212 



tunity to review their report and make their own determinations 

 of what they are going to do with the report. 



We have tried to keep this as a separate, independent panel of 

 science, as Congress requested, and that means also that the For- 

 est Service and main part of the Forest Service has not been in- 

 volved in the process. 



Mr. Herger. Just on this point, if I could make another com- 

 ment. I see my time is up, but just on this, I would like to mention 

 as a follow-up to the points that, if I heard you correctly, you stated 

 twice I believe, that you do accept this legislation and, that you did 

 attempt to follow it. You could see you weren't able to get it out 

 on time. You were attempting to follow it. I would like to empha- 

 size this. 



This legislation emphasized that SNEP was a study that was 

 supposed to be a report to Congress and that even former Chair- 

 man Miller stated that the report was intended to give to Congress, 

 as policymakers, any data needed to make policy decisions about 

 the managing of the Sierra Nevada and further, that this Congress 

 fully expects to be both the first to receive it and the SNEP report, 

 and the first to determine how it is used. 



And I want to emphasize, that this Congress, and certainly my- 

 self, would be very concerned if the administration attempted to 

 move on this before the Congress has time to examine it and move 

 on it. 



Mr. Unger. I would assure the gentleman and the Congress that 

 if the Congress puts forth plans and decides how it wants to use 

 this information, there will be no action by the Forest Service that 

 would precede what Congress decides to do on the subject. 



Mr. Herger. Thank you very much, Mr. Unger. And thank you, 

 Mr. Chairman. 



Mr. Hansen. Thank you. 



I want to ask, what additional activities will be required subse- 

 quent to the assessment process — and I want to ask Mr. Blackwood 

 this one — to bring existing land and resource management plans in 

 line with decisions for the assessment plan process of the Columbia 

 River Basin? 



Mr. Blackwood. Maybe the best way to respond to that is to 

 kind of talk about the time lines on when the assessment will be 

 complete, and where we are with the draft environmental impact 

 statements, and how that may relate to forest plan amendments, 

 BLM plan amendments. 



Right now the assessment is just about complete. It is in its final 

 editing mode, and we expect to send that to the printer here in 

 mid- June, and that is about the same time schedule for the draft 

 environmental impact statements. 



The draft environmental impact statements have been developed 

 in parallel with the assessment such that EIS teams understand 

 what was being developed in the assessments. 



Now, when the assessments are published, they will become 

 final; there will be no more work on the assessments at this scale. 

 The draft environmental impact statements will move forward in 

 between the period of the draft final. 



What we expect to do is for each National Forest to take a look 

 at their existing plan and see where they are in relation to if we 



