82 



I have been referenced here that an internal Forest Service anal- 

 ysis of Forest Service plans in the Pacific Northwest estimates that 

 these plans do not contain the specifics necessary to determine 

 whether or not long-term viability of selected fish stocks is ensured. 



And I raise it because, obviously, the purpose of this is on these 

 fish stock populations but also, because I think, in a broader sense, 

 we are dealing with hundreds of species. And so I am interested 

 in that and why it does not contain the specifics necessary to deter- 

 mine or to ensure, Mr. Leonard — then I want to go to Mr. Penfold 

 with basically the same question — combining two things, strategy, 

 and the satisfactory status of the forest, the Resource Management 

 Plans of both the agencies. And why doesn't it do that? 



Mr. Leonard. Our existing plans are deficient. They really re- 

 flected our understanding of the fishery resource as it existed about 

 10 or 12 years ago, and our approaches to planning. And we have 

 made tremendous strides over this last decade in our understand- 

 ing of what is required. And the relationship of the ecosystem to 

 the aquatic portion of that ecosystem. 



We are just in the process of developing our Pac-fish strategy, 

 which is to expand it beyond paying attention just to the Columbia 

 River system to the entire anadromous fish areas, a problem on the 

 west coast. And it is certainly our expectation that that will pro- 

 vide a strategy for getting habitats up to support restoration of the 

 fisheries, including recovery of the listed species insofar as habitat 

 is the factor that is involved. 



Mr. Vento. The strategy is a broader basis than you have spe- 

 cifically applied in the Resource Management Plans? 



Mr. Leonard. An essential part of that strategy is the idea of 

 watershed analysis in which you develop a specific strategy for a 

 specific watershed based on what's there, rather than a cookie cut- 

 ter approach that was laid down over the whole system, which may 

 be appropriate on average but inappropriate as applied. 



Defining watersheds, and then doing an intense analysis there to 

 develop prescription standards for activities and identification of 

 what restoration activities are needed in that particular watershed. 



Mr. Vento. This brings more questions. Time frame? 



Mr. Leonard. This is an ongoing thing we hope to complete this 

 year. But all these ideas and concepts are now being brought to the 

 table as part of the Forestry Conference in the Northwest and the 

 folio wup. 



So my expectation, frankly, at this point, is that these strategies 

 for this and owls and the murrlets are going to be folded together 

 to truly deal with it on an ecosystems basis. 



Mr. Vento. I think we would feel more comfortable if we know 

 that it's been worked ahead. As I said, we can do good things based 

 on the work that is behind it. 



Mr. Leonard. Well, I will say this, that people like Dr. Sedell 

 and Dr. Swanson are going to be part of the task force, the inter- 

 agency task force that is currently being put together to move from 

 the actual event there on April 2nd, to a proposed ecosystem ap- 

 proach to dealing with it. 



Mr. Vento. Let me go to Mr. Penfold. 



Mr. Penfold. The American Rivers review of our plans indicated 

 that they are deficient relative to that concern. We worked hard in 



