231 



.lusti-fy further logging in Sequoia National Forest. A tempoary 

 annual cut of 75MMBF was aqreea to until these studies were done. 

 Tne annual cut was then to be reevaluated in view of more com- 

 plete information to try and establish a permanent cut in the 

 Forest. By releasing the sales we had challenged a supply of 

 timber could flow to the mills while the studies were being done. 

 We in effect traded our legal challenges to those sales in ex- 

 change +or additional scientific studies that the Forest Service 

 should have done in the first place. 



it was expected the provisions of the MSA would take two years 

 to complete. Then the MSA would be incorporated into the LMP 

 using the NEPA orocess. During that time the mills would have an 

 adeguate timber supply and tne Forest Service would get badly 

 needed information to use for long term management decisions 

 asbout timber harvest. 



This summer it will be four vears since tne MSA was signed. Vet 

 most of the studies and none of the reevaluations of the annual 

 timber harvest have been done. If it had not been for the interim 

 guidelines to protect the California Spotted Owl imposed by 

 Region 5 of the Forest Service 75MMBF of timber would still 

 continue to be cut in Sequoia National Forest in spite of the 

 continuing lack of information the Forest Service promised to 

 obtain. Outside of Sootted Owl habitat in the Forest timber sales 

 still continue to be offered at an alarming rate. We kept our 

 half of the bargain bv releasing the timber sales while the 

 Forest Service has not completed its promised studies. Now we Are 

 being accused violating an agreement tnat was never intended to 

 be permanent because we are supportng HR-2153. 



The annual cut of 75MMBF was not based upon any science whatso- 

 ever. It is a number that was bargained across the table bv the 

 appellants to the LMP and the Forest SErvice. It was only to be a 

 temporary cut until the studies the Forest Service agreed to do 

 were done. 



These studies were to be used to reexamine the vield tables so 

 an annual cut the Forest could sustain permanently could be 

 established. The yield tables for the Forest have never been 

 reviewed because the requisite studies have never been done. 



The vast reduction in timber harvest from the part of the 

 Forest where the Sootted Owl is found helos substnatiate our 

 contention that the 75MMBF annual cut was too high. We sre con- 

 vinced that if and when the other studies are done they Will 

 point to the same conclusion. The cut on Sequoia National Forest 

 has been far too high for many years and that continued intensive 

 logging in the Forest will oestrov tne ecosystems that so many 

 species of plants and animals and recreation depend upon. 



Claims r\A\/e also been made that the MSA and the Presidential 

 Proclimation have orotected the Slant Seguoias. The Groves sre 

 protected only by a 500 ft buffer strip and an additional 500 ft 

 buffer where intensive logging is prohibited. These buffers were 



