445 



increasing timber sales from their lands, further reducing the 



/ \ / 



local demand /for national forest timber. 



The extent of the employment subsidy is put into stark 

 relief by the 1986 study by The Wilderness Society, notpd above, 

 which calculated that some $36,000 from the federal Treasury go 

 annually toward maintaining each logging and wood proce|Ssing job 

 supported by raw material removed from the Tongass.^ Other 

 reported estimates place an even higher price tag on each 

 subsidized job. 



Moreover, subsidized logging on the Tongass competes 

 destructively against other major employment bases of Southeast 

 Alaska. We concur with Senator Wirth that current management of 

 the Tongass is "not consistent with the principle of multiple 

 use" and "cannot be sustained without jeopardizing. . .commercial 

 fishing, recreation and tourism industries. "^^ 



Conformance With National Forest Management Standards 



In 1976, Congress enacted the National Forest Management Act 

 (NFMA) to remedy timber production abuses on the public lands. 

 It is a shame that the Tongass, among the most outstanding 



^ The Wilderness Society, supra note 6, at 8. 



'" A recent article, reporting on the work of forestry 

 economist Randal 0' Toole, stated that "[i]n Alaska, according to 

 O'Toole, it winds up costing the U.S. Government $100,000 for 

 every logger who is paid $20,000 a year by private industry." D. 

 Zaslowsky, "Hired Gun," Harrowsmith 46 (Jan. -Feb. 1988). 



^^ 135 Cong. Rec. S1103-S1105 (Feb. 2, 198'9). 



