100 



proceeding with their appeals, however, a mediation process was 

 agreed upon and representatives of these numerous interest groups 

 sat down and spent over a year negotiating the Mediated 

 Settlement Agreement that, among other things, protects the giant 

 sequoia. 



This was not an easy process. In the end, this agreement 

 did not embody the "ideal" plan for any one person or group, but 

 like any good compromise, made everyone involved a little 

 unhappy. Unfortunately, there were some who did not agree with 

 the direction this Mediated Settlement was taking. These 

 disgruntled representatives walked away from the table before the 

 final product was signed. Since they were unable to convince the 

 other participants to adopt the course they advocated, they 

 decided instead to circumvent the process and implement their 

 plan by legislative fiat. This is the bill you have before you. 



Those who worked on the Mediated Settlement put in long 

 hours discussing, arguing and negotiating agreements that 

 affected the resource allocation and land management policy in 

 the Sequoia National Forest. They signed off on this agreement 

 not because it gave them everything they wanted, but because they 

 understood that the essence of compromise is getting some of what 

 you want by giving something in return. Enacting this 

 legislation would throw their Mediated Settlement into the 

 recycling bin. At the same time, a message would be sent to 

 every group that is interested in resolving their differences 

 through negotiation and compromise, and the message is: Don't 

 bother. Why spend all that time and effort working with others 

 in developing an agreement, when you can go to Congress and have 

 them give you the plan you want . 



Finally, it is important that you consider the costs 

 involved in implementing this legislation, both in terms of the 

 direct costs to the Treasury and the costs associated with the 

 loss of more jobs in my district. 



Currently, the counties of Kern, Tulare and Fresno receive 

 payments from timber sales revenues from sales carried out in the 

 Sequoia and Sierra National Forests. Last year, those payments 

 totaled $1.7 million. Since timber sales in a large portion of 

 the Sequoia Forest would be eliminated, these revenues would 

 disappear. This legislation provides for their replacement 

 through annual appropriations, imposing another burden on the 

 taxpayer, that could be easily avoided by not acting on this 

 legislation and allowing the Forest Service to continue managing 

 the forests and selling timber in a responsible fashion. 



The job impact, though not necessarily large, is no less 

 important. The timber industry in this area has already faced a 

 difficult time, having fought numerous appeals on nearly every 

 proposed sale of timber. Recently, the Regional Forester 

 implemented an interim management plan for the protection of the 

 California spotted owl that prohibited the cutting of any timber 

 with a diameter of more than 30 inches. This interim plan may be 

 in effect for another year, and the details of the plan that will 



