267 



Senator Murkowski. Thank you. I very much appreciate your 

 testimony, Mr. Loescher. 



As you know, as we proceed with this effort to resolve the Ton- 

 gass and we have two pieces of legislation before us, you have indi- 

 cated that you have a problem with both of them. The process, of 

 course, is ultimately one of consensus and compromise. That is 

 what we are all faced with, and we appreciate your cooperation 

 and commitment. 



There was a reference in the early part of your statement con- 

 cerning timber employment as being down. I wonder if you were 

 referring specifically to private timber and native timber vis-a-vis 

 non-native timber? 



Mr. Loescher. Mr. Chairman, I was referring to the historical 

 trend since passive of ANILCA. 



Senator Murkowski. Okay. Is it your contention that the trend 

 is now down currently? 



Mr. Loescher. Mr. Chairman, my response is that if you look at 

 where employment was when ANILCA was passed and where it is 

 today that there is a difference and it is down. 



Senator Murkowski. Is it going down now or going up now? 



Mr. Loescher. Senator, I would have to say at this time that it is 

 probably going to continue to be level for the next year or so. 



Senator Murkowski. You and I have had several conversations 

 about Admiralty Island, and I think we are all in agreement that 

 we failed to be able to exercise an extraordinary opportunity when 

 we could not get the environmental groups aboard to approve a 

 land exchange to maintain the sanctity of Admiralty Island, a posi- 

 tion that I very much supported and recommended. In fact, unfor- 

 tunately the national environmental groups that were up in 

 Alaska saw fit not to visit Admiralty on that particular trip, which 

 really we had hoped that they would get behind an exchange and 

 give up some of the less desirable wilderness to maintain the sanc- 

 tity of Admiralty. It was a rare opportunity that we had that we 

 lost. 



You and I recall the bitterness involved in the Sheatic and the 

 logging on Admiralty and the fact that that opportunity did not 

 occur. 



I would still support an effort to find a workable exchange to 

 maintain what is left of Admiralty, which is a very, very large 

 area. I would certainly look forward to working with Sealaska and 

 others parties as well as the environmental community to achieve 

 that. 



With regard to Brady Glacier I also have to support the conten- 

 tion of Sealaska with regard to the merits of any exchange on that. 

 As we both know, Mr. Loescher, there are some strong opponents 

 that would oppose that, but nevertheless it is an extraordinary re- 

 source. There is strategic mineral. 



I think the point is that we are not dealing with a Grand Canyon 

 or a Yellowstone. We are dealing with a very, very vast area of 

 Glacier Bay, and I think it is permissible to pursue the merits of an 

 exchange, but we both know that that is not going to be done 

 easily. 



When you indicate the multiple use tools in the management 

 forest, we are always down to the reality of if we support a higher 



