14 



ganization that represents the entire spectrum of views in Ver- 

 mont. 



Now, obviously, we need to scrutinize every Federal program to 

 make sure it does not waste money. However, if you apply only 

 fiscal analysis to the forestry programs, it ignores some very impor- 

 tant issues. 



There are below-cost timber sales on Federal lands that should 

 not go forward, and I think we know the type of terrain where they 

 should not go forward. But if every land management strategy had 

 to produce a profit, then you couldn't manage wildlife refuges, you 

 could not protect wildernesses, you could not maintain recreation 

 areas, you could not conduct forest research because these are all 

 below cost. But the advantages to the whole country in each in- 

 stance are great. So what you do is pick out those areas which 

 make no sense and get rid of them, because they not only waste 

 money, but they abuse our natural resources, and it is bad public 

 policy. 



But there are some below-cost sales which are appropriate. Some 

 of the forest management issues make a great deal of sense, from 

 maintaining a wild game population to an ecosystem. Let's elimi- 

 nate below-cost timber sales that degrade the environment, but 

 then make sure at the same time that the overall environmental 

 stewardship in our national forests is maintained. 



There will be some below-cost sales because there is a greater 

 good that is gained by it. So I would hope that when we consider 

 our fiscal responsibility, we consider our environmental steward- 

 ship as well. Often the balancing act is to continue with the sales, 

 and educate the American public that all timber sales are not in- 

 herently bad. But in the long run we must maintain high-quality, 

 environmentally oriented forest management. We can do that and 

 maintain timber sales. 



So Mr. Chairman, I think that not only do you help the Senate 

 with these hearings, but you also educate those who are not in- 

 volved in it. 



I would ask that my full statement be included in the record and, 

 if I am unable to stay for all the witnesses, that I be allowed to 

 submit some questions for the record. 



Senator Daschle. Without objection. Thank you, Senator. 



[The prepared statement of Senator Leahy follows:] 



Prepared Statement of Hon. Patrick J. Leahy, U.S. Senator from the State of 



Vermont 



introduction 



Thank you Senator Daschle for chairing this important hearing this afternoon. 

 The management of our Nation's forests is a critical responsibility of this commit- 

 tee. The fact that the 1990 farm bill was the first to contain a forestry title indicates 

 how important I believe forestry is. I hope that today we are able to identify some 

 goals for timber sale programs specifically, and for national forest management as a 

 whole. 



When the below-cost timber sale initiative was described in the New York Times 

 on April 30, it seemed like the Forest Service was preparing to shut down 62 forests 

 in a heavy-handed and hasty fashion. This did not make sense in Vermont where 

 we had carefully negotiated a consensus forest plan that met both environmental 

 and timber objectives. 



