77 



Act. It allowed clearcutting, but we thought it would be under re- 

 strained circumstances, shall we say. And I'm not at all satisfied 

 that those circumstances have been adequately restrained. 



Mr. KONDOLF. Well, also, I know that the environmental assess- 

 ments done for these cuts have not evaluated whether they will af- 

 fect ground water recharged to a giant sequoia growth somewhere 

 else. That's just not considered in this. 



Mr. Brown. I would suspect that you can make some sound eco- 

 nomic arguments from the standpoint of the loggers that it is 

 cheaper, faster, and maybe would even require less roads in the 

 long run to clearcut an area. And then, of course, they all promise 

 to come back and replant it, and it will grow immediately. 



Yet, the success rate on the replanting seems to be very low, and 

 it seems to be correlated with other factors, such as the steepness 

 of the slope. I'm not at all sure that those factors have been ade- 

 quately considered. 



Mr. KONDOLF. Well, the success rates are certainly lower in the 

 Sequoia National Forest than in a lot of other places, 



Mr. POMBO. Mr. Chairman, I did have one question. 



Mr. Brown. I was hoping that I would provoke a question or two. 



Mr. PoMBO. Yes, you did. 



To Dr. Rundel, specifically, in this bill, it states consistent with 

 the purpose and provisions of this act, 'Timber cutting shall not be 

 permitted on Federal lands within the preserve, except for sci- 

 entific study, or as consistent with the fire plan as established by 

 the board. 



Timber cutting for scientific purposes shall in no case exceed one- 

 twentieth of 1 percent of the total preserve acreage in any given 

 year." It goes on to state that, "No timber cutting within 500 yards 

 of sequoia groves is prohibited." 



Under that scenario, would it be possible in all cases to properly 

 manage this forest? With the current science that you know, 5 

 ye£irs from now, you will probably give me a different answer. But, 

 I mean, with the science that you know, and with your experience, 

 would that be possible to carry that out? 



Mr. Rundel. I think the problem we are facing is, I think we are 

 all in agreement, we need to reduce fuels and to restore fire as a 

 natural part of the environment. And for a variety of reasons, it is 

 difficult to bring fire in, initially, with large fuel accumulations. 



Now, I think where the question becomes or there may be some 

 play is, how best to achieve that goal. If that goal is achieved by 

 major lumbering £ind roadbuilding in these areas, then I think it 

 is totally against the preservation ideas for the sequoias. If there 

 is selective logging biannuals, or if there is some new kind of equip- 

 ment that is not destructive to the roots and the other species in 

 the areas, then that may well be an appropriate management tech- 

 nique. I'm not familiar with those kind of harvesting techniques in 

 enough detail. 



But I think the intent is that we need to find ways to reduce the 

 fuel load. Fire is going to be part of that. We need some mechani- 

 cal, probably manipulation beyond that. And traditional lumbering 

 is not an appropriate mechanical means. 



