313 



Question 7 Is a full harvest moratorium necessary on the 

 23 areas identified in S. 346, or could the 

 Forest Service vary its management practices 

 on those areas to provide increased 

 protection for fish and wildlife while still 

 allowing timber harvesting in these areas? 



The 23 areas identified in S. 346 include 

 important wildlife habitat on the Forest. In 

 addition, they capture other values, 

 including scenery, recreation, fisheries, and 

 unique geographical features (see Attachment 

 J) . This is not to imply that these 23 areas 

 are the only ones with these properties or 

 that some adjustments or substitutions could 

 not do a satisfactory job of increasing 

 protection for fish and wildlife. 



The key, however, to preservation of wildlife 

 diversity and abundance is permanent 

 protection from logging and extensive reading 

 for substantial areas of high-value wildlife 

 habitat. The system of areas so protected 

 must of necessity include commercially 

 valuable high-volume old-growth. 



It is certainly true that increased 

 protection (relative to current harvest 

 plans) could be achieved to some degree 

 without a full moratorium on logging. 

 Examples of alternate strategies are 

 discussed in Question 6 above. One example 

 would be single-tree logging of large spruce 

 in riparian zones. However, these options 

 are somewhat impractical economically. In 

 the windy environment of S.E. Alaska, balloon 

 or helicopter logging are also very 

 problematic. 



In short, we believe that the extent to which 

 areas such as those named in S. 346 are 

 protected from logging will determine the 

 extent to which many fish and wildlife values 

 are also protected. 



