92 



SEACXriHMn«|Sui««i«iiiv«HH- H\i 

 TWnK Biy. AlaOj July 3. 194« 



term economic gain. Article VIII further emphasizes the right of citizens to get to and 

 use the state's resources. 



The GAO report's conclusion that Pacific Northwest stales, because of significant 

 differences between federal and state timber sale programs, can operate their timber sale 

 programs at less cost does not mean that the same will occur if the Tongass is transferred 

 to the State of Alaska: 



Yakataga - In a January 1991, an audit report from the Legislative Budget and Audit 

 Committee on the Department of Natural Resources administration of the Icy Cape No. 2 

 timber sale on state lands along the YakaUga coast^ found that 



" Receipt of less than SI Million in total stumpape fees, on a bid that originally 

 promised that the State would collect almost $6 million. ... we estimate that the State 

 spent almost as much in dealing with various aspects of the sale as it collected in 

 slumpage receipts." (emphasis in original). 



...Without improvement, the State faces the continued prospect of receiving less than 

 full value for its resources and exposure to repeated litigation by logging operators. 



Haines State Forest -- A 1994 briefing paper on long-term timber sales on the Haines 

 Slate Forest showed that the State lost more than eight million dollars in road credits, 

 subsidies, infrastructure, and management costs between 1979 and 1985 in a Haines long 

 term contract.-' 



Given the differences between how the State of Alaska and Washington and Oregon 

 manage state lands, as well as the record of money-losing timber sales on Alaska 

 state lands, the GAO report can not be relied upon to Jiistif)r transferring the 

 Tongass to the State of Alaska. 



Adequacy of Fish Protection on State and Private Lands in Alaska — la a statement 

 before the House of Representatives on May 21, 1996, you proclaimed that a new study 

 prepared by Peniec Environmental for Sealaska Corporation, the Southeast regional 

 Native cotporation, and the Alaska Forest Association, 'shows that logging on state and 

 private lands in Alaska is compatible with fisheries protection." We disagree. As noted 

 in the April 9, 1996 comments by the Alaska Department of Fish and Game following its 

 multi-divisional review of the April 18, 1995 Pentec Review Draf) Report: 



"Because of declining budgets, it is unlikely that the [state] agencies would have the 

 consistent funding over time to accomplish [Ihe] difficult task [of conducting 

 effectiveness monitoring]. Analyzing this project has once again brought home the 

 extreme difficulty of designing and implementing a study which successfully copes 

 with the wide range of natural variables at work in uplands, streams and biota. 



^AtUchmcDl 5(cited pages). 



'Atuchment 6(A]aslu EnviroiunenUl Lobby press release, April 25. 1994). 



