418 



Thank you very much for the opportunity to submit this testimony on behalf of 

 the National Audubon Society. As you know, the Society is one of the nation's 

 largest environmental organizations. It is on behalf of our 550,000 members, 

 organized into over 500 chapters across the nation — including three chapters 

 in the state of Alaska -- that I submit this testimony and request it be made 

 a part of the record for the February 28, 1989 hearing. 



The National Audubon Society has participated vigorously in the many efforts 

 of the American people to protect the suf)erb wilderness, scenic, and wildlife 

 treasures of Alaska. Our individual members and leaders were active in the 

 creation of some of the early Alaska National Parks and Wildlife Refuges, and 

 we were a major part of the Alaska Coalition, which sparked the drive to 

 secure passage of the Alaska National Interest Lands Conservation Act of 

 1980. We maintain a full time office in the state, and thousands of our 

 members have come to know firsthand the glory, beauty, and richness of the 

 Alaskan wilderness. 



It is against that background of long involvement and deep concern for the 

 future of these resources that we give strong support to S.346, introduced by 

 Senator Tim Wirth. Essentially, the Tongass Timber Reform Act would repeal 

 Section 705(a) of the Alaska National Interest Lands Conservation Act 

 (ANILCA), require the Forest Service to replace the two long-term timber 

 contracts on the Tongass with short term timber sales, and place a logging 

 moratorium on 23 areas of great importance to wildlife, fish, and other 

 resource users. For the record, we support the legislation with one 

 reservation: the 23 areas deserve permanent protection through inclusion in 

 the national wilderness preservation system rather than the proposed temporary 

 moratorium. 



Section 705(a) was inserted by the Senate into ANILCA at the very last stages 

 of negotiation, on a "take it or leave it" basis, without hearings and with no 

 chance for public input. Contrary to what may have been said, Mr. Chairman, 

 this was a "deal" that we opposed at the time, and have continued to oppose. 

 That is why we favor repeal of Section 705(a). 



As other witnesses have pointed out to you. Section 705(a), along with the 

 50-year contracts, essentially commits nearly all of the remaining unprotected 

 old growth virgin forest of the Tongass National Forest in Southeast Alaska to 

 the primary single use of logging -- regardless of the wildlife and fisheries 

 values, regardless of the recreation and tourism potential, regardless of the 

 needs and wishes of local residents, regardless of the long term future of 

 Southeast Alaska, and regardless of the cost to the U.S. Treasury -- the 

 superb virgin rain forests of the Alaska panhandle are to be logged because of 

 these provisions. 



Why is this so? It is because Section 705(a) directs the U.S. Forest Service 

 to make available 4.5 billion board feet from the Tongass National Forest per 

 decade, and establishes a permanent appropriation, entirely outside of the 

 normal budgeting and appropriations process of the Congress, to accomplish 

 this goal. 



After eight years of operation, we have now had an opportunity to see the 

 effects of this legislation: hundreds of miles of new logging roads have been 

 pushed through the forests and across the land, even into the remotest, most 

 scenic, and wildlife rich bays and coves, tens of thousands of acres of virgin 



