| | Biomass removal on the Rancho de Jicarita is small scale and slow by some measures, but over the last 20 years owner A. Hart Allex and his wife Utilia have made progress toward restoration of the ponderosa pine forest on their 70 acres. The property is on the western slopes of the Sangre de Cristo Mountain range in north-central New Mexico at 8500 feet. Most of the private forest in this area was heavily logged in the early 1900s for railroad ties, and again in the 1950s for lumber. Since then, due to neglect, it has become heavily overgrown with dog-hair thickets and trees without enough sunlight to thrive. The south-facing slope of the mesa that runs down into the irrigated pastures, cut out of forest land hundreds of years ago, is predominately juniper with some piñon and ponderosa. The forest above the south slope is mixed conifer, with ponderosa pine making up 85% or more of the total tree composition. The rest is juniper, piñon, white fir, and Douglas-fir. Throughout the forest, the ground cover is comprised of needles except in a few small open areas where sparse grasses have taken root. There are a few low-growth evergreen shrubs, chamisa, and scrub oak plants. The number of roaming cattle and the browse impact has decreased in recent years, which is contributing to revegetation in thinned areas now receiving sunlight. Previous browse and a history of fire suppression have created a jungle of spindly trees where many are less than 3 inches DBH, 35-feet tall, and only have green needles on the top five or ten feet.
Allex's goal, for the mixed conifer portion of his land (about 45 acres) is to reduce the basal area to 60 square feet per acre by removing small, deformed, damaged, infested trees, and those too close together for proper branch growth. The forest was overstocked with an average basal area of 105 square feet per acre, 375 trees acre, and an average DBH of 7.2 inches after thinning ten acres. All of the thinning accomplished to date has been through hand felling. Although Allex explored other product options including posts and poles, most product removal has been as firewood. In the late 1980s, Allex was able to thin 10 acres using a grant that paid $57 an acre. Allex thinned the acreage with the help of his sons and was able to trade about 10 cords of poles for enough gravel to build a half mile of road through the pastures. In the last six years, Allex has cut tens of thousands of trees on the entire 45 acres without grants. Neighbors, friends, and relatives have removed over 700 pickup loads (about 20 truckloads per acre) of firewood in trade for their processing labor. Allex has burned slash for months at a time, almost every year—approximately 20 slash piles per acre. Though Allex has not yet achieved his desired forest condition, he is already seeing the return of sunlight to the forest floor, permitting the reintroduction of grasses, shrubs, and wildflowers.
Allex did not start out as an advocate of forest restoration; in fact he might have been branded a "tree hugger" at the beginning. But his attitude changed as he realized his forest was continuing a downward spiral due to neglect and past mistakes. His interest in creating a healthy forest, less prone to crown fire, has made him a local advocate of sound forest management. Protecting his land from crown fire requires that his upwind neighbors are similarly protected. After years of work and learning in the woods, and receiving the New Mexico Tree Farmers of the Year Award in 2003, he has expanded from restoring his own lands to promoting better forest management for his neighbors. There are now over 20 New Mexico Tree Farmers in the area and seven have started thinning their trees. Some of the thinning projects take advantage of Healthy Forests Restoration Act funds via New Mexico State Forestry, which pays around $300 per acre at completion as a cost share, depending on how the slash is handled. Four local landowners have treated around 50 acres with grants so far. All the rest are awaiting State Forestry completion of the necessary forest inventories and management plans (bureaucratic red tape) before they can apply for funding—a process that can take years.
Links
Note contrast between treated (left) and untreated (right)
Foreground stand has been treated and background stand is untreated.
Note the understory vegation and sunlight on the forest floor. | | | | 2 | Land Ownership
Private
| | | | 3 | Location
Penasco, New Mexico
| | | 4 | Forest Type
Ponderosa pine
| | | | Context |  | | | 5 | Is this project a part of a landscape plan?
Yes
| | | | 6 | In a Wildland Urban Interface (WUI)?
Yes
| | | | 7 | Acreage treated
45 ac with a goal of 70 ac
| | | | 8 | Type of contract
Not applicable
| | | | 9 | Funding source
Not applicable
| | | | 10 | Collaborators and partners
None
| | | | 11 | Project start date
2001
| | | 12 | Project completion date
Ongoing
| | | | Treatment Goals | | | | 13 | Restoration, watershed or habitat improvement
| | | | 14 | Reduce fuel load
| | | | 15 | Fire break
| | | | 16 |
| | | 17 | Forest Stand Improvement
| | | | Treatment Specifics | | | | 18 | Primary treatment objective
Thin to 60 ft2/ac of basal area (remove sick, deformed, damaged and infested trees)
| | | | 19 | How does biomass removal fit with other objectives?
Forest restoration requires removal, tree health and revegetation need more sunlight.
| | | | 20 | Treatment description
Remove sick, deformed, damaged and infested trees
| | | | 21 | Description of contractors
Landowner and firewood haulers | | | | 22 | Travel distance for contractors
None
| | | | 23 | Type of equipment used
Chainsaw
| | | | 24 | Treatment of residual slash if any
Pile burn
| | | | 25 | Treatment cost per acre
Landowner and firewood haulers labor
| | | 26 | Trucking costs
Not applicable
| | | | Utilization | | | | 27 | Products from project
Firewood 85%, posts/poles 5%, lumber 5%, vigas 5% numbers very approximate
| | | | 28 | Price for products
Minimal
| | | | 29 | Date of Sale
| | | | 30 | Did biomass markets exist previous to project?
Yes
| | | | 31 | Type of utilization
Firewood
| | | | 32 | How well did the woody biomass match the utilization options?
Well
| | | 33 | Distance to utilization
Less than 10 miles
| | | | Treatment guidelines, targets, limitations | | | | 34 | Diameter limit
None
| | | | 35 | Basal area reduction
About 50%
| | | | 36 | Crown coverage
| | | | 37 | Fuel loading
| | | | 38 | Retention guidelines
Straight and good separation from neighbors
| | | | 39 | Treatment of snags and downed logs
Only one snag on property which was retained, downed logs/old stumps removed or burned
| | | | 40 | Soil impacts
Minimal, good revegetation in treated areas
| | | 41 | Other ecological impacts monitored
| | | | Pre Treatment | | | | 42 | Fuel load
| | | | 43 | Stem density (stems/ac)
~500
| | | | 44 | Basal area (ft2/ac)
100
| | | | 45 | Canopy closure (%)
90% | | | | 46 | Height to live crown base
20ft
| | | | 47 | Snags and downed woody debris
| | | | 48 | Size class distribution
6 to 7 inches DBH
| | | | 49 | Tree species composition
85% PP, 15% PJ and fir
| | | | 50 | Presence/absence of invasive species
Very few noticed
| | | 51 | Soil and other ecological data
| | | | Post Treatment | | | | 52 | Fuel load
| | | | 53 | Stem density (stems/ac)
| | | | 54 | Basal area (ft2/ac)
60 to 80
| | | | 55 | Canopy closure (%)
| | | | 56 | Height to live crown base
| | | | 57 | Snags and downed woody debris
| | | | 58 | Size class distribution
| | | | 59 | Tree species composition
| | | | 60 | Presence/absence of invasive species
| | | | 61 | Soil and other ecological data
| |
| |
