protect the birds that it that's the only statement in the draft and the final environmental impact statement that captures this fundamental and important days with which speech are we have that is on page ninety nine hundred ninety three that the proposed standards and guidelines lower these concerns with a credible what was the quality what was the nature of them instead of informing the public about those critical days the environmental impact statement buries it never informing the that are really going to do that and i need to know why it is that that response doesn't have bite you're on our alternative section must present a reasonable range of alternative off all of the alternatives are based on the management recommendations how can alternatives that are based on the on the management recommendations including alternative both be preserving that much old growth would create more risk of insects and seize destruction of the forest i think that that's what they're talking about page one sixty one for example among others your hon am familiar with that argument and yes the fourth wife and i would think it would be to the environmental impacts yet so why doesn't that show that they thought about it and they thought well balancing the northern got hocks habitat needs  e memos or in letters in response to the need to still don't appear in the face in the four corners of the document it's not there a reader looking at it would have no idea that a major  n that underlies every alternative and esteemed author of the environmental impact statement has some reasonable opposing opposition there's just no hint of it that's your first purpose the argument  assuming that it would have been discussed an environmental impact statement the purpose of the alternatives action is to be able to provide alternatives to compare and contrast those that are even the first alternative by the forest service so position here advocates the single right way of doing it like one exact text however i have one alternative that that incorporates encapsulate said to be one that says you know for was a look like they were really giving a hard look to this this particular verse of the northern gaza and what they were saying is that you've got a problem that if you preserve as much old growth insects and disease spreading if you don't have some thinning at is also important for the priest species associated with the mexican spotted owl on the northern grass off and then they are saying ecologically it makes little sense to limit the utilization rate guidelines to only mexican spotted owl in northern ca talk habitat alternative gene may impact but most species will trend toward federal listing and there will be no loss of viability the way i read this now i may have misread it you'll educate me if i have but the way i read it is you can't take optimal care of the northern ca without creating other ecological risks and harm other species leaving aside the human species and as a result there has to be some balancing here and they've tried to do this and they know that it's not optimal for the northern crosstalk but it won't be so scientific article that was in conclusory in some respects i read article sometimes and journal of the american medical association and new england journal of medicine and they don't tell me enough about how the  gathered the population was gathered as conclusory at you can always nitpick that and say they should have said more but we don't get to grade their papers we just get to decide whether they statement that you pointed out that you read to me being at being a reader of it being a reasonable reader i just don't see this is the president there no way that the public would be able to provide input in a way that would let them know what's shall begin these mandatory words this class at appropriate points in the final statement and a responsible opposing view which was not adequately discussed in the graph statement and shall indicate the agency's response could you explain why the agency was not obligated to provide further discussion of the opposing view that it reject crocker best first letter i believe there is i believe just by comparing the two alternatives to analyzing it throughout the whole filing i asked it well there it may not be as blunt as you would have liked it but that doesn't mean it's not a reasonable approach and s with your management recommendations for and that was twenty percent in each of the various stages and that never changed it was tweaked a little bit but yes been really nice truth and so why is it that review of the subject agreed or disagree it doesn't even present the reader with the fact that it was a debate or dispute in fact a reader would look at this in feel that there is nothing interesting in it in this document because had there been something