355 



fish, and subsistence. SEACC consulted with groups representing all of these uses, although 

 our emphasis was on non-timber uses. 



SEACC consulted with and continues to coordinate closely with: 



United Fishermen of Alaska 



Alaska Trollers Association 



Southeast Seiners Association 



United Southeast Alaska Gillnetters Association 



Sealaska Corporation (a diversified corporation with interests in seafood, timber, 



tourism, and subsistence) and other village corporations 

 The Wildlife Society 

 Alaskans for Responsible Resource Management (concerned with small scale 



logging, subsistence, and habitat protection) 

 Tongass Tourism and Recreation Business Association 



In addition, SEACC has participated in ad hoc meetings with independent timber operators in 

 several Southeast Alaska communities. Representatives of Alaska Pulp Corporation have met 

 with our Sitka member organization, the Sitka Conservation Society, and SEACC staff has spent 

 many hours discussing and debating the needs of the timber industry with pulp mill 

 representatives. SEACC staff met with KPC representatives in 1988-89, and we had many 

 meetings with Sealaska, the third largest timber operator in the region. 



SEACC has given careful consideration to ways to protect key habitat and recreation lands 

 while still supplying adequate timber to sustain the existing Tongass-dependent timber industry. 

 It is important for policy makers to understand that no community in Southeast Alaska depends 

 only on the timber industry. Even in the major mill towns many people hunt, fish, and trap-- 

 and therefore depend on fish and wildlife habitat conservation as well as timber harvest. 

 Balancing timber cutting with additional fish and wildlife habitat protection is crucial to 

 maintaining the stability of local dependent communities. Also, many communities are not 

 dependent on commercial timber harvesting, whatsoever -- maintenance of their community 

 stability is directly dependent upon protecting key fish and wildlife watersheds. 



In 1988 we had several meetings with the Alaska Loggers Association, including a special 

 meeting with their Board of Directors. Most recent discussions in 1989 have not proved useful. 

 In 1988-89 we also participated in lengthy discussions with the Tongass Committee of the 

 Southeast Conference reviewing the merits of our land proposals and concerns of the timber 

 industry. The Conference Tongass Committee ended up, in its original position, recommending 

 12 of the 24 areas on our list for permanent protection. 



2e. What opportunities did SEACC afford the public to change the boundaries on its land 

 proposals? Did SEACC provide a draft for review and receive comments? 



SEACCs land proposals have a strong basis in public process and resource conservation. 

 Clearly, SEACCs proposals represent the views of Southeast Alaska conservationists. We did 

 not conduct a formal public review process after the proposal was submitted to Congress, but 

 we took our "working maps" out to the public in 1987, 1988, and 1989. We added some areas 

 because of concerns from small communities. We carried our draft map to more than a dozen 

 communities seeking comments from interested/concerned folks. We also dropped one area 

 (west Dall Island) after discussions with Sealaska. 



The U.S. Congress has conducted a thorough public review process as it considered the urgent 

 need for Tongass Reform. Numerous hearings in both the House and the Senate have 

 considered the questions of fish and wildlife habitat protection needs, timber reform measures. 



