425 



million spent between 1981 and 1986, GAO reports that timber jobs during that 

 same period declined nearly 50%, from 2700 in 1981 to 1420 in 1986, primarily 

 due to a poor market for pulp. Currently, only 1781 people are directly 

 dependent on Tongass timber. At Congressional Oversight Hearings in May 1986, 

 the Forest Service in response to questioning by Rep. Don Young stated, "Given 

 the reduced demand for Alaska sawn products in export markets since 1981, no 

 amount of ANILCA investments could have maintained the timber industry 

 employment at historic levels." Meanwhile, the two mills have shown their 

 sincere concern for jobs with bitter labor disputes and union-breaking over 

 the last several years. 



Instead of protecting the jobs of Alaskan timber workers, the 

 legislatively-mandated funding and timber supply have meant fiscal waste: 

 millions spent on roads that no one uses and timber sales that no one buys . 

 But repealing Section 705 is only the first step in providing satisfactory 

 reform. 



A vital second step is the termination of two anachronistic 50-year 

 contracts the Forest Service holds with two pulp companies, and their 

 replacement with the system of short-term, competitively bid timber sales used 

 on all other national forests. The travesty brought about by the 50-year 

 contracts is well documented. It is wise to consider the words of former House 

 Public Lands Subcommittee Chairman John Seiberling, who chaired oversight 

 hearings on the Tongass in the 99th Congress. In reference to the contracts 

 he said: 



I don't feel that either Louisiana Pacific or APC [Alaska Pulp 

 Corporation] have any equity left in their claim that they cane 

 over here to make an investment based on the 50-year contracts. 

 Their conduct, squeezing small people out of business, violating 

 our antitrust laws, has long ago eliminated any moral claim they 

 had for the continuation of that.... It seems to me that the best 

 thing to do would be to scrap the contracts and put APC and 

 Louisiana Pacific on the same basis as everybody else. 



The Sierra Club believes that the contracts must be terminated and 

 replaced with short-term timber sales. They are the bedrock for a host of 

 environmental and social problems plaguing the Tongass today. The two long- 

 time timber contracts give unprecedented domination of Tongass Forest 

 management to Louisiana Pacific-Ketchikan (LPK) and Alaska Pulp Corporation 

 (APC). Together, LPK and APC control one-third of the Tongass land area and 

 two-thirds of the commercial forest land. Although these contracts predate the 



