19 



employment and total impact. This mutual support effect results in a 

 broader economic base and will allow a community to experience a 

 setbacJt in one industry or segment of an industry without area wide 

 recession. It also allows costs of community development and 

 infrastructure to be born by that broader base. 



The goal of the U.S. Congress, when the long term timber sale was 

 approved, was the formation of a stable and enduring economy for 

 Southeast Alaska. With diversification, including fishing, tourism, 

 timber, mining, and subsistence, there is a growing realization that 

 each has an important contribution to the overall competitive 

 position of Southeast Alaska in the world market. The regional 

 economic well-being is directly tied to continued health of the other 

 partners in that industrial base. Every unit of the economy benefits 

 from the transportation infrastructure, localized roads, and 

 community development, so long as that does not infringe or threaten 

 the quality of life or the other industries. The committee found it 

 essential in these discussions to develop an option that reinforced 

 economic "value added" diversification. 



The underlying interests raise complicated questions and challenges. 

 Debate is serious, sometimes hateful, but always reflective of a need 

 to clarify the mission of the U.S. Forest Service in the Tongass. 

 Southeast opponents of continuation of the large scale logging and 

 specific subsidized harvest levels are using congressional debates 

 for airing their concerns about the Forest Service management 

 practices. They argue that the supposition of a multiple use mission 

 is skewed, or even impossible given the mandates of Section 70S of 

 ANILCA to provide 4.5 billion board feet per decade from the 

 Tongass. These proponents for change say that this harvest mandate 

 skews the mission of the Forest Service. Their concerns include a 

 lack of protection of important fish and wildlife habitat . let alone 

 enhancement. The argument comes to economic point on details that 

 suggest a threat to the fisheries, subsistence as well as the 

 recreation and tourism industries. 



Opponents of the status quo suggest that the communities' areas of 

 special interests, quality anadramous streams and wildlife habitat 

 all fall second consideration to the skewed mission. They add that 

 there is no opportunity for competition. 



Proponents of the pulp timber industry counter by claiming that the 

 pulp mills are only economically viable with reasonable long term 

 commitments of access to productive timber stands. Ketchikan Pulp 

 Company has for example recently invested some 35 million dollars to 

 "retool their mill" for more cost effective value added use of the 

 timber coming to them. The mills maintain they must have contracts 

 and commitments of large volumes of timber to sustain their financial 

 stability. Further, proponents point out that roads constructed 

 provide long term use by tourists, fishermen, and hunters; and that 

 they provide valuable recreation, and subsistence opportunities. 

 Further, there are four smaller log mills that operate efficiently by 

 selling the pulp which some estimate is up to 50* of the timber, to 

 the pulp mills and lumber milling the other for market. 



-3- 



