202 



by approximately 21% or 22%. (See Exhibit B) Alternatively, the 



Forest Service will be forced to enter roadless areas at a more 



rapid rate to sustain the industry. 



CONGRESSIONALLY MANDATED BUFFER STRIPS ARE NOT NEEDED AND 



WOULD DRASTICALLY AFFECT THE ECONOMY OF SOUTHEAST ALASKA . Even the 



National Marine Fisheries Service NMFS), which is the author of 



the buffer strip proposal recognizes that site specific management 



is best. For example, in Chapter Four of a workshop compendium 



"Streamside Management: Forestry and Fisheries Interactions" (Selo 



and Cundy, ed. 1987), Mr. Koski and five others point out the 



following regarding streamside management: 



"They finally recommend that 'if managers desire to 

 manage an optimum mix of forest resources consistently, 

 a staff of trained specialists is needed. Rather than 

 relying on guidelines that have little flexibility from 

 site to site, managers need to rely on the knowledge of 

 foresters, engineers, hydrologists, wildlife and fishery 

 biologist and other disciplines as needed to tailor 

 forest management operations to the constantly changing 

 characteristics of the landscape and streamside areas.'" 



The problem is that the NMFS does not trust the Forest 

 Service. Thus, management by tape measure is preferable to the 

 site specific management Congress has required through the NFMA on 

 every other national forest. 



It is instructive to spend just a moment looking at what 



the Forest Service is required to do and what the NMFS proposes. 



NFMA requires the Forest Service to protect fish habitat on all 



National forests. Section 6(g)(1)(E) of NFMA requires the agency 



to: 



Insure that timber will be harvested from National Forest 

 system lands only where protection is provided for 



8 



