60 



are a lot of sales. I am not familiar with specifically those. But 

 there may be sales where that green component exceeds, I believe, 

 20 percent, 25 percent of volume, which we have been instructed 

 to review at my level. When those do come in for review, we will 

 expedite them as rapidly as we possibly can to make sure that they 

 are OK, and if they are, we will proceed. If there is a problem, of 

 course, we will hold them. 



Mrs. Chenoweth. I know my time is up and the Chairman 

 wants to proceed. I am not going to talk about silvicultural man- 

 agement here, but I would love to just work with you. Dr. Thomas, 

 on what your criteria is, even in associated trees. When they are 

 in a disease or insect-infested area, they are likely to be attacked 

 and killed, also, so we are very concerned. 



Mr. Thomas. I can respond to that very quickly. That is part of 

 the review process. We would like to achieve other silvicultursd as- 

 pects. We want to be as effective and efficient as we can, and if 

 that is put forward and it is clear, then we will proceed. If there 

 is a problem, we will not. But let me tell you, if we do not proceed, 

 that does not mean the sale will not go forward. It means it may 

 go forward after the expiration of the salvage rider because there 

 is an obvious concern with public input and ability to appeal. 



So we will follow that process. If it looks good and it seems to 

 be within the guidelines, we will proceed. If not, we will delay it 

 until the salvage rider is expired and then we will proceed under 

 regular process. 



Mrs. Chenoweth. Thank you, Dr. Thomas. 



Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 



Mr. Hansen. Thank you, Mrs. Chenoweth. 



This has been an interesting hearing. This is the seventh hear- 

 ing, I think, we have done on this type of thing. Also, we went out 

 to Roseburg, Oregon, and did a hearing. But we keep hearing the 

 same thing. We get a lot of folks in, elected officials, county super- 

 visors, city councilmen, loggers, environmentalists. 



There is a difference of opinion, obviously. The loggers point out, 

 especially the union folks, how many hundreds of jobs they are los- 

 ing. Some of the fish and wildlife people talk about how they have 

 to have more habitat. The lumber people talk about how the price 

 of lumber has escalated. Other people talk about how unreasonable 

 the government is, whether it is the Forest Service, BLM, Con- 

 gress, or whatever it may be. 



Out of this timber sales, this salvage thing, that law was passed 

 on July 27, 1995, and during the emergency period, the Secretary 

 concerned is to achieve to the maximum extent feasible a salvage 

 timber sale volume level above the program level to reduce the 

 backlog volume of salvage timber. 



If I am reading Secretary Glickman's direction of July 2, it pretty 

 well countermands that. Is that the whole theory behind this, Mr. 

 Lyons? 



Mr. Lyons. No, it is not, Mr. Chairman. Quite to the contrary, 

 it simply is intended to provide additional guidance with regard to 

 how the emergency salvage program is to be implemented. It is not 

 countermanding in any way, shape, or form. I would offer that it 

 is a clarification of guidelines that the field is to use and direction 



