ID Number 2007-102
Utilization and Marketing Projects Application
NATIONAL FIRE PLAN COMMUNITY ASSISTANCE AND WILDLAND URBAN INTERFACE PROJECTS
Applicant
Applicant/Organization:
Institute for Washington's Future
Type of Applicant:
L (Nonprofit Organization)
Email:
jesse@forwashington.org
Phone:
206-204-0404
FAX:
Please Call Ahead for FAX:
Off
Please Call Ahead for FAX:
Off
Address (Street or P. O. Box, City, State, Zip):
419 Occidental Ave STE 206 Seattle, WA 98104
Project Coordinator
Project Coordinator (Name and Title):
Dave Demyan, Director
Organization/Jurisdiction:
Bearfight Institute
Email:
demyan@methownet.com
Phone:
509-996-9826
FAX:
509-996-9826
Project Information
Project Title:
New Practices, New Products
Project Location:
Methow Valley, Washington State
County:
Okanogan
Congressional District:
5
Latitude:
48.47287
Longitude:
120.17826
State the desired outcome in relation to NFP Goals and the Community Wildfire Protection Plan (CWPP). Project Objectives:
This project will demonstrate a model for implementing forest thinning and restoration projects that is economically viable. It will be designed to be
replicated by independent operator/owner businesses. We propose to employ low impact, low investment yarding and field equipment that can be used to
reduce the cost of fuels reduction treatments by greatly reducing the amount of material that will need to be hand piled. We will add to this gain by producing
value-added products making the best use of all that can be recovered from forest thinning. Our goals are: To reduce costs and negative impacts by
substantially reducing the amount of wood being hand piled and/or burned; To manage the sorting and distribution of recovered wood to maximize utility
and minimize inefficiencies in its handling; Identify and produce high value products that can be produced locally with minimal processing. This project will
sort materials obtained from treatment on 50 acres of state land.
Name of CWPP:
Methow Community Fireplan Coordination Group - CWPP is in process
Name of Communit(y/ies) at Risk:
Winthrop, Twisp
Proposed Project Start Date:
01/01/2007
Proposed Project End Date:
12/31/2007
Federal Funding Request:
$119,100.00
Total Project Cost:
$201,600.00
Are you submitting multiple projects?
No
If YES indicate the relationship of the projects to one
another:
If YES, please list the titles of projects by priority and briefly explain their relationship.
Name of Federal, State or Tribal contact with whom you coordinated this
proposal:
Organization/Jurisdiction:
1) John Foster
DNR
Phone
509-993-3390
Washington State dept of Fish and Wildlife
2) Dale Swedberg
Phone
Email fanning@televar.com
509-223-3358
Email sinlahek@televar.com
3)
Phone
Email
Project Planning Information
Name of Local Coordinating Group:
Highlands Fire Defense Local Coordinating Group
For this project, explain the level of cooperation, coordination or strategic planning, through a "Local Coordination Group." If you have not worked with a
local coordination group, why not?
We will be participating in the ranking meeting as well as future planning meetings.
List federal lands that are adjacent to the project and proximity.
Okanogan-Wenatchee National Forest
Will this project utilize fuels from an adjacent current fuel reduction project on federal lands or to one that is planned within the next three years?
No
Please indicate planned treatments and associated acres:
Treatment
Thinning
Acres
50
Treatment
Thinning
Acres
0
Treatment
Thinning
Acres
0
Treatment
Thinning
Acres
0
Acres
50
Treatment
Acres
0
If you have a treatment type other than standard types above:
Treatment
Salvage, low impact
Project Evaluation Criteria
Applications for funding must include narrative responses that address the following criteria. Be sure you address every one briefly, yet thoroughly.
1. Increasing utilization, management and economic impacts of woody material removed in fuels management and forest restoration
activities (60 points)
A. Will biomass, thinnings or other surplus forest fuels be utilized? If so, in what manner and how much? How many acres will be treated? Are any of these
acres within the wildland-urban interface? If so, how many? (20 points)
Response:
Yes Thinned material will be utilized for firewood, post and poles, building materials and small saw logs. Approximately 500 Tons of material will be
removed from the 50 acres. (this amount will be quantified; along with figures on quality and type of material) It will be sorted at the landing and at Pioneer
Lodgepole where the material will be processed into posts and rail fence system and small-building kits. The SWA is bordered by public and private land.
SWA is WUI adjacent. We will select six products to be produced from trees 1) less than 3.5" diameter, 2) 3.5"-5.5" diameter, and 3) 5.5" - 8" diameter.
Products to be evaluated include non-code utility building kits, rails, posts, firewood, and cants. All products will be market tested through established
mechanisms accessible to the IWF. This project will lay the groundwork for significant economic gains, as well as contributing to a significant reduction in
fire risk and smoke.
