S. Department of Agriculture, FIDO

2009).

Timber Harvest

Utah’s 2007 commercial timber harvest was 30.3 MMBF Scribner (table U2), 27

percent less than the 2002 harvest of approximately 41 MMBF Scribner (Morgan

and others 2006), and 51 percent less than the 1974 harvest of 62 MMBF (Setzer

and Throssell 1977b). The decrease in Utah’s total annual timber harvest since

1992 was largely due to the decline in National Forest timber harvest. In 1966 and

1970, National Forests accounted for 94 and 88 percent, respectively, of harvested volume (Setzer and Wilson 1970; Green and Setzer 1974). In 1992, National

Forest timber accounted for almost 50.0 MMBF (77 percent) of the annual harvest

(Keegan and others 1995); in 2007 the agency provided only 15.5 MMBF (51

percent). As in most of the Western States, decreasing Federal timber harvests

have led to greater shares of annual timber harvest coming from other ownership

sources. National Forests still provide the majority of the State’s harvest, but the

volume and proportionate share supplied by private and tribal owners continues to

increase. During 2007, private and tribal landowners accounted for 38.5 percent

(11.7 MMBF) of Utah’stimber harvest, about the same percent asin 2002. National

Forests provided the majority (77 percent) of house logs harvested in 2007, but

among sawlogs and other products (e.g., furniture logs, fiber logs, posts, poles,

and industrial fuelwood) private timberlands and National Forests were evenly

split—each providing slightly less than 50 percent (table U2). Sawlogs accounted

Table U1: Utah nonreserved timberland by ownership class 

(source: Forest Inventory and Analysis program, 2008).

Ownership class Thousand acres

Percentage of 

nonreserved 

timberland

National Forest 2,982 73

Private and tribal 727 18

Other public 387 9

Total 4,096 100

Table U2: Utah timber products harvested by ownership class, 2007.

Ownership class Sawlogs House logs

Other 

productsa All products

--------------Thousand board feet, Scribner-------------------

National Forests 8,666 5,660 1,164 15,490 

Private and tribal timberland 8,679 1,690 1,301 11,669 

Other publicb 330 - 2,832 3,162 

All owners 17,675 7,350 5,296 30,321 

----Percentage of harvested product by ownership---

National Forests 49.0 77.0 22.0 51.1 

Private and tribal timberland 49.1 23.0 24.6 38.5 

Other publicb 1.9 - 53.5 10.4 

All owners 58.3 24.2 17.5 100 

a

Other products include industrial fuelwood, furniture logs, fiber logs, posts, and poles.

b

Other ownership class includes BLM and State.
USDA Forest Service Resour. Bull. RMRS-RB-13. 2012 49

for about 58 percent (17.6 MMBF) of the total volume harvested in 2007, house

logs were 24 percent, and other products accounted for about 18 percent.

In 2007, Wasatch County led Utah’s timber harvest, with 14 percent (4.3 MMBF

Scribner) of total volume; Sanpete and Garfield Counties followed with 13 and

10 percent, respectively (table U3). In 2002, Kane and Summit Counties led the

harvest with 5.5 MMBF (13 percent) and 4.1 MMBF (10 percent) of the harvest,

respectively (Morgan and others 2006).

Spruces, including Engelmann and blue spruce, were the leading species harvested in Utah, accounting for 42 percent (12.6 MMBF) of the harvest in 2007

(table U4). Aspen and cottonwood accounted for 29 percent, lodgepole pine for

13 percent, Douglas-fir accounted for 11 percent while ponderosa pine only accounted for 3 percent of harvest. In 2002, spruce was the leading species harvested,

accounting for 44 percent, while lodgepole accounted for 23 percent (Morgan and

others 2006). During the 1960s and 1970s, ponderosa pine was the leading species

harvested, accounting for 30 to 50 percent of the harvest; while lodgepole pine

Table U3: Utah timber harvest by county, selected years (sources: Setzer and Throssell 1977b; Keegan and others 

1995; Morgan and others 2006).

