206 



Regional Forester in the Record of Decision as quoted above. Since 

 the NMFS policy is included as part of the AHMU program and only 

 modified after a consideration of long-term LOD supplies as well 

 as other important factors affecting fish production, the assertion 

 that anything less than 100-foot buffers in every instance will 

 create harm is ludicrous. 



In many instances, good riparian management actually 

 requires action in the riparian zone. For example, many streams 

 in Southeast Alaska are too cool for optimum fish production. 

 These specific streams would benefit from selective removal of 

 shade trees. Secondly, many of the streams in Southeast Alaska are 

 lacking in nutrient and fine gravel material is needed by some fish 

 species. These streams would benefit from a modest amount of 

 sediment being introduced into the streams. Third, many streams 

 in Southeast are blocked by blown down timber. This damage could 

 be reduced by having such potential problem trees removed from the 

 riparian zone during harvesting. Fourth, increased solar radiation 

 from selective tree removal could increase nutrient growth, thus 

 enhancing the overall productivity of the stream. 



If mandatory buffer zones are Congressionally mandated, 

 even if mandated only for Class I streams, then at least the 

 following management regimes should be allowed within the zone: 



1. Road crossing should be allowed within buffer strips 

 where necessary for accessing other areas for 

 purposes of National Forest management. This may 

 include, but not be limited to, considerations for 



12 



