Under my bil), Alaskans would have a chance to resolve them right 

 here in Southeast — without the shadow of Federal Government. 



Too many times the hand of the Federal Government in Wash- 

 ington, D.C., has interfered with the lives of the people in the 

 Tongass. 



The Alaska Pulp contract cancellation is a prime example. We 

 know now that three letters were drafted on the APC contract 

 issue. One granted an extension, another gave more time to get the 

 mill converted, and a third canceled the contract. Washington, 

 D.C., political appointees gave the order to sign the third letter 

 that canceled the contract. The Forest Service in Alaska was not 

 involved. That decision cost Alaskans 42 percent of our timber jobs 

 and Federal taxpayers a billion dollars to compensate for damages. 



Washington, B.C., also made the decision to pass the Tongass 

 Reform Act of 1990. I opposed that bill because I knew that it 

 would hurt Alaskans. Not only did that Act add 1 million acres of 

 wilderness, but it forced changes of the APC and KPC timber con- 

 tracts. That arrogant political decision will cost taxpayers 1 billion 

 dollars. Just yesterday, or day before yesterday, the U.S. Supreme 

 Court said the government cannot go around changing contracts 

 willy-nilly, then claim a defense of sovereign immunity, which was 

 precisely the government's defense on the Tongass Timber Reform 

 Act contract changes. The court said if the Federal Government 

 changes contracts, then the Federal Government — you, the tax- 

 payer — must pay for the taking under the 5th Amendment. 



Those are some of the big Federal decisions that cloud the lives 

 of people that live in Southeast Alaska. But some of the small deci- 

 sions hurt the most. Take the brilliant decision of the Forest Serv- 

 ice to require outfitter-guide special-use permits for commercial 

 taxicabs visiting the Mendenhall Glacier in Juneau. I do not know 

 whose idea that was. Or imagine the Forest Service gun-toting law 

 enforcement officer who reports directly to Washington, B.C. — not 

 even the local Forest Service — arresting four Alaskans for using a 

 cabin during the Federal shutdown, not even reporting to the local 

 boss. 



Now, some of you — and I know I look outside — and I may dis- 

 agree on TTRA or APC or other Federal Forest Service issues, but 

 as Alaskans we should agree on the bill we are here to discuss 

 today. It puts more power and control over the Tongass decisions 

 in the hands of Alaskans. Whether you are an environmentalist, 

 conservationist, biologist, or timber worker, you all get more con- 

 trol. I introduced my bill because I trust Alaskans to make deci- 

 sions about the Tongass without Federal help. Federal decisions 

 have crushed people and changed lives in communities like Sitka. 

 Southeast Alaska needs family-wage jobs, but the Federal system 

 is paralyzed over wildlife questions that seem to have no answer, 

 nor are they really seeking answers. I want to talk about the archi- 

 pelago wolf going extinct 150 years from now due to the habitat 

 shortages caused by timber harvests when less than 10 percent of 

 the Tongass will ever be harvested. Think about it: Less that 10 

 percent of the total Tongass. The State bag limit on wolves is five, 

 and yet they are saying you cannot harvest trees. Do we, as Alas- 

 kans, want the choice to control our future in Congress? Do we 

 really want the Federal Government to control our lands? In fact, 