County 1974 1992 2002 2007 1974 1992 2002 2007

--------MBF Scribner--------- ---------Percentage---------

Beaver 155 2,952 633 468 0.2 4.6 1.5 1.5 

Cache 1,389 175 1,180 1,150 2.2 0.3 2.9 3.8 

Carbon 260 100 1,670 1,564 0.4 0.2 4.0 5.2 

Daggett 3,193 2,850 375 - 5.1 4.4 0.9 -

Davis - - 135 - - - 0.3 -

Duchesne 2,539 1,767 3,469 1,793 4.1 2.7 8.4 5.9 

Emery 250 - 45 284 0.4 - 0.1 0.9 

Garfield 8,502 7,047 3,446 3,141 13.6 10.9 8.4 10.4 

Grand 5,000 - 20 1,925 8.0 - a 6.3 

Iron - 1,435 773 1,554 - 2.2 1.9 5.1 

Juab - - 1 - - - 0.0 -

Kane 6,480 4,117 5,520 60 10.4 6.4 13.4 0.2 

Millard 30 - 342 - a - 0.8 -

Morgan 11 25 250 150 a a 0.6 0.5 

Piute 440 620 3,288 500 0.7 1.0 8.0 1.6 

Rich 2,159 - 3,000 - 3.5 - 7.3 -

Salt Lake - - 65 59 - - 0.2 0.2 

San Juan 5,000 4,503 1,444 1,865 8.0 7.0 3.5 6.2 

Sanpete 520 3,750 2,468 3,800 0.8 5.8 6.0 12.5 

Sevier 715 3,663 1,703 1,483 1.1 5.7 4.1 4.9 

Summit 5,589 10,000 4,107 2,700 8.9 15.5 10.0 8.9 

Uintah 14,652 16,624 2,715 1,398 23.5 25.7 6.6 4.6 

Utah 20 - 323 793 a - 0.8 2.6 

Wasatch 1,606 2,908 3,750 4,300 2.6 4.5 9.1 14.2 

Washington - - 375 1,334 - - 0.9 4.4 

Wayne 3,905 2,110 110 - 6.3 3.3 0.3 -

Weber 50 20 60 - 0.1 a 0.1 -

Total 62,465 64,666 41,268 30,321 100 100 100 100 

a

Less than 0.05 percent.
50 USDA Forest Service Resour. Bull. RMRS-RB-13. 2012

and spruces each accounted for 15 to 25 percent (Setzer and Wilson 1970; Setzer

1971d; Green and Setzer 1974; Setzer and Throssell 1977b).

Spruces were the leading species harvested for sawlogs and houselogs in 2007,

accounting for 6.5 and 5.6 MMBF (37 and 77 percent), respectively (table U5).

Aspen and cottonwood accounted for slightly more than 3.6 MMBF (68 percent)

of the volume harvested for other products. Lodgepole pine was the leading component of house logs (19 percent) and of other products (22 percent).

Table U4: Proportion of Utah timber harvest by species, selected years (sources: Setzer and Wilson 1970; 

Setzer 1971d; Setzer and Throssell 1977b; Keegan and others 1995; Morgan and others 2006).

Species 1966 1969 1974 1992 2002 2007

---------------Percentage of harvest----------------

Engelmann spruce 19 13 22 35 44 42

Aspen and cottonwood c c 4 5 10 29

Lodgepole pine 18 18 27 46 23 13

Douglas-fir 3 11 8 4 8 11

Ponderosa pine 50 43 33 5 13 3

True firsa 4 7 3 5 2 2

Other speciesb 6 8 3 c c c

All species 100 100 100 100 100 100

a

True firs include white, subalpine, and corkbark fir. 

b

Other species include juniper and hardwoods.

c

Less than 0.5 percent.

Table U5: Utah timber harvest by species and product, 2007.

Species Sawlogs House logs Other productsc All products

---------------Thousand board feet, Scribner-------------

Engelmann spruce 6,517 5,635 455 12,607

Aspen and cottonwood 5,122 6 3,601 8,730

Lodgepole pine 1,430 1,372 1,187 3,989

Douglas-fir 2,953 276 31 3,260

Ponderosa pine 1,016 55 10 1,080

True firsa 631 6 11 648

Other speciesb 5 0 1 6

All species 17,675 7,350 5,297 30,321

------------Percentage of product by species-------------

Engelmann spruce 36.9 76.7 8.6 41.6

Aspen and cottonwood 29.0 0.1 68.0 28.8

Lodgepole pine 8.1 18.7 22.4 13.2

Douglas-fir 16.7 3.8 0.6 10.8

Ponderosa pine 5.7 0.7 0.2 3.6

True firsa 3.6 0.1 0.2 2.1

Other speciesb d - d d 

All species 58.3 24.2 17.5 100

a

True firs include white, subalpine, and corkbark fir. 

b

Other species include juniper and hardwoods.

c

Other products include industrial fuelwood, furniture logs, fiber logs, posts, and poles.

d

Less than 0.1 percent
USDA Forest Service Resour. Bull. RMRS-RB-13. 2012 51

Timber Flow

The majority (83 percent) of Utah’s 2007 timber harvest was processed in-State;

however, Utah was a net exporter of almost 2.9 MMBF of timber.About 5.2 MMBF

were exported for processing in Colorado, Wyoming, Idaho, and Arizona; while

2.3 MMBF were imported for processing in Utah from Arizona, Colorado, Idaho,

Montana, Wyoming, and as far away as Oregon and Canada (table U6).

