32 



With regards to the Tongass Transfer and Transition Act, I feel 

 it necessary to agree with you that there are problems with the 

 way the Tongass currently is being managed. These problems, how- 

 ever, are not agreed on by you and I. You contend that the problem 

 with the management of the Tongass lies with the Forest Service 

 and that the State of Alaska could do a better job; hence, your bill. 



I, on the other hand, believe that the Forest Service has three 

 major problems with the management of the Tonga$s, that being 

 Senator Stevens, Senator Murkowski, and you. Representative 

 Young. I firmly believe that if the three of you, along with your 

 special interests, would simply allow the Forest Service to use the 

 good science and public input available to them, that they could 

 manage the Tongass in a very responsible manner. 



If your bill were passed, it would represent the beginning of the 

 end of the 100-year tradition of public ownership of national forest 

 lands. The Tongass falls under the principle of public landowner- 

 ship, whereby it will be managed for the greatest good for the 

 greatest number in the long run. Your bill contradicts everything 

 that President Teddy Roosevelt stood for when he established the 

 national forest system. 



If your bill is passed, how would the management of this new 

 Tongass be paid for? An example. Over the past three years, the 

 Federal treasury has subsidized the timber program for KPC to the 

 tune of $102 million. The only way Alaska could continue a pro- 

 gram like this, in light of the fact that the State has less revenues 

 each year, would be to sell off portions of the Tongass to the high- 

 est bidder in order to generate revenues to pay the current sub- 

 sidies. This bill assures that the Tongass would be converted to pri- 

 vate ownership. Along with this private ownership comes the guar- 

 antee that logging would be accelerated, turning the new Tongass 

 into nothing more than a gigantic tree farm. 



This bill also repeals 16 years of protection enacted by various 

 acts. For example, your bill repeals the 100-foot minimum no-log- 

 ging buffer zones on salmon streams. Your bill also repeals perma- 

 nent protection for legislated LUD II areas, and for Sitkans that 

 means Upper Hoonah Sound, Lisianski River and Inlet would no 

 longer be protected. Your bill also repeals wilderness and national 

 monument designations. Here, again, for Sitkans, that means the 

 elimination of West Chichagof/Yacobi Wilderness Area, as well as 

 the South Baranof Wilderness Area. The purpose in repealing these 

 provisions is to create an even larger timber base. 



Your bill would also parcel out over 200,000 acres of the Tongass 

 for the five new, for-profit Native corporations. For-profit translates 

 to timber extraction. These allocations would further draw down 

 the best of the rest of what is left in the Tongass. 



I think it ironic that it has taken some 25 years for this landless 

 Natives' issue to surface. You and Senator Murkowski are only try- 

 ing to assist KPC and APC with another source of cheap fiber and 

 ignoring what people in Southeast and Sitka, in particular, are tell- 

 ing you. The message you need to hear is: We need to mandate 

 that Southeast Alaska have a value-added woods industry, thereby 

 cutting less trees, not more. The forest robber barons, KPC and 

 APC, make out really well in your bill. Under H.R. 2413, Ketchikan 

 Pulp Company, a convicted felon on probation for intentionally 



