209 



unprecedented effort on track, but most of the faces behind the Forest Plan are familiar ones — 

 working better because of the President's direction. 



Goal its Adhere to our nation's laws. 



In 1990, the BLM was not meeting all applicable environmental laws. In December of 1994, 

 Judge Dwyer found that the Forest Plan met the requirements of not only the environmental laws 

 but also laws addressing the need for timber. Just last month. Federal District Judge Thomas 

 Penfield Jackson of the District of Columbia ruled that he was deferring to Judge Dwyer on the 

 Forest Plan. Legally, we're sound. 



Before I conclude my testimony, let me address for a moment some of the concerns you may be 



hearing. 



You may have heard concerns about the Adaptive Management Areas created in the Plan, and the 

 amount of timber volume coming from those Areas. These Areas were a new and challenging 

 concept for us. What we intended to do was to provide a forum for partnerships to exist, and, in 

 concert with our partners, create new kinds of innovative forest management. And, as in all new 

 programs that are bold and challenging, we have been learning as we go, and finding ways we can 

 improve. In our Applegate Adaptive Management Area in Southern Oregon, we have had some 

 successes. Recently, this Adaptive Management Area was the site of the Thompson Creek 

 Timber Sale, a sale of about 7 million board feet that was not protested by the environmental 

 community and that received widespread public support. My point is that the Adaptive 

 Management Areas can work ~ but success depends on the dedication and persistence of the local 

 partnership. 



You may have heard some concerns about the size of the buffers we placed along rivers and 

 streams. I understand that concern, but what we had in the Northwest regarding the ongoing 



