555 



Testimony Tongass Timber Reform Act 

 Senate Field Hearings 

 Sitka, Alaska April 25, 1989 



Lee Schmidt 



Box 1110 



SI tka , Alaska 



Members of the Senate Panel, Staff, Guests, and Fellow Alaskans 



I am a 21 year resident of Alaska, with almost 18 years In 

 Sitka. That does not mean that my comments are any more valid 

 than people who live in another state, or less valid than people 

 who were born here. It merely establishes that my persplctlves 

 are based on changes I have observed In the Tongass over the 

 past two decades. 



I appreciate the opportunity to testify before this 

 Committee and wish you stamina In listening to many hours of 

 concerned people; it will be a physical challenge just to 

 listen. I know that you are sincere in trying to go beyond the 

 words to reach a judgement on what to recommend to your Senate 

 colleagues about the Tongass. You will need some yardsticks In 

 evaluating the comments; I have several to suggest. 



1. Try to deetermlne the motivation of the speaker. Is she or 

 he testifying out of personal convictions and knowledge - or Is 

 there an element of publicity seeking; what about financial gain 

 to the testifier. A gross test is whether the speaker Is being 

 payed to be here or whether he or she Is paying. Obviously, the 

 person who Is here on his or her own time or who has payed to 

 travel here demonstrates strong motivation. It might therefor be 

 more compelling testimony. 



2. Another yardstick is the ethical right. We have recently 

 raised ethical conduct to the national center stage: the old 

 fashioned question "but is It right?" is being asked more 

 frequently. We are pushing for an ehtic that goes beyond the 

 hollow statement -"we did no technical wrong that anyone could 

 discover." It is critical to use that yardstick: Does the action 

 recommended by the speaker resonate with what you as a public 

 servant know to be right - right, in the sense of ethically 

 good, not expediently convenient 



3. A third yardstick is whether there is public gain or 

 personal gain involved. At the crassest level this could be 

 considered as simply an argument over who is making money out of 

 the Tongass. Many, many comments today are made at this level: 

 some people claim that they have a personal right to Tongass 

 timber so that they have a job, others that they have a personal 

 right to salmon streams so they can harvest fish, and others 

 that they have a personal right to undisturbed habitat so they 

 can guide paying customers who want a bear trophy or a secluded 

 lodge experience. 