Timber processors in Utah received 27,470 MBF of timber in 2007, including

2,336 MBF that was harvested outside the State. Private and tribal timberlands

provided 11,587 MBF (42 percent) of the timber delivered to Utah mills in 2007

(table U7). National Forests provided 56 percent (15,502 MBF) of timber receipts,

with more than half (14) of Utah’s timber processors receiving timber cut from

National Forests. In 2002, Utah mills received 18 percent more timber. National

Forests supplied 67 percent (21,898 MBF) of the timber in 2002, and private and

tribal owners supplied 28 percent (9,241 MBF). During 2007, National Forests

provided Utah timber processors with 68 percent of house logs, 54 percent of sawlogs, and 52 percent of other timber products including fiber logs, furniture logs,

and posts, and poles (table U8). NIPF and tribal landowners provided 45 percent

of sawlogs, 32 percent of houselogs, and 46 percent of other timber products. State

lands provided less than 1 percent of the timber received by mills in Utah.

Timber Use

Utah’s 2007 timber harvest—approximately 7,082 MCF, exclusive of bark

(fig. U1)—was used by several manufacturing sectors both within and outside of

Utah. Of this volume, 3,459 MCF went as logs to sawmills, 1,842 MCF went to log

home manufacturers, and 1,781 MCF went to other plants, including post, pole,

Table U6: Utah timber products imports and exports, 2007.

Timber product Imports Exports

Net imports 

(net exports)

---Thousand board feet, Scribner---

Sawlogs 1,433 200 1,233

House logs 432 1,275 (843)

Other productsa 471 3,712 (3,241)

All products 2,336 5,187 (2,851)

a

Other products include industrial fuelwood, furniture logs, fiber logs, posts, 

and poles.

Table U7: Ownership of timber products received by Utah mills, 1992, 2002 and 2007 (sources: Keegan and others 1995; Morgan and 

others 2006).

1992 2002 2007

Ownership class MBF Scribner

Percentage 

of total

MBF 

Scribner

Percentage 

of total

MBF 

Scribner

Percentage 

of total

Private and tribal timberland 11,341 19.3 9,241 28.4 11,587 42.2

Public timberland 46,927 79.9 23,245 71.5 15,732 57.3

 National Forest 46,595 79.3 21,898 67.3 15,502 56.4

 State lands 332 0.6 1,346 4.1 230 0.8

Other ownersa 485 0.8 33 0.1 152 0.6

All owners 58,753 100 32,518 100 27,470 100

a

Other owners include the BLM, Canada, and (for 1992) unknown owners.
52 USDA Forest Service Resour. Bull. RMRS-RB-13. 2012

log furniture, and excelsior manufacturers. The following conversion factors were

used to convert Scribner board foot volume to cubic feet:

• 4.81 board feet per cubic foot for house logs;

• 5.15 board feet per cubic foot for sawlogs;

• 2.05 board foot per cubic foot for all other products.

Of the 3,459 MCF of timber received by sawmills, 1,640 MCF (47 percent) was

milled into finished lumber or other sawn products, and about 69 MCF was lost

to shrinkage. The remaining 1,750 MCF (51 percent) yielded mill residue. About

1,715 MCF of sawmill residue was utilized, and about 35 MCF (2 percent) remained unused. Of the 1,842 MCF of timber received by log home manufacturers,

about 1,106 MCF (60 percent) was processed into house logs, while the remaining

736 MCF became mill residue. About 684 MCF of house log residue was utilized,

and about 52 MCF remained unused. Of the 1,781 MCF of timber received by

other manufacturers, about 1,773 MCF was utilized as solid wood products such

as posts, poles and log furniture. About 7 MCF of residues from these other sectors

were utilized, and 1 MCF went unused.

Forest Industry Sectors

Utah’s primary forest products industry in 2007 consisted of 27 active manufacturers in 13 counties (table U9). Facilities tended to be located near the forest

resource along the mountainous central spine of the State (fig. U2). Changes in

Utah’s industry structure over the past 25 years were similar to those experienced

throughout the West, with the number of sawmills decreasing and the number and

diversity of other manufacturers increasing (Keegan and others 1995, 2001 a,b;

Morgan and others 2004 a,b; Morgan and others 2006). The sawmill sector (manufacturing lumber and other sawn products) was the largest, and included 12 mills

in 2007; 10 facilities produced house logs and log homes and there were five log

Table U8: Timber received by Utah forest products industry by ownership class and product, 2007.

Ownership class Sawlogs House logs

Other 

productsb All products

---------------Thousand board feet, Scribner-------------

Private and tribal timberland 8,579 2,062 946 11,587 

Public timberland 10,229 4,444 1,058 15,731 

 National forest 9,999 4,444 1,058 15,501 

 State lands 230 - - 230 

Other ownersa 100 - 52 152 

All owners 18,908 6,506 2,056 27,470 

------------Percentage of product by owner-------------

Private and tribal timberland 45.4 31.7 46.0 42.2 

Public timberland 54.1 68.3 51.5 57.3 

 National forest 52.9 68.3 51.5 56.4 

 State lands 1.2 - - 0.8 

Other ownersa 0.5 - 2.5 0.6 

All owners 68.8 23.7 7.5 100 

a

Other owners include the BLM and Canada.

b

Other products include furniture logs, fiber logs, posts, and poles.
USDA Forest Service Resour. Bull. RMRS-RB-13. 2012 53

Figure U1: Utah timber harvest and flow, 2007.

