STATEMENT OF HON. DON YOUNG, A U.S. REPRESENTATIVE 

 FROM ALASKA; AND CHAIRMAN, COMMITTEE ON RESOURCES 



The Chairman. July 13, 1989, and October 26, 1990. I remember 

 those dates. I still hear the echoes of what was said on the Floor 

 of the House on those sad days. 



Unfortunately Members who are not here but are still on this 

 committee puffed as they plunged the Federal dagger into the 

 hearts of the working people in the Tongass timber industry. They 

 would not admit their actions, but I knew the fate of the working 

 men and women in the Tongass after the votes on those days. They 

 also said that timber would be there to meet industry needs. They 

 said timber would be there for industry in double the amounts. 

 They said they did not intend to drive the timber industry out of 

 Southeast Alaska. I am talking about statements on the days when 

 the House passed the Tongass Timber Reform Act. 



Groups that will be testifying today also made their views known 

 about that legislation. They said the bill would have no impact on 

 existing Tongass-dependent timber jobs. They said they did not in- 

 tend to close the pulp mills and timber jobs would not be lost. 



I remember what was said on July 13, 1989, and October 26, 

 1990, and in prior hearings as the Federal Government in Federal 

 process with a Federal hand plunged the Federal dagger into the 

 renewable resource timber economy and into hundreds of families 

 in Southeast Alaska. It has taken almost six years to bleed the in- 

 dustry and the timber families. The industry is almost dead, but 

 the hearts of families still beat faintly for yet another Federal hear- 

 ing about the Tongass. 



This hearing is about H.R. 3659, a bill that extends by 15 years 

 the only remaining long-term contract for timber from the Tongass 

 National Forest. The Ketchikan Pulp Corporation holds that con- 

 tract, the contract that was changed unilaterally under the 

 Tongass Timber — changed unilaterally under the Tongass Timber 

 Reform Act. I want to stress that, because the new Supreme Court 

 ruling makes this a far-reaching legal liability of every taxpayer 

 and this Congress. 



This bill does undo unfair, one-sided changes and saves the gov- 

 ernment at least 357 million. It also adds 15 years to the term of 

 the contract. It does nothing more. 



All of the wilderness areas Mr. Miller agreed to in 1990 are still 

 there. The mandatory 100-foot fish stream buffers are left alone. 

 The LUD II set-asides are left alone. The Tongass Timber Supply 

 Fund so strongly opposed by Mr. Miller in 1989 is not reinstated 

 by this bill. The 1980 wilderness set-asides are left alone. None of 

 this is touched, even though I disagreed with the changes at that 

 time and did not sign the conference report. Everything that was 

 put in and signed by Mr. Miller, agreed to by Mr. Miller, agreed 

 to by environmental groups, agreed by the environmental commu- 

 nity, it is all there. It is still the same. 



This bill does not increase the timber harvest in the Tongass. 

 Only areas open for harvest under the land plan are open for har- 

 vest under the contract. 



Today we are not here to discuss where harvesting will occur. 

 The team of Congress and the Administration have already done 

 that. This bill and this hearing is not about harvesting practices on 



