277 



ference, when learning of Goldbelt's plight, reopened its doors and 

 took additional testimony. After all the views had been considered, 

 the Southeast Conference did what they initially told me they 

 would never do: 



They changed their minds and voted to permit planned timber 

 sales and harvesting along the Chuck River. The conference, which 

 is made up of most of the municipalities in southeast Alaska, is not 

 known for knuckling under to the demands of the timber compa- 

 nies, let alone a Native corporation. 



Their agreement to change their mind is reflective of the equity 

 of Goldbelt's position and of their sensitivity to the plight of the 

 more than 200 people who live and work at Hobart Bay. 



After we had borrowed and invested $17 million at Hobart Bay, 

 timber prices plunged. We did not meet our debt service and nearly 

 went bankrupt. What Goldbelt created at Hobart Bay for this $17 

 million were sort yards, over 100 miles of roads and bridges, a deep 

 water loading dock, and the Town of Hobart Bay itself. 



Although not incorporated, the Town of Hobart Bay, with its 

 over 200 residents, is one of the largest towns in southeast Alaska. 

 Hobart Bay is a settlement with housing, underground utilities, 

 sewage treatment plant, telephone service, a post office with its 

 own zip code, a school grades K through 12, a cable television 

 system, and three flights per day scheduled float plane service. 



We believe we are being treated unfairly, because we thought we 

 had made our peace with the conservationist groups. If these two 

 wilderness areas are legislated, our substantial investment at 

 Hobart Bay will become virtually worthless, part of our ANCSA 

 settlement nullified, and the Town of Hobart Bay abandoned. 



Goldbelt's $17 million investment at Hobart Bay was designed to 

 access the timber at Chuck River. This design was encouraged by 

 the U.S. Forest Service, which had entered into $4 million worth of 

 cost-sharing road arrangements clearly directed at developing 

 timber at Chuck River. The Forest Service also traded Goldbelt 

 lands so as to provide Goldbelt better access to the Chuck River 

 timber area. 



If H.R. 987 becomes law, the investment of the U.S. government 

 in Goldbelt will be devastated. 



It has been pointed out that the Chuck River is an important 

 spawning area for pink salmon. Goldbelt is sensitive to the impor- 

 tance of southeast Alaska's fisheries. Many of our own sharehold- 

 ers are commercial and sport fishermen. 



We have for the past three years been logging along the Chuck 

 River. There is no evidence that salmon runs have decreased at 

 Chuck River. They have increased. We have left buffer strips along 

 the Chuck River. Some strips have exceeded the requirements of 

 the Alaska Forest Practice Act. 



Alaska's Department of Fish and Game has recognized and 

 praised these measures. 



I would also like to point out that there are two other significant 

 salmon streams at Hobart Bay where we have been logging since 

 the early 1980's. Alaska Department of Fish and Game surveys of 

 these streams show the same annual trends and variations in pink 

 salmon escapement as on the Chuck River. Again, there are no in- 