B. Will the project improve the local economy in terms of jobs and sustainable economic activity? If so, how many and what type of jobs will be created or
retained (i.e., wage-scale, full-time equivalent), and for how long? What percent of the jobs are expected to be filled from the local labor force? (10 points)
Response:
Overall, this project will directly create three FTEs @ $45,000 per. It will employ local wood workers and the owner of Pioneer Lodgepole parttime. If
successful, this project will develop a system that will generate 6 FTE averaging $45,000 per 1,000 acres of thinning projects. This system will make
thinning economically feasible, making it much more likely thinning projects will be done. In Washington, best practice would have a million acres thinned
a year equal to 6,000 jobs.
C. Are there private businesses involved in this project? If so, what are their roles and investment? How will the project be structured to minimize or
eliminate te perception of use of public funding to create an unfair competitive advantage for those private businesses involved? (10 points)
Response:
Because this project is so small, it does not affect present competition for thinning or any of the products to be produced. Its results, however, will positively
impact the structure of competition. The findings from this project will be readily replicable. As such, they will increase both the market and competition. To
insure this happens, this project is structured to promote its findings through the media and via the web.
D. If the project involves new product development, what evidence is there for economically viable and sustainable markets? (10 points)
Response:
Evaluated products include utility building kits, rails, posts, firewood, & cants. Rails, posts, & cants are products with an established regional market. Prices
may fluctuate, but demand is constant. Quality firewood for urban use is relatively new & growing. This project has a base in these stable markets. Major
retailers have a large utility building market. They pay premium prices for green, convenience, durability & cosmetics. This project serves this specialized
market well
E. Can this project be offered as a model for other communities or businesses? If so, why and how will results of this project be disseminated or made
available? (5 points)
Response:
The purpose is to develop a model for Northwest businesses. Project results will be dessimated through print and web media. The content will be based on
project analysis. IWF has had success with print media, particularly op-eds for Seattle newspapers and articles in the Capital Press. Project reports will be
available on the IWF website. IWF will publicize the project through websites of associated groups, and a weblog it sponsors. The project team will make
personal presentations and tours.
F. How will the project be sustained beyond project timelines? If public funding will continue to be needed, why, how much, and for how long? (5 points)
Response:
There will be no further public funding for this project. This project will be sustained by the Bearfight Institute as it adapts proven methods and products in
its ongoing thinning and restoration projects. The IWF will sustain its promotional efforts by integrating them into its ongoing communication program.
Neither of these require substantial new funding. The project partners intend to establish a training and TA program to facilitate model replication. This will
be paid for by program fees.
2. Taking Advantage of Existing Networks, previously-funded projects and knowledge. (20 points)
A. How does this project take advantage of relevant, existing networks and the results from previously-funded projects or commercial operations? (10
points)
Response:
This project is based on five years of community forest work with the Forest Service (Bearfight) and ten years of community-based sustainable development
projects with the USDA and others (IWF). This experience has allowed us to structure a project which integrates proven methods and technologies to reduce
cost and create multiple value-added products.
B. Who and what (individuals, businesses, organizations, reports, studies, Internet sites, etc.) were consulted to ensure the best information available was
used in designing this project proposal? (5 points)
Response:
Reliance on USFS-Staff foresters (Arlo Van Derwoude, Jon Daly, Tom Ketchum), loggers (Dale Tugaw, Tom Hoffman, Bob Brown) machine shop (Tom
Bretz) & equipment (Valley Tractor, Swiftwater Kubota) along with numerous restoration & FS websites
C. How did your group arrive at your cost structure for all of the main areas including: personnel, equipment, supplies, and overhead? (5 points)
Response:
Project overhead is the IWF rate of 10% charged for gov't grants. Personnel, supplies, travel, equipment, and contract costs are based on current forest
service project experience.
3. Expanding community participation and collaboration. (20 Points)
A. Who are the partners and community members involved in planning and implementing the project? (5 points)
Response:
Bearfight Institute, leader in forest restoration projects; the Institute for WA's Future, leader in sustainable development; and Pioneer Lodgepole, leader in
producing alternative wood products; Washington Dept of Fish and Wildlife.
B. How much cost-sharing is there for this project? (10 points)
Response:
Cost sharing totals $82,500. Cash cost sharing for this project breaks down into: personnel services, $50,000; donated materials, $32,500. In kind service
are: IWF overhead (10% of grant) $19,000; Personnel cost of administration, market survey, and analysis, $25,000; travel and supplies, $6,000.
