51 



ANILCA Section 70S included marginal lands in the timber 

 base to compensate for more accessible timber locked up in 

 wilderness 



ANILCA Section 705 provided an off-budget appropriation of at least 

 $40 million each year to the Forest Service so that they could make 

 available timber to the dependent industry at a rate of 4.5 billion 

 board feet per decade. 



Under this provision, the Forest Service would be given the funds 

 and authority to include additional timber, economically marginal 

 because of its remoteness and quality, into the timber base. Without 

 this special provision, this additional timber would be considered 

 economically unsuitable for inclusion in the managed timber base. 



Inclusion of additional economically marginal timber lands into the 

 timber base, termed intensive management, would raise the 

 sustained yield capacity of the multiple use forest, outside 

 wilderness, from 3.38 to 4.5 billion board feet per decade and avoid 

 economic dislocation in Southeast Alaska. 



This is the core of the "1980 Deal" -- what I like to call the price of 

 wilderness" — the law creating the wilderness would also insure that 

 wilderness designations did not reduce the timber supply below the 

 Forest Service planning level and result in economic dislocation. 



THE NEED FOR LEGISLATION 



In 1980, Congress determined that Wilderness and timber 

 management should be statutorily protected uses of forest and 

 struck balance between them based on 1978 Tongass Land 

 Management Plan. 



While the basic premise of the ANILCA provision is sound, 

 implementation by Forest Service has been the subject of criticism. 



Tongass forest spending should be subject to annual 

 oversight and approval by Congress 



The Tongass Timber Supply Fund was established to make 

 investments in economically marginal timber areas and guarantee 

 availability of adequate funds for timber preparation each year. 

 However, actual spending, particularly during periods of low timber 

 demand, has not always been prudent. Critics have demanded that 

 spending in the Tongass be subject to annual Congressional oversight 

 and approval. 



