231 



Good afternoon, and thank you for this opportunity to speak. My name is Kathy Coghill 

 and I am here today on behalf of the Juneau Chapter of the National Audubon Society 

 to present our position on the proposal to extend Ketchikan Pulp Company's long term 

 contract for another 15 years. Although we support the presence of a timber industry in 

 southeast Alaska, we are opposed to this proposal (HJR 64) for the following reasons: 



1 . We are no longer living under the same conditions which lead to signing the original 

 contract in 1954. Our economy here is healthy and growing as we hsad into the 21st 

 century. 



2. Extending the contract is not a good way to aeate or preserve jobs. If more jobs are 

 desired, the emphasis should focus on creating a better environment for smsii timber 

 contractors, and fostering value-added operations. Extending special favors to KPC 

 will only hinder any positive movement in this direction. 



3. The Tongass National Forest will release its latest revision of the Tongass Land 

 Management Plan within the next month. As a part of this process, a panel of fishery 

 experts were asked to evaluate the impacts of the alternative plans, on the health and 

 productivity of salmon. Their consistent response was that roads are a serious cause 

 of damage to fish habitat, and that as more miles of road are constructed, the danger to 

 fish increases. We didn't know this 40 years ago. We do know it now. How can we 

 continue to operate as if roads are inherently good and award KPC credits for aeating 

 them? Over the last 40 years we have learned that logging roads are more of a burden 

 than an asset. If anything, KPC should be paying a penalty for building roads that 

 damage fishermen's livelihoods and cost the Forest Service millions of dollars to 

 maintain. 



4. The timber industry is heavily subsidized in southeast Alaska, and the Federal 

 government can no longer afford this expense, particularly when you consider that we 

 pay three times for this subsidy. First we pay with road credits, virtually giving away the 

 trees in exchange for new roads. Then we pay in lost opportunity for tourism, fishing, 

 subsistence, and recreation. Finally we pay for restoration when the logging road-; get 

 old and begin to fail. 



5 KPC has not been a good corporate neighbor, in 1995 KPC pled guilty to 14 

 criminal violations for intentionally polluting the waters of southeast Alaska. 



In closing, i want lo re-emphasize that times have changed since 1954, and the 

 sweetheart deal that KPC has been enjoying since then is no longer appropriate. In 

 addition, KPC has lepeatedly proven itself 'responsible, negligent, and particularly 

 unworthy of special fsv'ors. Extending the SO year timber contract with KPC is not in 

 the best interest of Alaskans, and in fact it would do them a great disservice. 



Thank you for the opportunity to comment. 



