291 



Now, with respect to buffer zones, I think frankly it is fairly well 

 agreed that you will have a 100-foot buffer zone on Class I streams. 

 There might be a little argument and I do not ask for anyone to 

 approve that, but I think a 100-foot buffer on Class I is here. 



I think you can assume no selective harvest in Class I, although 

 we will argue about that. It certainly has not been agreed to. 



And on Class II's, you could assume that you protect with 100 

 foot buffers only those that flow into Class I's, and otherwise for 

 other Class II's as well as Class Ill's you have Forest Service man- 

 agement. 



Then I would like to know what the effect on jobs and harvest 

 levels are of Southeast 1, Southeast 2, the House bill, or any other 

 formulation which you would like to make, because we cannot be 

 unaware of the effect on jobs of the things we do here. 



Mr. Metcalf, you seem to be a little more bullish. I think you 

 said that with the House language you would have 390 million 

 board-feet? 



Mr. Metcalf. That is correct. 



The Chairman. So that if you go to the Southeast 1, there would 

 be, I take it, in your opinion even more board-feet? 



Mr. Metcalf. I would agree with the State, it is probably around 

 422 or so. 



The Chairman. Under Southeast 1? 



Mr. Metcalf. Yes. 



The Chairman. And what would be the effect on jobs? 



Mr. Metcalf. There would be no effect on those jobs dependent 

 on Tongass timber at this point. There might, obviously, in the 

 future be some decrease as the industry would not grow way 

 beyond where they are now. 



The Chairman. Mr. Griffin has said Southeast 2 is the best for- 

 mulation, but the Governor is for Southeast 1, and your view is 

 that Southeast 1 best represents the consensus of Alaskans? 



Mr. Lindh. I think that it is correct to say that it best repre- 

 sents — it is as close as you are going to get to a compromise among 

 the people that live in southeast Alaska. 



The Chairman. Okay. Let me ask others to speak to that. 



And again, we are not just a public opinion poll here, but I would 

 like to know what the people of Alaska also feel. 



Mr. Griffin? 



Mr. Griffin. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 



I happen to disagree with Mr. Lindh. In our analysis, the indica- 

 tion is that there were a number of people left out of the original 

 proposal's review, that there have been a number of changes as far 

 as testimony before the House is concerned from people within 

 southeast Alaska who were not included in the original document 

 and information that was forwarded to you. 



I am sorry you have not gotten it, but I will make sure that you 

 do by tomorrow. 



The Chairman. So it is really a change in the composition of the 

 Southeast Conference, rather than a change of opinion of those 

 who originally came up with Southeast 1 that causes the change? 



Mr. Griffin. Nine of the original eleven members of the board of 

 directors of Southeast Conference are still board of director mem- 

 bers, who voted on number 1. 



