26 



and I share your feelings. Until it can be shown that it is not true I 

 think we have to proceed on the assumption that it is true, and I 

 am prepared to do everything I can to assist anyone that wants to 

 get us the databank so that we can determine for the future wheth- 

 er it is true that there is a warming trend. It would be hard to 

 prove to some of our people around Fairbanks at 82 below this 

 year, but I still think that it is probably true. 



Having said that, let me hasten to tell you that we are doing re- 

 forestation in Alaska, not deforestation. We cut no timber for the 

 purpose of creating municipalities or industrial parks, or any kind 

 of residential areas. 



For every tree that is cut in Alaska there comes up about 40 

 trees in the first year, and by the end of the cycle when it gets to 

 the point where it would be ready to cut there will be one left, but 

 in that whole growth period, all of those smaller trees contribute to 

 the lungs of the world. They do not prove to be a negative aspect in 

 terms of the ozone or the clean air problem of the world. 



What we have had a difficult time convincing people of is that 

 we have a model forest. I challenge you to find another forest in 

 the world that takes care of conflicting interests as well as this one 

 does, and limits the developers to the very small area that is used 

 in this forest. 



I happened to be around at the time that former Governor Frank 

 Heinzelman, who was the territorial governor at the time, worked 

 with President Eisenhower to request the Japanese to come to 

 Alaska to make investments in our state for the purpose of devel- 

 oping the facilities that would provide them with the timber they 

 needed in the period of their reconstruction. 



They had a vast demand for timber products, and this was an 

 area that was close to them, and we entered into long-term con- 

 tracts, 50 year contracts at the time, to encourage them to make 

 this investment and to proceed to utilize a portion of this timber. 

 We did that because we did not want them taking the timber out of 

 our country without a value-added concept. 



Now some people say, why do we have these contracts? I come 

 back to your original comment about your experience. I too have 

 had a lot of trial experience, and I find it very difficult to under- 

 stand how a group that is primarily dominated by lawyers would 

 suggest cancelling a contract that was made with private industry, 

 not only with the sanction of the federal government, at the invita- 

 tion of the United States Government, a contract between two pri- 

 vate parties, which was co-signed by the federal government to 

 make the commitment of the availability of the resource that 

 brought about the investment in the two mills in Southeast Alaska. 



On your trip you will visit those two mills, but Mr. Chairman, 

 the difficulty I have with this is isolating my own experience from 

 these issues. We cannot, in my judgment, countenance the Con- 

 gress cancelling or reneging on this commitment until someone can 

 show to me that that commitment is now contrary to the best in- 

 terest of the United States. At that time, I will support you in 

 modifying the commitment. 



But I do not think, on the basis of the evidence we have had 

 in the past 10 years — it is not quite 10 years now, it is really 8 

 years total — we can reach a judgment that the foresight of people 



