340 



conducted by NMFS referred to in the January 5, 1990, 

 letter" to Michael A. Barton (emphasis added) . The., two 

 documents supplied were the only two referred to in the 

 letter. 



17. Isn't it misleading then to claim extensive research in this 

 area? 



NMFS buffer-strip policy is based on extensive research, six 



primary studies are cited in the policy itself (a copy of 



the policy is attached). In total, information from over 20 



studies relates to the policy. We would be glad to supply a 



detailed bibliography of these studies to the Subcommittee. 



18. At page 2 of your testimony, you claim to have worked 

 closely with the Forest Service in this area. Yet I note 

 that in a September 15, 1989 letter to John Knauss, the 

 Chief of the Forest Service invites "increased participation 

 of NMFS in the field evaluations and analyses associated 

 with selecting management prescriptions for streamside zones 

 and in follow-up evaluations to check whether the expected 

 results were achieved following project completion"? 



Are you people really getting out on the ground and looking 

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

 buffer strip policy because you have insufficient personnel 

 to get out and monitor these activities? 



As indicated in our December 13, 1989, response to the USFS, 



NMFS Alaska personnel have spent a considerable amount of 



time working with USFS personnel. NMFS and USFS personnel 



have been involved in the development of the Southeast Area 



Guide, Tongass Land Management Plans, Southeast Alaska 



Multiresource Model, Aquatic Habitat Management Handbook, 



and other planning and guidance materials. Our biologists 



also spend a great amount of time in the field. However, 



much like the FS, we have limits to the area we can cover 



8 