Utah Timber Harvest and Flow, 2007

a

Other plants include log furniture, and excelsior manufacturers.

Sawmills

3,459 MCF

Other plantsa

1,781 MCF

Finished house logs 

and log homes

1,106 MCF

Finished lumber and 

other sawn products

1,640 MCF

Total Harvest

7,082 MCF

House log and log 

home manufacturers

1,842 MCF

Other products

1,773 MCF

Utilized 

residue

2,406 MCF

Unutilized 

residue

88 MCF

Unutilized 

residue

52 MCF

Unutilized 

residue

1 MCF

Utilized 

residue

7 MCF

Utilized 

residue

1,715 MCF

Shrinkage

69 MCF
54 USDA Forest Service Resour. Bull. RMRS-RB-13. 2012

furniture producers operating in 2007. Morgan and others (2006) identified 49 primary wood-processing plants in 2002, including 23 sawmills, 14 house log plants,

10 log furniture producers, one post and pole firm, and a decorative bark producer.

In 1966 there were 50 active sawmills in the State (Setzer and Wilson 1970).

The number of producers, and primary wood products sales decreased between

2002 and 2007. Finished product sales ($27,332,000—adjusted for inflation) in

2007 were about 30 percent lower than 2002 sales, (table U10). This overall decrease was coupled with a substantial decline in lumber and log home sales while a

slight increase was noted in other product sales. Lumber sales were down $6.5 million, and log home manufacturers sales decreased around $6 million; however the

sales of other products increased by about $875 thousand over the 2002 totals. In

2007, lumber sales accounted for less than 30 percent of finished product sales,

versus 40 percent in 2002 and 73 percent in 1992; house logs and log homes accounted for about the same in 2002 and 2007 (55 percent) of sales. Other product

sales nearly doubled to 15 percent in 2007 compared to 8 percent of total sales in

2002.

Table U9: Active Utah primary wood products facilities by county and product, 2007 (sources: 

Keegan and others 1995; Morgan and others 2006).

County Lumber

Log homes and 

house logs

Log furniture and 

other productsa Total

Beaver 1 1 2

Cache 2 1 3

Duchesne 2 1 3

Garfield 1 1

Iron 1 1

Morgan 1 1

Salt Lake 1 2 3

Sanpete 1 1

Summit 3 3

Uintah 5 5

Utah 1 1

Wasatch 2 2

Weber 1 1

2007 Total 12 10 5 27

2002 Total 23 14 12 49

1992 Total 34 13 4 51

a

Other products include posts, poles, and bark products.

Table U10: Finished product sales of Utah’s primary wood products sectors, 1992, 

2002 and 2007 (sources: Keegan and others 1995; Morgan and others 2006).

Sector 1992 2002 2007

---Thousands of 2007 dollars---b

Sawmills $27,389 $14,628 $8,114

Log homes 9,208 21,007 15,053

Other sectorsa 982 3,290 4,165

Totalb $37,579 $38,925 $27,332 

a

Other sectors include producers of posts, poles, and log furniture. Mill residues, 

firewood, mulch, and bark products not included for comparison to previous years.

b

All sales are reported f.o.b. the manufacturer’s plant.
USDA Forest Service Resour. Bull. RMRS-RB-13. 2012 55

Figure U2: Map of Utah 

facilities.

Sawmill Sector

Utah’s sawmill sector has been in decline for several decades. Lumber production in 2007 was 14 percent lower than in 2002, 64 percent lower than in 1992

and 68 percent lower than in 1966, while the number of mills declined 48, 32,

and 54 percent over the same periods (table U11). Most of the production loss

was among the State’s larger mills that produced more than 1 MMBF of lumber

annually, while the greatest loss of milling facilities was among the small mills.

The proportion of lumber production by large versus small mills has increased

with larger mills contributing 94 percent of the production, but the average annual

lumber production per mill has returned to the 1992 level (table U12). Average annual lumber production among the State’s five largest mills was about 4.3 MMBF

lumber tally in 2007 (table U13), compared to 3.8 MMBF among six mills in

2002.The remaining 7 small mills had an average lumber production of 182 MBF
56 USDA Forest Service Resour. Bull. RMRS-RB-13. 2012

in 2007, compared to the 2002 average production of 204 MBF at 17 small mills

(Morgan and others 2006).

On average, Utah sawmills produced approximately 1.20 board feet of lumber

for every board foot Scribner of timber processed. This average overrun of 20 percent in 2007 contrasts sharply with the 2002 overrun of 28 percent (Morgan and

others 2006). The decrease in overrun over the past 5 years indicates a possible

shift in products manufactured, smaller and lower quality logs utilized, or that few

sawmills in Utah have invested in improved milling technology.

Table U11: Utah sawmills by production size class, selected years (sources: Setzer and Wilson 

1970; Keegan and others 1995; Morgan and others 2006).

