126 



Wilderness in the Tongass is rock, ice, tundra, or scrub timber. Ninety-two percent of the 

 Wilderness acreage is not suitable for timber harvest. Less than 1 1/2% (80,000 acres) of 

 designated Tongass Wilderness is considered to be commercialy important harvestable timber 

 (over 30,000 board feet per acre). This hardly excludes logging from much of the best forests. 



THE TLMP REVISION WON'T SOLVE FOREST MANAGEMENT PROBLEMS : 



Much has been said about the Tongass Land Management Plan Revision. Unfortunately, the 

 Revision is fatally flawed. After spending $5 million dollars the Forest Service is developing a 

 plan that : 



1) Will not have adequate or reliable timber information to resolve on-the- 

 ground issues; 



2) Will not meet the intent or the letter of the National Environmental Policy 

 Act (NEPA) or the National Forest Management Act (NFMA), or ANILCA 

 Section 810. 



If this Revised Plan is allowed to run its present course, the Plan will be entangled in years of 

 court battles because Southeast Alaska residents will be forced to sue the federal government to 

 protect their livelihoods — and the Tongass issues will still not be resolved. 



In its July 1987 Work Plan, signed by all three Supervisors and the Regional Forester, the 

 Forest Service promised to produce a comprehensive land management plan for the Tongass, 

 with site-specific information. That promise has clearly been broken. 



L WITHOUT CONGRESSIONAL REFORM THE TLMP REVISION WILL BE 



STIFLED BY THE SAME POLICIES THAT CRIPPLE THE CURRENT PLAN. 



The 50-year timber contracts held by Ketchikan Pulp Company and Alaska Pulp Company still 

 drive Tongass management. 



In the November, 1989 Final Environmental Impact Statement on implementation of the Alaska 

 Pulp Corporation long-term timber contract, the Forest Service asserted the APC contract takes 

 precedence over the 1980 Alaska Lands Act provisions that established subsistence as a priority 

 use of federal lands in Alaska. The Forest Service stated: 



The Forest Service's contractual obligations were established before the 

 enactment of ANILCA. Congress knew of the existence of these contracts when 

 it passed ANILCA, but did not cancel them. . . . Should a conflict arise between 

 the availability of subsistence resources and compliance with contractual 

 obligations such as the APC contracts, these contractual obligations should be 

 considered 'necessary' under ANILCA Section 810(a)(3)(l). 



That is, the Forest Service believes the APC contract supercedes the subsistence provisions of 

 ANILCA. 



The mandated timber supply offering of 4.5 billion board feet per decade (450 million 

 feet/year) is still in effect. 



The automatic appropriation of $40 million-t- per annum has not been eliminated. 



Many areas that are critical for subsistence, local community uses, commercial salmon 

 production, wildlife habitat, and unique recreation and tourism opportunities are still 

 threatened by the current Tongass timber program. Lisianski, Kadashan, Mud Bay, and 

 Hoonah Sound are all eligible for road construction and clearcutting in the upcoming APC 



