556 



I am not saying It Is wrong to consider personal economics, 

 but I urge the Committee to acknowledge It when It appears, and 

 then progress beyond that to a yardstick that measures a 

 societal economic benefit. As national statesmen you want to 

 hear people recommend changes that benefit many citizens: If It 

 Is not possible to benefit all Americans, then at least far, far 

 more than the few thousands who live In Southeast Alaska. 

 Statesmen who make laws for all Americans, who have as many 

 constituents In a few square blocks of concentrated urban high- 

 rises as live In all of Southeast Alaska, are going to be 

 susplcous of policies that seek to manage America's largest 

 National Forest as a private backyard for two Mills. It Is 

 logical and reasonable for the Committee members to ask, "How 

 are the citizens of my State benefitted by today's decisions 

 about the Tongass National Forest?" Testimony that addresses a 

 benefit for the general public should therefor receive special 

 attention. 



By using these three yardsticks - what Is the speasker's 

 personal motivation; do the comments meet an ethical standard 

 for what Is right; and what is the benefit to the general public 

 - the Committee can more effectively deal with the larger 

 issues, which tend to become obscured during an Intense 

 parochial field hearing. 



Persons on this panel represent SEACC - the Southeast 

 Alaska Conservation Council - certainly ther most visible 

 Southeast Alaska organization advocating management changes In 

 the Tongass. It Is both an organization of general members, and 

 a coalition of environmental, fishing and community groups. 



For many years SEACC has held the point position for 

 habitat protection, wilderness designation, and logging 

 practices Improvement In the Tongass Forest. 



During my elghteeen years In Sitka, I have seen an 

 evolution In people's thinking. Twenty years ago people 

 accepted, with little challenge, that the best thin for SE 

 Alaska was to enter Into long term Mill contracts and clear cut 

 all marketable timber. No long range thinking was done. Little 

 thought was given to how these contracts would effect the 

 resource base that fishermen, recreatlonls t s , hunters and 

 tourists use. No thought was given to the ehtlcal Issue of 

 whether we have a moral obligation to protect ecosystems inorder 

 to maintain species, or to preserve old growth forests as part 

 of the herrltage for our children and grandchildren. 



Today there are hundreds of people testifying that the 

 management direction of the Tongass must be changed. Even the 

 most vigorous timber harvest advocate sees the handwriting on 

 the wall. Why else would Senator Murkowski have changed his own 

 position In the past year and introduced corrective 

 legislation? That monumental change is compelling evidence that 

 the conservationists were right; the open minded person will 

 listen carefully to their recommendations for additional 

 corrective action. 