Year Under 1 MMBFa Over 1 MMBFa Total

-----------------Number of sawmills------------------

2007 7 5 12

2002 17 6 23

1992 25 9 34

1966 37 13 50

---Percentage of lumber output--- Volume (MBFb)

2007 6 94 22,892

2002 13 87 26,524

1992 13 87 63,637

1966 10 90 72,000

a

Size class is based on reported lumber production. MMBF = million board feet lumber tally.

b

MBF = thousand board feet lumber tally.

Table U12: Number of Utah sawmills and average 

lumber production, selected years (sources: Setzer and 

Wilson 1970; Keegan and others 1995; Morgan and 

others 2006).

Year

Number of 

sawmills

Average production 

per mill

MMBFa

2007 12 1.9

2002 23 1.2

1992 34 1.9

1966 50 1.4

a

MMBF = million board feet lumber tally.

Table U13: Utah lumber production by mill size, 2007.

Size classa

Number 

of mills Volume 

Percentage 

of total Average per mill 

MBFb MBFb

Over 1 MMBF 5 21,621 94 4,324 

Under 1 MMBF 7 1,271 6 182 

Total 12 22,892 100 1,908 

a

Size class is based on reported lumber production. MMBF denotes million board feet lumber 

tally.

b

MBF = thousand board feet lumber tally.
USDA Forest Service Resour. Bull. RMRS-RB-13. 2012 57

Sales from sawmills accounted for just 30 percent ($8.1 million) of Utah timber

processors’ finished products sales in 2007. This proportion of sales from sawmills

was the smallest of the Four Corners States. Sales from sawmills accounted for

more than 56 percent of sales in Arizona, 49 percent of sales in New Mexico and

more than 45 percent in Colorado during 2007. Board and shop lumber accounted

for almost $4.5 million (55 percent) of sawmill product sales in 2007; dimension

lumber and studs accounted for almost $2.4 million (30 percent), timbers and cants

accounted for $1.2 million (14 percent); and other sawn products accounted for the

balance (<1 percent) of finished product sales from sawmills.

Log Home Sector

Sales value from Utah’s log home sector decreased over the past 5 years. This

sector lost facilities during the period with 10 house log manufacturers identified in

2007—four less than in 2002. Only firms that processed timber and manufactured

house logs or log homes, not log home distributors, were included in the 1992,

2002, and 2007 censuses. In 2007, Utah’s 10 log home manufacturers processed

7.3 MMBF of timber, produced about 6.2 MMLF of house logs, and generated

about $15 million in product sales. By sales value, Utah’s log home sector is the

fourth largest in the Western United States behind Montana, Idaho, and Colorado.

Other Products Sectors

A significant decrease occurred in the number of facilities among Utah’s other

products sectors, with less than half as many facilities operating in 2007 than in

2002; however, sales of the other products sector was greatly increased from 2002.

There were five other product facilities in 2007 that produced log furniture and

post and poles. Sales of posts, poles, and log furniture totaled almost $4.2 million

in 2007. Additional detail about the sector is withheld to protect the confidentiality

of firm level information.

Capacity and Utilization

Utah’s annual sawmill lumber production capacity was 46.5 MMBF in 2007.

Sawmills produced 22.9 MMBF of lumber and utilized 49 percent of their lumber

production capacity. This was the lowest level of sawmill production capacity utilization for all the Four Corners States in 2007. Timber-processing capacity among

Utah sawmills was 39,172 MBF Scribner, with 18,945 MBF Scribner of timber

processed, making utilization of timber-processing capacity among sawmills about

48 percent in 2007. Such low levels of capacity utilization often signal the closure

of mills and this was no exception for Utah, which saw the closure and out-ofState relocation of its second largest sawmill during 2003. Across all industry sectors, total timber-processing capacity was 60,062 MBF Scribner. Accounting for

changes in mills’ log inventories, a total of 26,371 MBF Scribner was processed

by Utah firms in 2007, making timber-processing capacity utilization about 44 percent across all sectors.

Mill Residue Volumes, Types, and Uses

Across all sectors, Utah timber processors produced 27,645 BDU (approximately 2,654 MCF) of mill residue, with 87 percent being utilized (table U14). Total

residue production declined slightly from 3,288 MCF in 2002, and the proportion utilized decreased slightly from 89 percent (Morgan and others 2006). Utah’s
58 USDA Forest Service Resour. Bull. RMRS-RB-13. 2012

decreased residue production resulted from decreased timber volumes processed,

while residue utilization remained constant and was attributable to the evolution

of better uses for residue-related products, especially bark and coarse residues.

Sawmills, the leading timber processors, were also the main residue producers in

Utah, producing 1.0 BDU of residue per MBF of lumber in 2007 (table U15).

Coarse residue wasthe State’slargest residue component at 46.8 percent (12,946

BDU) of all residues in 2007, with 81.4 percent utilized. In-State facilities used

8,484 BDU of the coarse material for unspecified uses, with the remaining utilized

volume going to energy. Fine residues—sawdust and planer shavings—comprised

the second largest component at 34.4 percent (9,504 BDU) of mill residues. More

than 97 percent of fine residue was utilized in 2007, primarily as mulch or animal

bedding, with about one-fourth of fine residues going to unspecified uses. Bark

accounted for 19 percent of all residues and was largely used for mulch or unspecified uses, with 4,281 BDU (82 percent) utilized.

