219 



Mr. Herger. I understand that it is over a year behind schedule 

 in completion. Is that accurate? 



Mr. Unger. I believe that is. 



Mr. Herger. Given that the study has taken 3 years to complete 

 and has been thoroughly peer reviewed, is there any reason why 

 it has not been released for final publication? 



Mr. Unger. The reason that it has not been released, it is not 

 to be released until after the SNEP report, we are very close to 

 submission of the SNEP report to the Congress in a matter of a 

 couple of weeks. There are questions about whether there is any 

 new information in the SNEP report that would affect in any way 

 the analysis or the decisions in the California Owl EIS and record 

 of decision. So the decision is to wait that period of time to make 

 an expeditious review of the SNEP report so that the regional for- 

 ester can be aware of what it does contain and then proceed as 

 quickly as possible with the issuance of the California Owl EIS and 

 record of decision. 



Mr. Herger. The California Spotted Owl Report has had exten- 

 sive peer review? 



Mr. Unger. That is correct. 



Mr. Herger. Has the SNEP report had extensive peer review? 



Mr. AUNE. The California Owl EIS has had a technical review. 

 It has not had an official scientific peer review. 



Mr. Unger is correct; it is a technical review and there is a dif- 

 ference between that and a peer review. The SNEP report has, 

 each individual assessment, approximately 70 assessments, has 

 had at least three peer reviews, each of the assessments, plus the 

 major report peer review by policy-level peers. That contrast be- 

 tween the two is an important distinction. So yes, the answer is 

 SNEP has had a very thorough scientific peer review. 



Mr. Herger. I would like to state that, concerning the report 

 that you give to the Congress, we would like to have the benefit 

 of the California spotted owl review prior to that so we could com- 

 pare them rather than issuing it after that report. In addition I 

 would like to urge you, since we are already late in offering it, to 

 offer it, as it is ready to go, and to publish it prior to the SNEP 

 so that we can use the information from it in conjunction with the 

 SNEP report, enabling us, in the Congress to make the best pos- 

 sible decisions. 



So my argument to you would be but to go ahead and release it 

 at this time rather than waiting and releasing it after wards. 



Mr. Unger. I understand your argument, and of course there 

 have been many discussions and questions on either side of this 

 issue of before and after. I will be happy to take your idea under 

 consideration and discuss it with 



Mr. Herger. Is there something that we have to hide. Are we 

 ashamed of that report? Are we fearful of the scientific data or in- 

 formation that we have discovered? It sounds as though, since it 

 is already ready to go, that for some reason the administration is 

 choosing not to allow it to come out until afterwards. Is there some- 

 thing that the administration is hiding? 



Mr. Unger. Absolutely not. 



