198 



areas that in the National Forest Management Act says you cannot 

 harvest because they are not economic but in order to make this 

 thing work you had to access those areas. What are we going to 

 need to access? We are going to need some extra money and the 

 extra money was in order to get the 5.5 milUon acres and also to 

 get the jobs so it was not, when you call that extra money and the 

 extra money was only 11.7 million dollars, not 14, it was an addi- 

 tional amount to spend on the Tongass. It was as much as you 

 wanted to call it a subsidy and the hair always starts raising on my 

 back when you hear "subsidy" because I disagree with that term. 



Senator Wirth. What is a subsidy for some is a necessity for 

 others. The fact is it is a revenue enhancement. You can use vocab- 

 ulary in a wonderful way. 



Ms. Shaub. Yes, but it is just as much to make that objection for 

 the wilderness as it was for the jobs and protecting other resources. 

 It was to make the deal work because it was not just working 

 under normal means and so it was the result of a compromise and 

 it was the result of promises, both to the people who wanted 5.5 

 acres of wilderness and the people who wanted to keep their jobs. 

 It was a balance and it was a very delicate balance and that is 

 what we are playing with here and it is not fair to say that that 5.5 

 million acres is in the bank now, now we are going to go after the 

 rest and what's left there is the jobs. That's why we are saying it's 

 not fair, you have got to look at all those objections, what they 

 were dealing back then and how it came about. 



Senator Murkowski. I think he has answered your question 

 along with Mr. Pihl. It is simply a matter — you have got to cut a 

 certain amount of timber to maintain, reduce the timber or you 

 lose the job, it is just that simple. In 1980, without the marginal 

 timberlands to sustain the yield drop, I think the 4.5 for that 

 decade or 3.8 because of the wilderness designation and that is the 

 cost of lots of jobs and so, Mr. Chairman, neither you or I would 

 want to invest in a mill if we did not have enough timber to sus- 

 tain the mill to amortize investment and that is what we are talk- 

 ing about the mills here and a 50-year contract was made and they 

 put improvements in and provided employment and now they are 

 15 years from running out and the thing that concerns me more 

 than anything is they are contemplating making changes. Before 

 we finish the TLMP. There is a sense of it being made available for 

 input for outside of Alaska and that is allegedly going to be ready 

 to use and this recognition I think goes — which recognition that 

 certainly should be considered because I would certainly agree with 

 you that changes are needed. 



Senator Wirth. Well, we thank you all very much and again you 

 are going to get back to us with any thoughts that you have. Again 

 I think one of the key issues that we face, a variety of questions, if 

 Tongass is treated one way and the forest is treated another — 



Senator Murkowski recited very clearly a lot of history for that, 

 there are a lot of reasons and we have to make sure that we under- 

 stand for the record in making a decision why payment occurs in 

 one case and not in another. That is one of the fundamentals and I 

 think one of the differences between Senator Murkowski's legisla- 

 tion and my own, is that we are attempting to make this look like 



