radically — are of course radically different in their impact on the 

 Tongass. 



Senate Bill 346 produced by my colleague, Senator Wirth and 

 others, and Senate Bill 237, introduced by me and Senator Stevens. 



I believe the Wirth Bill would seriously cripple the timber indus- 

 try and I think it would drastically reduce the timber supply, abro- 

 gate our two pulp mill contracts and force the United States to 

 walk away from a commitment made to the people of southeastern 

 Alaska. 



I also find it rather ironic and troublesome that at a time when 

 Alaska is facing severe challenges to our economic stability by the 

 disaster in Prince William Sound that we are also facing the poten- 

 tial loss of our timber industry or some 4,423 jobs and the life-style 

 of those Alaskans that are dependent on those jobs. 



Now while we sort out the effects of the spill it is fair to say that 

 exploration of — as well as relief sale activity in Bristol Bay and ex- 

 ploration in ANWR as well as resale activity in Bristol Bay are cer- 

 tainly off the screen. Exploration in ANWR and Sale 92 should not 

 go forward until questions are resolved satisfactorily as to the ade- 

 quacy of containment and contingency plans proven by actual test- 

 ing. 



It is significant given these realities that we are here today to 

 fight for our state's only two year-round manufacturing industries. 

 Why is it that some members of Congress want to shut down our 

 mills, our timber industry and providers of jobs for three out of ten 

 residents of Southeastern Alaska. 



We can reform the management of the Tongass without devastat- 

 ing the economy of southeastern Alaska. That is what the Tongass 

 Management Land Plan, or TLMP, is really all about, to gather the 

 input from all the interests to make the management of Tongass 

 National Forest more responsive to all concerns of all parties. With 

 all the hearings and the input from Alaskans in the record and the 

 TLMP Report to be available late this year or early next year, I 

 find it inconsistent that we now move for this legislation before 

 considering the recommendations made by the people of Alaska 

 and the affected parties and the TLMP process. It is our feeling 

 that our bill is a workable compromise and responsible to reasona- 

 ble concerns about Tongass management. It takes in concerns of 

 the Southeastern Conference, those who oppose the $40 million 

 Federal Fund as well as groups fighting for their jobs and life- 

 styles, such as the Alaskan women in timber. 



The important aspect of our proposals are one, it does not walk 

 away from the commitment made by the United States to the 

 people of Southeastern Alaska and, two, it does not upset the basic 

 compromise crafted by them. 



Our bill would repeal the off-budget appropriation to Congress' 

 timber program and repeal the mandate that the Forest Service 

 make 4.5 billion board feet of timber available to the dependent in- 

 dustry each decade. 



Under our bill the actual amount of timber prepared for sale, 

 sold and harvested would be limited by the annual congressional 

 appropriation, the sustained yield capacity of the forest which in- 

 cludes protection of fish and wildlife and the market demand for 

 timber. In addition we would require that a sufficient amount of 



