United States insufficient harvesting of the dead and dying trees 

 and the years of fire suppression fuels have been building in our 

 forests and building to extremely dangerous levels. 



The Clinton Administration has numerous forest management 

 tools available to it. They are rejecting the salvage timber sales 

 and prescription burning after a timber harvest. 



Mr. Chairman, with that I would like to submit the balance of 

 my statement to the Committee for the record. 



Thank you very much. 



[The Prepared statement of Hon. Helen Chenoweth follows.] 



Prepared Statement of Hon. Helen Chenoweth 



Additionally, we the Congress made it even easier for the Administration to re- 

 move the fuel load by passing the Emergency timber Salvage Sale Program This 

 was a program that expedited timber salvage sales to get the dead and dying timber 

 out of the forests. Yet, the Administration chose to ignore it. 



Interestingly, we had this same debate in 1995, and nearly a carbon-copy hearing, 

 after the nearly as devastating 1994 fire season The Administration made all types 

 of promises, including salvage timber sales, yet, the Administration has engaged in 

 a pattern of obstruction when it comes to salvage timber sales. 



I personally asked Secretary Glickman to reconsider his July 2, 1996 directive 

 that effectively killed the Emergency Timber Salvage Sale program. On no fewer 

 than three occasions the Members of this Committee requested Secretary Glickman 

 to act in accordance with the law (Public Law 104-19). We have either been told 

 no or simply ignored. 



And now where are we? Nearly six million acres have burned. Mr. Chairman, 

 that's six million acres of harvestable timber that could have gone a long way to- 

 ward putting the timber families of the Pacific Northwest back to work. Now what 

 Secretary Glickman? Now what President Clinton? 



I don't want to take up much more time, Mr. Chairman. However, I do want to 

 point out that salvage harvesting and forest health are not mutually exclusive op- 

 tions. In fact, I think we can all agree that salvage harvesting has tremendous bene- 

 fits, both in terms of forest health and economics. 



I am not convinced that this Administration has done all that it can do to protect 

 our forests or my constituents who have dealt with these fires up close and in per- 

 son. In fact, given the promises that were made after the 1994 fires, it appears to 

 me that the Administration has actually obstructed certain forest health efforts. 



So why is the Clinton Administration refusing to move salvage timber? Why did 

 the Clinton Administration kill a program that could have been used as an effective 

 tool to move salvage timber? Now, its just going up in smoke. 



Each salvageable tree going up in smoke in each of those six million acres is lit- 

 erally jobs and money going up in smoke. 



Mr. chairman, it would be disingenuous of me to argue that the Administration 

 is completely at fault here. However, from my perspective, Secretary Glickman's re- 

 fusal to use all forest management tools at his disposal indicates that the Adminis- 

 tration must shoulder most of the responsibility for the current fire crisis. 



With that being said, Mr. Chairman, let's hear from our witnesses. Again, thank 

 you for holding this hearing. 



Chairman HANSEN. Thank you very much. 



Our friend from California, Mr. Frank Riggs is with us. He is not 

 a Member of the Committee, but one who has shown a tremendous 

 interest in forest health problems and issues. 



Do you have any opening statement you would like to make, 

 Frank? 



Mr. RiGGS. No. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 



Chairman Hansen. Well I surely don't see Wally Herger here. So 

 we'll go to our first panel. Dr. Leon F. Neuenschwander from Idaho 

 and Mr. Blain Cornell from California, if you two would come up. 

 We appreciate your being with us. 



Dr. Neuenschwander, we'll turn to you first if that's all right. 

 Can you handle it in five minutes? 



