110 



■2- 



2) In recent dealings with the Forest Service, we have 

 found that they are employing no-cut buffers, ranging from 

 25 ft to greater than 100 ft, along anadromous fish streams. 

 Given the importance of these areas for fishery production, 

 for purposes of this evaluation we are assuming a 100 ft 

 no-cut buffer along anadromous and high quality resident 

 fish streams. 



3) In the proposed areas in which over 50% of a watershed 

 would be classified for multiple use/timber harvest, the 

 assumption is that the Forest Service will disperse clear 

 cuts in time and location to preserve the biological 

 productivity of every fish stream as required under existing 

 laws, regulations, plans and the Aquatic Habitat Management 

 Handbook. Watersheds in which dispersal of clearcuts is a 

 concern include Karta, Chuck, Kadashan, Patterson, Nutkwa, 

 and several smaller systems in upper Hoonah Sound. 



4) Road construction and stream crossings will be designed 

 and constructed so as to not adversely effect fish habitat. 



5) The Forest Service will not allow roading or timber 

 harvesting on overly-steepened slopes or soils with high 

 erosion potential to prevent sedimentation of fish habitat. 



Given the above assumptions about the protection of fish 

 habitat, and the problem of predicting the impacts to fish 

 from the final on-the-ground roading and logging practices, 

 this analysis assumes there will be no significant adverse 

 effects on fish habitat in these special management areas. 



METHODOLOGY 



The evaluation of wildlife habitat was based on the draft 

 habitat capability models for Sitka black-tailed deer, brown 

 bear, black bear, marten, bald eagle, river otter, and 

 cavity nesting forest birds that are under development by 

 the department, in conjunction with the Forest Service and 

 the U. S. Fish and Wildlife Service. The Forest Service's 

 timber type maps and topographic maps were used, along with 

 these draft models, to assess the value of the wildlife 

 habitats within the areas proposed for no timber harvest and 

 for multiple use. 



The importance of the areas to hunters from Juneau and 

 Ketchikan was based on the department's harvest records for 

 the year 1987. The analysis of the susbsistence use of each 

 of the areas was based on draft maps of subsistence use 

 patterns for each rural community in Southeast Alaska 

 (Tongass Resource Use Cooperative Study, draft maps, June 

 1989) . 



