149 



a range of payments from $21 to $150 million. Subsequent events, such as 



changes in KPC's timber payments would actually lower that figure. 



Attempting to link the action contemplated in S . 346 with the 



California Redwoods "buyout" is also inaccurate. Congressman George Miller 



clarified this point during the House floor debate on the Tongass last year: 



When we had the Redwoods legislation before us, the 

 Federal Government was going in and condemning and 

 purchasing private property. This is not private 

 property. The Tongass is a public resource. The owners 

 of these two pulp mills may think this is their 

 private property because they have run It as their 

 private property .... 



S.346 WILL AID THE TONGASS LAND MANAGEMEMT PLAN REVISION. Opponents of 



Tongass reform including the Forest Service have asked Congress to wait until 



the completion of the TLKP revision in 1991 before making any changes in the 



Tongass timber program. As stated previously, many of the areas that S . 346 



seeks to protect temporarily will be obligated to the two pulp mills before 



completion of the TLMP revision. Therefore, the bill actually ensures that 



public comment from the people of southeast Alaska about these areas is 



meaningful and not after-the-fact. As K.J. Metcalf, U.S. Forest Service team 



leader for the first phase of the original TLMP, stated before this Committee 



in 1987: 



Removal of the inflexible 450 million board feet per 

 year timber supply goal will untie the hands of agency 

 professionals. The revision will be a better product 

 as a result. 



K.J is retired after 20 years of distinguished service with the Forest Service 



and is now a director of SEACC. I have attached a letter he wrote explaining 



why S . 346 must be passed in order to make the TLMP revision meaningful. He 



accurately summarizes SEACC's own conclusions: 



30 



