84 



In my mind, I don't believe this bill would improve on the on- 

 the-ground management over what is being done today. And I often 

 ask, why must we reinvent the wheel? 



I thank you again for letting me appear before the subcommittee 

 today. I hope we can work something out with this bill. 



[The prepared statement of Mr. Schlitz appears at the conclusion 

 of the hearing.] 



Mr. DOOLEY [assuming chair]. Thank you, Mr. Schlitz. We will 

 now hear from Mr. Larry Duysen. 



STATEMENT OF LARRY DUYSEN, LOGGING SUPERINTENDENT, 



SIERRA FOREST PRODUCTS 



Mr. Duysen. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 



I am Larry Duysen, a licensed professional forester in the State 

 of California, and the logging superintendent for Sierra Forest 

 Products of Terra Bella, C^ifomia. I am a member of the Society 

 of American Foresters and also the California Licensed Foresters 

 Association. 



In addition, I am the outgoing president of the Sierra-Cascade 

 Logging Conference, representing members of the logging industry 

 in southern Oregon, the entire State of California, and Nevada. 



My testimony today represents Sierra Forest Products, and my 

 19 years experience as a professional forester in the southern Sier- 

 ras. I might comment that in the interest of time, my testimony 

 contains information about forest health, other forestry matters 

 and catastrophic fire dangers. I have elected to just speak at this 

 time to my participation in the mediated agreement, and also some 

 specific areas of interest with Sierra Forest Products. 



I feel the giant sequoia preservation bill is lacking in many 

 areas. It proposes to remove 442,000 acres of land within the Se- 

 quoia National Forest to create our Nation's first forest preserve. 

 The rationale behind this concept is to protect approximately 

 15,000 acres of giant sequoia groves. 



You have heard over and over today, these groves are already 

 protected by Forest Service regulations. Presidential proclamation, 

 and the 1990 mediated settlement agreement of the Sequoia Na- 

 tional Forest land management plan. 



When the land management plan was adopted in February of 

 1988, numerous parties appealed the decision, challenging both the 

 plan and/or the EIS. These groups consisted of national and local 

 environmental groups, the timber industry, the State of California, 

 the cattle industry, and various recreational and user groups. 



The forest supervisor at that time made the wise decision to try 

 to use mediation as a tool in an attempt to resolve the many con- 

 flicting viewpoints. It seemed at that time, it was mediation or liti- 

 gation, and mediation seemed the wise way to go. I think it has 

 really proven to be that way. 



Between March of 1989 and June of 1990, the parties spent 

 many days in face-to-face discussion and negotiations. Having per- 

 sonally participated in the mediation, I can attest to the long 

 hours, the dedication, and the perseverance of all those involved. 



The result of this time and effort was an agreement signed in 

 July of 1990 by representatives of 18 organizations. I have submit- 

 ted a copy of this mediated agreement. 



