21 

 Senator Pressler. Mayor Vitter. 



STATEMENT OF DRUE VITTER, MAYOR, HILL CITY, SD 



Mr. Vitter. Thank you, Senator. 



I represent the mayors of the Black Hills. Overwhelmingly, we 

 have supported the multiple use program of the Black Hills. We do 

 not believe that a reduction of timber in the Black Hills will sus- 

 tain a good, healthy economy. So we propose that the Forest Serv- 

 ice revise their program and allow us the industry to continue on 

 in its natural course. They need at least 100 million to 120 million 

 board feet to cut each year. They refuse to release the figures or 

 the data that supports this so it can be reviewed by everyone. 



Our economy is totally supported by the off-season use of the 

 multiple forest. We think that our people who live in these commu- 

 nities have a right to the multiple use program and that according 

 to the Organic Administration Act of 1897 it was said that no na- 

 tional forest shall be established except to improve and protect the 

 forest within its boundaries. It went on to say that it also is a ne- 

 cessity of the United States citizens that we provide enough timber 

 for the use of our citizens. Why would we kill the last great indus- 

 try that is left in the United States? 



We cannot in my community replace these jobs, these high- 

 paying jobs. The support of the communities with jobs in, say, our 

 tourism industry, does not match up. You cannot replace mini- 

 mum-wage jobs with high-paying jobs. There is a factor that we are 

 losing a population of our people because they cannot work. The 

 reduction of the timber sales has caused these people to almost go 

 out of business or move to other States to be able to secure work. 

 Our own fire chief of Hill City has to move to another State in 

 order to provide his family with the adequate income that he needs 

 to sustain life. We cannot afford to lose these citizens. 



The loss of money in our communities would be significant in its 

 impact on our school system, which in Hill City alone is subsidized 

 by the National Forest Service $490,000 a year. If we had to replace 

 that, Senator, we'd have to go back to the landowners and raise 

 their taxes. How long could they be able to sustain this if they had 

 to pay higher taxes without high-paying jobs? 



If this industry is killed and we have to buy lumber from foreign 

 countries, it hurts the economy of the United States. This cannot 

 be in the interest of western South Dakota or in the west itself We 

 need to sustain our population. We need a good, healthy economy. 

 We need to be able to have multiple use of the forest. We cannot 

 afford to be like the town in Oregon with a population of 9,000 

 people that was devastated by the Wilderness Act. The town had a 

 65-year-old pulp mill that supplied 650 jobs. The mill had to shut 

 down. Three generations of loggers were lost. Their unemployment 

 rate is now running 15 to 20 percent. There has been an increase 

 from 11 percent to 25 to 30 percent in their food banks. Where is 

 the money going to come from to supply these people who cannot 

 make a decent living? From the United States government? 



I propose that the management of the forest can be sustained 

 and it can be a healthy environment where we can produce timber 

 and keep our mills running. Because if we go to under 80 million 



