433 



replacing them with short-term, conpetitively bid timber sales. While 

 originally the contracts may have served the public interest, 

 conditions have changed and we believe these contracts lie at the 

 heart of the fiscal and resource waste afflicting the timber program 

 on the Tongass. Replacing these "sweetheart" deals with competitively 

 bid, short-term timber sales serves the taxpayer emd the public 

 interest. 



Replacing the 50-year contracts would put management of the 

 Tongass on the same terms as all other national forests in the 

 country. No longer would the pulp coitpeinies run the forest; timber 

 would be sold through competitively-bid, short-term sales. The return 

 to the Treasury in the form of stumpage payments would likely increase 

 significantly. And access to the forest's timber would be re-opened 

 to other users; independent logging operations would again have the 

 chance to operate on the Tongass. 



We are not xmsympathetic to the individual loggers in Southeast 

 Alaska. The bill would not prevent the mills from continuing to 

 purchase Tongass tinker in quantities equal to or even greater than 

 recent historical levels. 



But the key here is that they would have to buy the timber at 

 ccMnpetitive rates, and the Forest Service would have more flexibility 

 in managing the sales to ensure the greatest all-arovond benefit. 



Due to a strong market, currently dissolving pulp prices are at 

 an all-time high. Yet, because of terms of the 50-year contracts, the 

 mills are paying prices as much as 90 percent below vdiat they paid in 

 1981. 



Another point to remember is that only about half the timber 



