23 



$1.2 billion and that the estimated gross revenue from timber sales 

 is about 10 percent of that, perhaps $162 million, is the figure that 

 I have here. 



Now, the $1.2 billion revenue to the area from recreational use 

 does not come from your constituents; it comes from the constitu- 

 ents of the other 50 congressional districts in California, and it 

 comes from the constituents of the other 433 congressional districts 

 in the United States, plus overseas. 



I am a little bit at a loss to have you indicate, perhaps not know- 

 ingly, that those of us who represent these constituents who 

 produce that $1.2 billion revenue stream to your district have no 

 interest in protecting that. 



Mr. Lehman. Well, Mr. Thomas can respond, but I don't have a 

 problem with you carrying this legislation. I think the American 

 people own this property, and I have no proprietary interest be- 

 cause it is in my district. I am more concerned about the substance 

 of the bill, I suppose. 



But on the recreation issue, what is interesting to me is that it 

 is not just the timber industry that has come to me opposed to this 

 bill; it is the people who own recreational facilities who are really 

 concerned that the effect of this bill will be to drive them out of 

 business. Some of them will testify today, I assume, and you can 

 address that at that point. But those people are very concerned 

 about the effects of the bill, as well. 



Mr. Thomas of California. Mr. Brown, your sensitivity in terms 

 of those people who represent the area should be completely under- 

 stood, and that is, it is not that we resent people who in other 

 parts of the country have an interest in this area. It is that the 

 people who represent the area are not consulted, not involved or in 

 any way allowed to indicate that they feel just as strongly as you 

 do about the area. 



For some reason, since we represent the area, we are always pic- 

 tured as the rapers and pillagers and the protectors are those who 

 do not represent the area, and I frankly resent that, because I have 

 worked hard to make sure that rational decisions are made in my 

 area, and frankly, I have a greater risk in participating in that 

 process than people who are outside the area. 



I might remind you that when you talk about the money gen- 

 erated in terms of various areas, the amount generated by logging 

 may be a relatively small percentage of the total, but it is 100 per- 

 cent of their income. 



In addition to that, given the locking up of the giant sequoia 

 area, for no reason other than the attempt to legislate a vision, will 

 have an enormous detrimental effect on the ability to produce dol- 

 lars through recreational activities, because what you have created 

 is an inability to utilize this area in ways that are positive for all. 



In addition to that, the process of settlement that we have ar- 

 rived at, and your unwillingness to let it work its will, has to be 

 underscored by the statement of my colleagues, and that is, what 

 do I tell these people after I have told them, "Sit down, work out 

 your differences," and they have done so, and they turn right 

 around and find out that it did not mean anything at all and that 

 somebody else got to somebody, and they are going to get their vi- 

 sion pushed through in legislation? 