Table U14: Production and disposition of Utah mill residues, 2007.

Residue type

Total 

utilized

Pulp and 

board Energy

Mulch/ 

bedding

Unspecified 

use Unused

Total 

produced

----------------------------Bone-dry unitsa--------------------------------

Coarse 10,534 - 2,050 - 8,484 2,412 12,946

Fine 9,281 - 4 6,833 2,444 223 9,504

 Sawdust 5,306 - 4 3,280 2,022 148 5,454

 Planer shavings 3,975 - - 3,553 422 75 4,050

Bark 4,281 - 4 3,726 551 914 5,195

Total 24,096 - 2,058 10,559 11,479 3,549 27,645

----------------------------Percentage of residue type--------------------------------

Coarse 81.4 - 15.8 - 65.5 18.6 46.8

Fine 97.7 - 0.0 71.9 25.7 2.3 34.4

 Sawdust 97.3 - 0.1 60.1 37.1 2.7 19.7

 Planer shavings 98.1 - - 87.7 10.4 1.9 14.7

Bark 82.4 - 0.1 71.7 10.6 17.6 18.8

Total 87.2 - 7.4 38.2 41.5 12.8 100

a

Bone-dry unit = 2,400 lb oven-dry wood.

Table U15: Utah sawmill residue factors, 1992, 2002 and 2007 (source: Keegan and others 

1995; Morgan and others 2006).

Type of residue 1992 2002 2007

------BDU/MBF lumber tallya--------

Coarse 0.56 0.48 0.44

Sawdust 0.19 0.19 0.21

Planer shavings 0.06 0.10 0.15

Bark 0.28 0.21 0.20

Total 1.09 0.98 1.00

a

Bone-dry unit (BDU = 2,400 lb oven-dry wood) of residue generated for every 1,000 board feet 

of lumber manufactured.
USDA Forest Service Resour. Bull. RMRS-RB-13. 2012 59

Primary Forest Products Markets and Sales

Sales from Utah’s primary wood products industry during 2007 totaled nearly

$28.6 million, including finished products and mill residues (table U16). House

logs and log homes accounted for 56 percent (more than $16 million) of total sales;

lumber, mine timbers, and other sawn products accounted for about 33 percent

(almost $9.6 million); while other products and mill residues accounted for 10 percent (nearly $3 million). Utah was the leading market area for lumber, log homes,

posts, poles, and log furniture, with in-State sales accounting for almost 35 percent of total sales. The other Four Corners States (Arizona, Colorado, and New

Mexico) accounted for about 32 percent of total sales, with log homes accounting

for 74 percent of sales in the region. The South accounted for 13 percent of total

sales, with log homes accounting for 82 percent of sales to the South. Following

Utah, the North Central area was a major market area for lumber and other sawn

products.

Table U16: Destination and sales value of Utah’s primary wood products and mill residues, 2007.

Product Utah

Other

4-Corner 

States

Other 

Rocky Mtn 

Statesa

Far 

Westb

Northeastc SouthdNorth 

Centrale Otherf Total

------------------------------------------Thousand 2007 dollars-------------------------------------------------

Lumber, mine timbers, and other sawn 

products $3,803 $2,166 $76 - $111 $445 $2,959 - $9,560

House logs and log homes 4,469 6,732 1,000 200 600 3,032 - 40 16,073

Other productsg 1,614 191 51 51 338 230 486 - 2,961

Total $9,886 $9,089 $1,127 $251 $1,049 $3,707 $3,445 $40 $28,594

---------------------------------Percentage of regional sales by product-----------------------------------------

Lumber, mine timbers, and other sawn 

products 38.5 23.8 6.7 - 10.6 12.0 85.9 - 33.4

House logs and log homes 45.2 74.1 88.7 79.7 57.2 81.8 - 100.0 56.2

Other productsg 16.3 2.1 4.5 20.3 32.2 6.2 14.1 - 10.4

Total 34.6 31.8 3.9 0.9 3.7 13.0 12.0 0.1 100

a

Other Rocky Mountains includes Idaho, Montana, Nevada.

b

Far West includes Alaska, California, Hawaii, Oregon, and Washington.

c

Northeast includes Connecticut, Maine, Massachusetts, New Hampshire, New Jersey, New York, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, and Vermont.

d

South includes Alabama, Arkansas, Delaware, Florida, Georgia, Kentucky, Louisiana, Maryland, Mississippi, North Carolina, Oklahoma, South 

Carolina, Tennessee, Texas, Virginia, and West Virginia.

e

North Central includes Illinois, Indiana, Iowa, Kansas, Michigan, Minnesota, Missouri, Nebraska, North Dakota, Ohio, South Dakota, and 

Wisconsin.

f

Other areas consist of products being shipped outside the United States.

g

Other products include posts, poles, log furniture, mill residues, firewood, mulch, and bark products.
60 USDA Forest Service Resour. Bull. RMRS-RB-13. 2012

References

Fiedler, C.E., C.E. Keegan, S.H. Robertson, T.A. Morgan, C.W. Woodall, and J. Chmelik.

