23 



However, concerns about the impacts of those roads on environ- 

 mental quality, on water quality, for example, led to a transition to 

 greater emphasis on the Forest Service building roads themselves 

 and engineering those roads themselves and building them up to 

 standards that they felt would meet environmental quality needs. 

 Now questions have been raised about whether or not that policy is 

 appropriate. 



Clearly, we are going through a shift again. I think there are a 

 couple of things that will impact on the kinds of roads we build in 

 the future. One will clearly be money. We will not have the kind of 

 resources we had in the past to construct roads. Another element 

 will be where we are accessing timber, and as you know from your 

 State of Idaho, Senator Baucus' and other areas, the roadless area 

 debate is to some degree coming to a close, and the extent to which 

 we are entering large units for purposes of continuing sales is 

 going to change over time. So we will probably see ourselves trying 

 to make more judicious use of roads, to enter watersheds for a 

 period of time and then back out, or to go into areas we have cut 

 previously where we can — a more difficult problem in your State — 

 and take out timber in those areas and then back out. 



I think another element that is going to come into play, though, 

 is the environmental quality concerns, and we need to have a 

 better understanding of how we can build lower-cost roads, for ex- 

 ample, temporary roads, roads we are going to put to bed, in a way 

 that does not impact on, for example, water quality, and get away 

 from the kinds of hard money roads, the heavy-duty roads, that we 

 have built in the past to try to address that concern. We are ana- 

 lyzing that right now — the shift from the hard money roads, the 

 appropriated dollar roads, to the purchaser credit roads. 



Senator Craig. Jim, in a former life, you and I worked a year 

 ago on an issue that found its way toward final passage and into 

 law, and that involved changes in the appeal regulations. It passed 

 in the 1993 Interior appropriation bill, streamlining the process 

 and hopefully reducing some of the costs involved there. Well, it 

 has been nearly a year since its passage. I guess my question is 

 when will the new regulations be finalized and implemented. 



Mr. Lyons. Senator, the comment period was extended, as you 

 know, on the original proposal, and that comment period closed 

 June 1. We are currently analyzing the comments. I will commit to 

 you that we will move as quickly as possible to prepare a final rule 

 that is consistent with the legislative compromise that originated 

 here and that you had such an important role in constructing. We 

 will be working with your staff in trying to ensure that that final 

 rule is consistent with that compromise. We want to have that in 

 place as soon as possible. 



Senator Craig. I appreciate that comment. We'll look forward to 

 that. I think you and I both agree that that is a cost factor that 

 might find its way into some savings and at the same time, give 

 fairer access to public input, which I think we are all desirous of. 



I have one last question that relates to costs of timber sale prepa- 

 ration. Why not eliminate the costly timber appraisal process? Is it 

 possible to do that? Is it realistic to do that? 



Almost all of our sales are bid well above the appraisal value. 

 We've got a market that moves up and down; it is market-driven. 



