100 



creased participation of the National Marine Fisheries Service in 

 the field evaluations and analyses associated with selecting man- 

 agement prescriptions for streamside zones and in follow-up eval- 

 uations to check whether the expected results were achieved fol- 

 lowing project completion." 



The question I have is, are your people getting out on the ground 

 and looking at what the Forest Service is doing, or do you want 

 this buffer strip policy because you just do not have sufficient per- 

 sonnel to get out and monitor their activities? 



Dr. Brooks. Both. Both of your questions I think I would answer 

 in the affirmative. We do have people out in the field working with 

 the Forest Service. We do not have enough to monitor all of the 

 activities and the effects of logging. 



Senator Wallop. So one of the things we are trying to do here is 

 to put the blanket solution down that does not have necessarily a 

 scientific basis, but a convenience basis? 



Dr. Brooks. The 100-foot strip, of course, is arbitrary. One could 

 say 90 feet or 120 feet or 85 feet. It seemed like a number that 

 would be easily understood and interpreted and manageable by 

 people in the field. 



Senator Wallop. Well, in fact what you have just said is what I 

 think all of us have been saying. The response to that question is 

 that there are different circumstances along different stream banks 

 which, when subjected to judgment, would come up with a different 

 conclusion. 



What you are doing is denying us that conclusion, simply by put- 

 ting down a blanket solution to it. And I think my plea and that of 

 Senator Murkowski and that of others, is that this process of site- 

 specific management undergoing the forest management planning 

 process, which is the law of the land, is probably better than some 

 blanket solution which you're advocating here for convenience, 

 both on the level of personnel and, by your own response to the 

 iast question, there are times when better things could be done. 



Dr. Brooks. Senator, I do not want to indulge in doublespeak. I 

 old you that, on the basis of our scientific studies, we had not 

 found any reason to conclude that a buffer strip of less than 100 

 feet would assure long-term adequate protection. What we have 

 said is that we may well have to go much beyond 100 feet to 

 xhieve the desired protection, but 100 feet is something that most 

 inyone can measure. It does take some of the subjectivity out of it. 

 '-3ut remember that the people out there with the chainsaws look- 

 ing at the stream are each going to make a different estimate of 

 how many trees they should leave along the stream. And if you 

 have a minimum that you know is going to provide an acceptable 

 ]evel of protection, you have got a good base to work from. Use dis- 

 vetion and good judgment beyond that. 



Senator Wallop. Well, in your letter of last year, or not yours 



at Dr. Krauss's letter to Dale Robertson on December 13th, that 

 better would appear to say that National Marine Fisheries Service 

 agrees that site-specific management is best, but it just does not 

 trust the Forest Service to implement it. 



I quote from the letter. Your letter states that: 



