190 



is due to grazing on those upper watersheds and on Forest Service 

 lands? 



Dr. Frissell. Yes. 



Mr. DeFazio. We are talking Forest Service grazing versus just 

 timber practices. 



Dr. White. Right. And I think there was something in the paper 

 yesterday about the Forest Service reneging on its promise. 



Mr. DeFazio. I questioned Mr. Leonard earlier on that. Perhaps 

 you weren't here, Mr. White. 



Dr. DOPPELT. Our proposal is just a west-side proposal. But we 

 are waiting for the key mapping to be done and then we are going 

 to extrapolate the strategy, and the job numbers, and the cost to 

 the east side. But on the east side, for the most part, a lot of the 

 work will be addressing the grazing issue. So that is a key issue 

 with both riparian areas and the water-right issues on the east 

 side. 



Mr. DeFazio. In my discussions with the Secretary of Interior m 

 his grazing reform package, the idea is there would be an increase 

 of fees and part of it will be dedicated to a mitigation strategy. This 

 is an important distinction because we all think timber when we 

 say Forest Service. And if you could, wherever we can make the 

 changes within Forest Service lands, obviously, grazing permits are 

 allowed. And whatever part of the problem that is, it is useful to 

 make the distinction between timber harvest and grazing practices. 



Dr. Frissell. One of the reasons that I hesitate to do that is that 

 they are often closely intertwined and these activities tend to occur 

 as these areas are entered and are available to the grazers. So it 

 is difficult to sort those things out. 



Mr. DeFazio. I would just ask of anyone, there was a comment 

 someone talked about, I think it was commenting on new forestry 

 and having a zero level of risk so that we couldn't risk some areas 

 with new forestry. And everyone has a different idea of new for- 

 estry, what the practices mean, but I can't remember who that was 

 who was making that comment; was that you? 



Okay. . . . 



Did you follow or monitor anyone who did the harvest activities 

 that took place after the fire at the Siskyou Forest. 



Dr. Frissell. I haven't closely followed that, no. 



Mr. DeFazio. What we were told by the management agency, 

 since I took part in the salvage process, was that they found no 

 measurable impact above that that was expected, you know, after 

 the event, with those activities, and there were no major slides or 

 anything. 



I am just curious; there is a point at which, you know— Congress 

 is going to have to craft the balance here, and everybody would like 

 us to say, well, I mean you get to the ultimate point where we don't 

 do anything anyway and that is not going to happen. 



When we are making judgment calls, it is useful to have dis- 

 criminatory information in those areas since I understand in the 

 best of all possible worlds there would be no activities in any of 

 these areas, but that is not likely to happen anywhere. 



Dr. Frissell. I am glad you asked the question, because it raises 

 the time point question. There is no way to tell within five or ten 

 years after an extensive timber harvest whether it is going to lead 



