344 



portion of the Long-Term Sale Area. The letter stated 

 "Presuming the same problems exist throughout the sale area, 

 we must assume that considerable impacts to fish and 

 wildlife habitat are occurring as a result of the Long-Term 

 Sales and associated 'salvage' sales on Prince of Wales 

 Island" (letter attached) . 



27. So your real quarrel with the Forest Service is that it 

 applies less than a 100-foot buffer on some Class I streams 

 through use of a site-specific Interdisciplinary Team 

 approach which NMFS doesn't trust? 



NMFS supports the USFS ' approach of using Interdisciplinary 



Teams (IDTs) . However, NMFS believes that it is the USFS 



responsibility to assure that the riparian habitat will be 



managed using the best scientific information provided by 



IDTs to protect the extremely important and valuable 



anadromous salmon habitat found in the Tongass National 



Forest. The minimum 100-foot buffer policy of NMFS 



incorporates that information. 



28. If you do not agree, in reference to the December 27, 1989 

 letter from NMFS Alaska Director Pennoyer to Mike Barton, 

 didn't NMFS complain that while buffer strips were used on 

 Class I streams, that some of the buffers were less than 100 

 feet? 



Again, this just means that less then 100% of Large Woody 

 Debris will be naturally recruited into those streams, it 

 does not mean they will be damaged, right? 



As stated in the referenced letter of December 27, 1989, 



NMFS objects to the USFS plans to harvest timber next to 



anadromous streams using buffer strips less than 100 feet. 



Over time, LWD is lost from streams. If no buffers are 



left, this LWD is not replaced causing damage to fishery 



12 



