369 



resource values However in the context of question *3. we would consider making 

 adjustments to key fisheries areas aov being discussed for protection. Any 

 consideration given by UFA would be limited to only those areas with overriding 

 fisheries values. Furthermore, any review adjustments would be made on the basis of 

 keeping watersheds/ drain ages intact. 



4. This quote is a direct, word-for-word quote from the Forest Service EIS for the long 

 term timber sale (pg. 4-163) Yes. much of the harvesting within AHMU's has 

 occurred in the 60s and 70s However harvesting within the AHMU's still goes on as 

 I discussed in my testimony No. it is not true that the standards in the EIS for the 

 1989-94 long term timber sale contain 100 foot buffers on aiLanadromous streams. A 

 member organisation of UFA is currently appealing the EIS for this long term timber 

 tale on this very point. 



5. No. I am not aware of an Oct 6 letter to National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) 

 I am however aware of a Sept. 28 letter to NMFS discussing the NMFS policy in 

 relation to current Forest Service's practices. I do know that the riparian 

 managment prescriptions being evaluated by the TLMP interdisplinary planning 

 team does not include a NMFS prescription option for TLMP revision. Neither 

 riparian management prescription 13 or 14 in the standards and guidelines analysis 

 document for TLMP revision contains a requirement for 100 foot buffers on all 

 anedromous streams and important tributaries 



