128 * 



been found by federal courts to be out of compliance with the National 



Environmental Policy Act and the Alaska National Interest Lands Conservation 



Act. It is also out of compliance with the National Forest Management Act, 



the National Historic Preservation Act, the National Wild and Scenic Rivers 



Act as well as a myriad of regulations implementing these laws. Why? 



Because for over 30 years the Tongass has been managed for timber first, last, 



and always . 



Repeal of the "450" directive would permit the Forest Service to 



take off its blinders and set allowable timber sale levels and pre-roading 



(now renamed "public works roads") targets in response to expected demand and 



in consideration of protecting important habitat. These actions would not 



limit the ability of timber operators to purchase ample volumes of timber, to 



operate wood processing facilities, or to employ Alaskans. 



The GAO recommends that Congress amend Section 705 to "remove the 



rigid per decade requirement" of the 450. And the Forest Service itself, when 



asked by this committee if it advocated legislating harvest goals such as the 



one in Section 705 as a standard land management tool for the agency, replied: 



As a general rule, no. Legislation with specific 

 management direction reduces our flexibility to 

 respond to changing conditions. (S.Rpt. 100-548, page 

 487). 



The agency also opposed a provision in last year's Idaho Wilderness Bill 



(S.2055) that would have set an annual allowable timber sale quantity, 



stating: "...we prefer that the Forest Plan establish both management 



prescriptions and allowable sale quantity (S.Hrg. 100-690, Pt.2, page 38)." 



This can only happen on the Tongass if this committee approves S . 346 , the 



Tongass Timber Reform Act. 