C. What are the direct community benefits that will result from this project? (5 points)
Response:
The local community will gain five part time jobs (equals 2.75 FTE). This income supports small independent businesses and promotes new ones. The
environmental benefits are fifty acres of habitat restored with low environmental impact.
Project Work Form
Tasks
Time Frame
Responsible Party
Organize project, Identify sites, and document
density, fuel loading
September, October, November, December 2007
IWF & Bearfight Institute (Don Hopps and Dave
Demyan)
Perform non-commercial thinning on 50 acres (up
to 8" dbh, cut into 8-12' lengths)
March, April, May 2008
Bearfight Institute (Dave Demyan)
tack >3" diameter material; <3": hand pile or log
and scatter, burn piles
April, May, June 2008
Bearfight Institute (Dave Demyan)
Yard stacked material (using tracked kubota 900
with small trailer <1# PSI ground pressure).
June, July 2008
Bearfight Institute (Dave Demyan)
Sort at landing: dry firewood at SWA site, haul
rails, posts, and short logs to peeler.
June, July 2008
Bearfight Institute (Dave Demyan)
Build Sections of rail fense and utility structure kits. July, August 2008
Document costs
Bearfight Institute (Dave Demyan)
Market firewood; display products at events,
perform market survey.
August, September, October 2008
IWf and Bearfight Institute (Don Hopps, Jesse
Nelson, and Dave Demyan)
Analyze economic and environmental results;
publish and communicate reports
October, November, December 2008
IWf and Bearfight Institute (Don Hopps, Jesse
Nelson, and Dave Demyan)
Project Budget
Cost Category
Description
Federal
Agency
Applicant
Pioneer
WA State F &
Lodgepole
W
Partner 1
Partner 2
Partner 3
Total
Personnel
Institute - Hopps, Nelson
$28,000.00
$25,000.00
$0.00
$0.00
$0.00
$53,000.00
Bearfight - Demyan Mccord
$40,000.00
$0.00
$0.00
$0.00
$0.00
$40,000.00
$68,000.00
$25,000.00
$0.00
$0.00
$0.00
$93,000.00
$3,500.00
$4,500.00
$0.00
$0.00
$0.00
$8,000.00
$0.00
$0.00
$0.00
$0.00
$0.00
$0.00
$3,500.00
$4,500.00
$0.00
$0.00
$0.00
$8,000.00
Institute - Hopps, Nelson
$1,600.00
$0.00
$0.00
$0.00
$0.00
$1,600.00
Bearfight - Demyan Mccord
$8,400.00
$0.00
$0.00
$0.00
$0.00
$8,400.00
$10,000.00
$0.00
$0.00
$0.00
$0.00
$10,000.00
$0.00
$1,500.00
$0.00
$0.00
$0.00
$1,500.00
$10,000.00
$0.00
$0.00
$0.00
$0.00
$10,000.00
$10,000.00
$1,500.00
$0.00
$0.00
$0.00
$11,500.00
Institute - Hopps, Nelson
$1,000.00
$0.00
$0.00
$0.00
$0.00
$1,000.00
Bearfight - Demyan Mccord
$1,600.00
$0.00
$0.00
$0.00
$0.00
$1,600.00
$2,600.00
$0.00
$0.00
$0.00
$0.00
$2,600.00
$25,000.00
$0.00
$0.00
$0.00
$0.00
$25,000.00
$0.00
$0.00
$20,000.00
$12,500.00
$0.00
$32,500.00
$25,000.00
$0.00
$20,000.00
$12,500.00
$0.00
$57,500.00
$0.00
$19,000.00
$0.00
$0.00
$0.00
$19,000.00
$0.00
$0.00
$0.00
$0.00
$0.00
$0.00
$0.00
$19,000.00
$0.00
$0.00
$0.00
$19,000.00
$119,100.00
$50,000.00
$20,000.00
$12,500.00
$0.00
$201,600.00
$0.00
$0.00
$0.00
$0.00
$0.00
$0.00
Subtotal
Fringe Benefits
Institute - Hopps, Nelson
Bearfight - Demyan Mccord
Subtotal
Travel
Subtotal
Equipment
Institute - Hopps, Nelson
Bearfight - Demyan Mccord
Subtotal
Supplies
Subtotal
Contractual
Forest Work
Manufacturing Work
Subtotal
Other
Institute Overhead
Subtotal
Total Costs
Project (Program) Income 1
(using deductive alternative)
1 Program income is the gross revenue generated by a grant or cooperative agreement supported activity during the life of the grant. Program income can be
made by recipients from fees charged for conference or workshop attendance, from rental fees earned from renting out real property or equipment acquired
with grant or cooperative agreement funds, or from the sale of commodities or items developed under the grant or cooperative agreement. The use of Program
Income during the project period may require prior approval by the granting agency.