26 



But the other issue that we are dealing with here is habitat and 

 that, too, is a very important issue and we have a couple of experts 

 here who I think — I think we should just draw a little bit more out 

 of them about the uniqueness of this habitat and its need in order 

 to avoid future environmental train wrecks which I think Secretary 

 Babbitt has been very eloquent in discussing and showing us the 

 dangers of those and the need to avoid them. 



I think that we really need to focus not just on the whole issue 

 of publicly owned versus privately owned land in the State of Cali- 

 fornia but on the uniqueness of the ancient redwood forest, the an- 

 cient redwood ecosystem and its very key role as the FEMAT re- 

 port discusses in detail in maintaining the viability of species that 

 are on the verge of extinction. So I am not sure who is in charge 

 here. 



Mr. Rose. I will be right back. 



Mr. Hamburg. Mr. Chairman, I don't know who you are going 

 to recognize next, but I had a couple of follow-up questions, then 

 I could be finished. 



Mr. Bishop. The procedure for the subcommittee is to allow each 

 member an opportunity to address questions or to make state- 

 ments, and we probably need to limit that time — I am sure that ev- 

 eryone can — so we don't tsike an inordinate long period of time. So 

 if it is all right with those present, I will ask the members who 

 have questions to limit them to 5 minutes and shorter if possible 

 and see if we can work that in so we can perhaps get back to Mr. 

 Hamburg and you can use your follow-up questions. Let's give 

 every member an opportunity to address these questions at least 

 once before we go back for repeaters. 



Mr. GrOODLATTE. He was here first. 



Mr. Rose [assuming chair]. He didn't indicate a desire to ques- 

 tion. 



Mr. Groodlatte. 



Mr. GrOODLATTE. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, 



Mr. Leonard, last year you testified that the Forest Service op- 

 posed the enactment of thas legislation because of the high cost of 

 acquisition and potential for economic impact to local communities. 

 This year you have expressed concern about the costs of the bill 

 without any mention of the economic impact to local communities. 



Is this economic impact no longer of concern to the Forest Serv- 

 ice? 



Mr. Leonard. No. We obviously are continuing to be concerned 

 about the impact on local timber-dependent communities. What is 

 reflected in the change of our position is an interest by this admin- 

 istration in sitting down with all the parties and seeing if some- 

 thing can't be worked out; and within that context, concern for the 

 dependent communities would be part of that process that would 

 be worked out. 



Mr. GOODLATTE. And it goes beyond the timber nature of it, 

 doesn't it? We are taking additional lands out of the local tax base 

 when we do this, so even if we set aside the issue of using it as 

 a timber resource, if it can't be used for any other resource, that 

 is a loss of revenue to the local economy and to the local tax base; 

 is it not? 



