292 



The Chairman. Did they change their opinion? 



Mr. Griffin. Yes, several. 



The Chairman. Of the nine, how many did, and do you know 

 why they did? 



Mr. Griffin. There were many factors that contributed to their 

 change. One, of course, was the fact that new information came 

 before them. 



Two was that information included such things as maps. Prior to 

 the vote on number 1, there were no maps provided to the board of 

 directors and they were not able to see what the results of their 

 actions might be. VCU numbers and other kinds of descriptions 

 were given to them, but they saw no maps. 



When they saw the maps, as you have had an opportunity to 

 take a look at portions of them today, they began to think about 

 not just the timber industry and not just the fishing industry, but 

 all the other industries and people who live in Southeast Alaska. 



We have to look for transportation corridors for 10, 20, 30 years 

 down the road. We have to look for utility corridors 10, 20, 30 years 

 down the road. 



The Southeast Conference is on record supporting the Southeast 

 Intertie, which is an electrical intertie for Southeast Alaska, which 

 is going to need utility corridors, and you do not run them across 

 wilderness areas. 



We also are on record of supporting the Marine Highway System 

 and other highway systems in Southeast Alaska to provide trans- 

 portation. You do not do that across the wilderness area. 



I can go on and on and on as to why some of the people who 

 changed their minds on the board did so. 



The Chairman. Mr. Metcalf. 



Mr. Metcalf. Yes, I think I would like to speak to that also 



I think, while the Southeast Conference 1 was a good proposal, it 

 did not go as far as we would like. But it was an honest proposal 

 that took a lot of time to craft. And Southeast 2 simply did not 

 take that time. It left a lot of people out. 



While we say, yes, it included more people, in fact the record 

 shows clearly that there were a lot of people very upset about 

 Southeast 2. They were concerned perhaps not with the content of 

 the proposal, but with the way it was done. 



Take for instance Sitka, a strong supporter of the timber indus- 

 try, simply said that they were not willing to support the Southeast 

 2 because they did not like the way it had been done, and at the 

 last borough meeting that I listened to said that they were not 

 going to support it. They were going to wait and see. 



So I think you have to look at not only the content of it, but also 

 the way it was engineered. 



The Chairman. Ms. Troll. 



Ms. Troll. Yes. I believe that the revised Southeast Conference 

 came about as a change of board representation at the last South- 

 east Conference board meeting, where some membership were 

 changed and some of the people involved in the Tongass timber leg- 

 islation no longer serve on the Southeast Conference board of direc- 

 tors. 



In some of the documentation that was provided to the current 

 Southeast Conference when they were considering this revision, it 



