The written responses received by the Forest Service can be categorized as follows:
• 60 were signed form letters, primarily from individuals between 9 and 18 years of age. The form letter questioned the methodology of the Forest Service analysis and emphasized the importance of timber harvesting to the Kaslo area.
• 74 responses were from groups or individuals who supported a minimum reduction, if any, to the allowable annual cut, due largely to the importance of timber harvesting to their lifestyles and to the local economy.
• 37 responses suggested protection of the environment, biodiversity, and other non-timber forest resources required greater restrictions on timber harvesting, and requested a more drastic reduction to the allowable annual cut than indicated by the base case timber supply forecast in the Forest Service analysis.
• 4 responses were neutral. One indicated the methodology and timeframes for the Timber Supply Review were unrealistic and suggested they be re-evaluated. Another stressed the importance of co-use of forest resources and of local reinvestment of forest revenues. A third acknowledged the difficult task facing the chief forester and requested that a careful and balanced decision be made. The fourth criticized the assessment of the agricultural sector in the Socio-Economic Assessment.