2002.Astrategic assessment of fire hazard in New Mexico. Reportsubmitted to National

Joint Fire Sciences Program, Boise, ID. 27 p.

Green, A.W. and T.S. Setzer 1974.The Rocky Mountain timber situation, 1970. Resour.

Bull.INT-10. Ogden, UT: U.S. Department ofAgriculture, Forest Service,Intermountain

Forest and Range Experiment Station. 78 p.

Keegan, C.E., A.L. Chase, T.A. Morgan, S.E. Bodmer, D.D. Van Hooser, and M. Mortimer.

2001a. Arizona’s forest products industry: a descriptive analysis 1998. Missoula: The

University of Montana, Bureau of Business and Economic Research. 20 p.

Keegan, C.E., A.L. Chase, T.A. Morgan, S.E. Bodmer, D.D. Van Hooser, and M. Mortimer.

2001b. New Mexico’s forest products industry: a descriptive analysis 1997. Missoula:

The University of Montana, Bureau of Business and Economic Research. 24 p.

Keegan, C.E., K. Gebert, A.L. Chase, T.A. Morgan, S.E. Bodmer, and D.D. Van Hooser.

2001c. Montana’s forest products industry: a descriptive analysis 1969-2000. Missoula:

The University of Montana, Bureau of Business and Economic Research. 67 p.

Keegan, C.E., D.P. Wichman, and D.D. Van Hooser. 1995. Utah’s forest products industry:

a descriptive analysis, 1992. Resour. Bull. INT-RB-83. Ogden, UT: U.S. Department of

Agriculture, Forest Service, Intermountain Research Station. 21 p.

Lockwood-Post. 2008. 2008 Lockwood-Post’s directory of the pulp, paper and allied

trades. San Francisco, CA: Lockwood-Post. 515 p.

Lynch, D.L. and K. Mackes. 2001. Wood use in Colorado at the turn of the twenty-first

century. Res. Pap. RMRS-RP-32. Fort Collins, CO: U.S. Department of Agriculture,

Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Research Station. 23 p.

McLain, W.H. 1985. Colorado’s industrial roundwood production and mill residue, 1982.

Resour. Bull. INT-35. Ogden, UT: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service,

Intermountain Research Station. 13 p.

McLain, W.H. 1988. Arizona’s timber production and mill residue, 1984. Resour. Bull.

INT-55. Ogden, UT: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Intermountain

Research Station. 16 p.

McLain, W.H. 1989. New Mexico’stimber production and mill residue, 1986. Resour. Bull.

INT-59. Ogden, UT: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Intermountain

Research Station. 17 p.

Morgan, T.A., T. Dillon, C.E. Keegan, A.L. Chase and M.T. Thompson. 2006.The Four

Corners timber harvest and forest products industry, 2002. Resour. Bull. RMRS-RB-7.

Fort Collins, CO: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Rocky Mountain

Research Station. 64 p.

Morgan, T.A., C.E. Keegan, T. Dillon, A.L. Chase, J.S. Fried, and M.N. Weber. 2004a.

California’s forest products industry: a descriptive analysis. Gen. Tech. Rep. PNWGTR-615. Portland, OR: U.S.Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Pacific

Northwest Research Station. 54 p.

Morgan, T.A., C.E. Keegan, T.P. Spoelma, T. Dillon, A.L. Hearst, F.G Wagner, and L.T.

DeBlander. 2004b. Idaho’s forest products industry: a descriptive analysis. Resour.

Bull. RMRS-RB-4. Ogden, UT: U.S.Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Rocky

Mountain Research Station. 31 p.

O’Brien, R.A. 2003. New Mexico’s forests, 2000. Resour. Bull. RMRS-RB-3. Ogden, UT:

U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Research Station.

117 p.

Quarterly Census of Employment and Wages [QCEW]. 2004. U.S.Department of Labor,

Bureau of Labor Statistics. Quarterly census of employment and wages. www.bls.gov/

cew/home.htm. (October 2004).
USDA Forest Service Resour. Bull. RMRS-RB-13. 2012 61

Random Lengths. 2008. Big book 2008: the buyers and sellers directory of the forest products industry. Eugene, OR: Random Lengths Publications, Inc. 1024 p.

Regional Economic Information System [REIS]. 2004. U.S.Department of Commerce,

Bureau of Economic Analysis. Regional accounts data. www.bea.gov/bea/regioanl/

data.htm. (October 2004).

Setzer, T.S. 1971a. Estimates of timber products output and plant residues, Arizona,

1969. Res. Note INT-130. Ogden, UT: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service,

Intermountain Forest and Range Experiment Station. 4 p.

