101 



The Forest Service requires a no-harvest buffer zone along streams when needed 

 to maintain or enhance fish habitat and maintain water quality, the width of the 

 buffer to be dependent on the on-site conditions. 



NMFS agrees that site-specific evaluations are theoretically the best way to 

 manage streamside zones. In reality, however, the Forest Service policy fails be- 

 cause it is too complex and relies on too many people variously interpreting Forest 

 Service guidance to protect riparian vegetation. 



In fact what you have said is that site-specific management is 

 best, but you just do not trust anybody. That is the process. Con- 

 gress goes through this process, working with people of the best of 

 intentions to develop a planning mechanism into which there is 

 public input, to which there is the whole process which has been 

 set up for it. And you are coming along and saying, now set that 

 aside, do not use your brains within this element, and just lay 

 down some kind of a permanent solution. 



Twice now you have answered that site-specific would be better 

 or site-specific would lend itself to judgments that the blanket con- 

 clusion does not. I am just saying, you know, that it seems to me 

 that it is a very big shame when this country comes down to the 

 fact that management is based on blanket prescriptions which do 

 not allow the intellectual process of land managers to come into 

 play. 



You have substantial increases in fish harvests without these 

 buffer zones, do you not? I mean, you have record fish runs. In 

 1983, eight million fish a year were being caught. Recent statistics 

 show that 30 million are now being caught. It is a fourfold in- 

 crease. 



It is not as though it looks as though things are in danger. 



Dr. Brooks. Senator, we have had ups and downs in our fisher- 

 ies. In the early 1970's we had essentially no fishing in southeast- 

 ern Alaska because of the failure of the salmon run. Management, 

 environmental conditions, weather conditions, largely determine 

 the production of salmon. 



Senator Wallop. And driftnets. 



Dr. Brooks. But I think that most anyone will concede that there 

 is a relationship between the quality of salmon habitat and the 

 production of salmon. 



Senator Wallop. There is no argument from me on that. The ar- 

 gument from me is whether there is a universally improved habi- 

 tat without the action or thoughts of man in the planning process. 



You seem to be saying that it is so. I seem to think that man can 

 do a pretty good job and it has been demonstrated. 



Dr. Brooks. Senator, let me say, if in the judgment of the Senate 

 you do not feel, or the Congress, you do not feel that you need to 

 assure a 100-foot buffer strip in the interest of protecting salmon 

 habitat and salmon production, then what do you think the people 

 on the ground, the timber-oriented people, the people who quite 

 properly are seeking to maximize profits — when they look at those 

 pumpkins along there, what is their decision going to be? The Con- 

 gress said we could take them. 



Senator Wallop. I did not think that the people in the business 

 had that decision. That is the whole point of this thing. The Forest 

 Service sitting right here and the planning process and the public 

 comment period are what makes that decision. 



