42 



to misstate this, but in terms of the general overall approach we 

 simply have got to move past this particular point in our history 

 and start looking at the entire situation having some clear direc- 

 tion and mandates from the Congress and the Administration as to 

 what the agency is expected to do, and given those mandates and 

 clear direction we do very well. 



We fumble around poorly, but we are engaged in a great debate 

 in this country of what those national forests are to be managed 

 for and how they're to be managed, and the professional managers 

 are caught on the horns of that dilemma. 



Basically we have moved to a point with a long progression of 

 law and interaction of case law to the point of direction of how we 

 should operate to say to take the brunt of the ESA on the Federal 

 lands plus all the court actions where we have an overriding con- 

 cern with biodiversity. Congress never said that. The Administra- 

 tion never said that. It just emerged. Now we need to consider that 

 and decide if that's indeed the direction we are to accomplish, to 

 recognize that as a goal and to set out to achieve it and to produce 

 as many goods and services as we can I assume under those con- 

 straints. 



Basically I see us bickering back and forth about things that are 

 not the real issue. I understand every individual Congressman's 

 concern with those people and those mills in their District, but in 

 terms of the larger overall question we simply have got a situation 

 that we need to sit down and address. It's not partisan, but it's a 

 reality of a circumstance. I'm not a partisan. This didn't develop 

 under the Clinton Administration, and I don't think I would like 

 to lay it to the Republican Administrations before that or the 

 Democratic Administrations before that. This has been a long time 

 in development, and it will be a long time in solution. 



It's about time we began to engage in real professional discourse 

 about where we want to go, have the instructions clear on how to 

 go and what we're to do, what it would take to do it and getting 

 on with it. For example, when we talk about fire funding oper- 

 ations, for years the Congress and the Forest Service and all the 

 Administrations from now on past have played a game that says 

 fire doesn't cost anything, and when we have a big fire year, that's 

 just an accident and it won't come again. It will come again, and 

 it's time to quit pretending that it won't. 



It's also time to understand that we need a fire management pro- 

 gram and not a firefighting program. We do that beautifully. We 

 can't solve these things with more and more acres of controlled 

 burning unless we can get those acres, as Dr. Neuenschwander 

 said, in a condition where we can actually apply it. At the rate 

 we're going we're 50 years out in being able to address these ques- 

 tions. That's too long. 



Mr. DOOLITTLE. Wait a minute, let me just understand, 50 years 

 out? 



Chief Thomas. Fifty years out from being able to achieve a suit- 

 able condition of forest health and of an essential forest condition 

 that we would consider acceptable. We have to prioritize, but we 

 have to get there sooner than that, and it has to be through a com- 

 bination of things. There will be some preservation, particularly of 

 old growth in the short term, but then we have to talk about 