Setzer, T.S. 1971b. Estimates of timber products output and plant residues, Colorado,

1969. Res. Note INT-131.Ogden, UT: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service,

Intermountain Forest and Range Experiment Station. 4 p.

Setzer, T.S. 1971c. Estimates of timber products output and plant residues, New Mexico,

1969. Res. Note INT-134. Ogden, UT: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service,

Intermountain Forest and Range Experiment Station. 4 p.

Setzer, T.S. 1971d. Estimates of timber products output and plant residues, Utah and

Nevada, 1969. Res. Note INT-135. Ogden, UT: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest

Service, Intermountain Forest and Range Experiment Station. 4 p.

Setzer, T.S. and M.K. Barrett. 1977. New Mexico timber production and mill residues,

1974. Res. Note INT-231.Ogden, UT: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service,

Intermountain Forest and Range Experiment Station. 6 p.

Setzer, T.S. and D.G. Shupe. 1977. Colorado timber production and mill residues, 1974.

Res. Note INT-232.Ogden, UT: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service,

Intermountain Forest and Range Experiment Station. 6 p.

Setzer, T.S. and T.S.Throssell. 1977a. Arizona timber production and mill residues, 1974.

Res. Note INT-230.Ogden, UT: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service,

Intermountain Forest and Range Experiment Station. 6 p.

Setzer, T.S. and T.S.Throssell. 1977b. Utah timber production and mill residues, 1974.

Res. Note INT-234. Ogden, UT: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service,

Intermountain Forest and Range Experiment Station. 5 p.

Setzer, T.S. and A.K. Wilson. 1970. Timber products in the Rocky Mountain States, 1966.

Resour. Bull. INT-9. Ogden, UT: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service,

Intermountain Forest and Range Experiment Station. 93 p.

Silver v. Thomas 924 F.Supp. 976 (D. Ariz. 1995).

Spencer, J.S. and T.O. Farrenkopf. 1964. Timber products output in Colorado, Wyoming,

and western South Dakota, 1962. Res. Pap. INT-14. Ogden, UT: U.S. Department of

Agriculture, Forest Service, Intermountain Forest and Range Experiment Station. 18 p.

U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, 2009. Forest Inventory Data Online

(FIDO) [Database]. FIDO version 1.3 1r1. Washington, DC. http://fiatools.fs.fed.us/

fido/index.html. (10 April 2010).

Western Wood Products Association [WWPA]. 1965-2008. Statistical yearbook of the

Western lumber industry. Portland, OR: Western Wood Products Association.

Wilson, A.K. and J.S. Spencer, Jr. 1967.Timber resources and industries in the Rocky

Mountain States. Resour. Bull. INT-7. Ogden, UT: U.S. Department of Agriculture,

Forest Service, Intermountain Forest and Range Experiment Station. 67 p.

Federal Recycling Program Printed on Recycled Paper

The Rocky Mountain Research Station develops scientific information 

and technology to improve management, protection, and use of the 

forests and rangelands. Research is designed to meet the needs of 

the National Forest managers, Federal and State agencies, public and 

private organizations, academic institutions, industry, and individuals. 

Studies accelerate solutions to problems involving ecosystems, range, 

forests, water, recreation, fire, resource inventory, land reclamation, 

community sustainability, forest engineering technology, multiple use 

economics, wildlife and fish habitat, and forest insects and diseases. 

Studies are conducted cooperatively, and applications may be found 

worldwide.

Station Headquarters

Rocky Mountain Research Station

240 W Prospect Road

Fort Collins, CO 80526

(970) 498-1100

Research Locations

Reno, Nevada

Albuquerque, New Mexico

Rapid City, South Dakota

Logan, Utah

Ogden, Utah

Provo, Utah

The U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) prohibits discrimination in all of its 

programs and activities on the basis of race, color, national origin, age, disability, 

and where applicable, sex (including gender identity and expression), marital 

status, familial status, parental status, religion, sexual orientation, political 

beliefs, genetic information, reprisal, or because all or part of an individual’s 

income is derived from any public assistance program. (Not all prohibited bases 

apply to all programs.) Persons with disabilities who require alternative means 

for communication of program information (Braille, large print, audiotape, etc.) 

should contact USDA’s TARGET Center at (202) 720-2600 (voice and TDD).

To file a complaint of discrimination, write to: USDA, Assistant Secretary for Civil 

Rights, Office of the Assistant Secretary for Civil Rights, 1400 Independence 

Avenue, S.W., Stop 9410, Washington, DC 20250-9410. Or call toll-free at 

(866) 632-9992 (English) or (800) 877-8339 (TDD) or (866) 377-8642 (English 

Federal-relay) or (800) 845-6136 (Spanish Federal-relay). USDA is an equal 

opportunity provider and employer.

www.fs.fed.us/rmrs

Flagstaff, Arizona

Fort Collins, Colorado

Boise, Idaho

Moscow, Idaho

Bozeman, Montana

Missoula, Montana