mer Music Festival or the Fine Arts Camp. These are the kinds of 

 aspects that makes this community so attractive and unique. 



We have lost that economic stability and we are beginning to lose 

 the ability for the business community to help fund those kinds of 

 activities. Sitka has been a well-rounded community over the years, 

 but with the fishing industry suffering global market problems and 

 a dispute with Canada, and the timber industry and visitor indus- 

 try constantly battling the access issues, this is an opportunity for 

 a part of those problems to be resolved. We cannot resolve the Can- 

 ada issue with this legislation, but there is a possibility to bring 

 the decisionmaking process for the timber issues and the access is- 

 sues for tourism back to Alaska, where they belong. We may want 

 to lock it up and make it a park, for all I know, but at least that 

 decision would be made by Alaskans. 



I support the concept that this legislation proposes. You have put 

 some hard issues into this bill for Alaskans to comment on, and 

 that is appreciated. 



In conclusion, I would state that you have answered one of my 

 primary concerns, and that is the paramount issue of the Native 

 subsistence rights that you included in this legislation. I commend 

 you for that. My two major concerns, for the record, would be con- 

 cluding the State of Alaska have a management ability in place for 

 this transfer and that the employment issue of Sitkans who work 

 for the Forest Service be addressed in more detail with an empha- 

 sis on job retention. 



I would also conclude my testimony stating that, regardless of 

 Forest Service policy, I personally appreciate the work of Gary 

 Morrison, Chatham District Supervisor, and Jim Franzel, Sitka 

 Ranger, and their staff here at the local level here in Sitka. Too 

 often their work goes unappreciated in this community. I appre- 

 ciate the thought of giving Alaskans the ability to control their own 

 destiny by the concept of this proposed legislation. I hope that you 

 will address the concerns that I have presented. I believe this pro- 

 posed legislation is worth taking to the next step to take a more 

 detailed view of how it might work. As a lifetime Sitkan who in- 

 tends to live here for the rest of his life with his family, thank you 

 for allowing me to testify today. 



The Chairman. Thank you, Keith, and I can assure you that 

 your thoughts will be considered. That is what hearings are all 

 about. 



If I can, I know three times you complimented the local Forest 

 Service people, and I want to back up what you said. 



There was a time when their decisions were the decisions that 

 the people of Alaska lived with. That is no longer true. Those deci- 

 sions are now made in Washington, D.C., and that is why this bill 

 is a necessity, and why anybody would oppose local input and local 

 control, I cannot for the life understand. Why they support big gov- 

 ernment and centralized government, I cannot understand, unless 

 they have a different concept of America than I have. I think their 

 input is so important, and also the decisionmaking thoughts so im- 

 portant. So I thank you for your comments. I know I let you go 

 overtime, and I apologize to Stan, but, Stan, you are on now. 



