564 



TO HARVEST 96% OF THE OLD GROWTH FORESTS ON THE TONGASS. THE 

 FOREST SERVICE INSISTED THAT THEY WERE PRACTICING MULTIPLE USE. 

 WHEN THEY WERE CHALLENGED THEY PROCLAIMED THAT THEY WERE THE 

 PROFESSIONALS AND THIS WAS A PROFESSIONAL DECISION. THE FOREST 

 SERVICE MOVED AHEAD WITH ITS "PROFESSIONAL RESPONSIBILITIES" 

 RESULTING IN WIDE SPREAD DESTRUCTION OF FISH AND WILDLIFE HABITAT 

 AND THE DEGRADATION OF MANY OF THE TONGASS VALUES, ALL FOR THE 

 BENEFIT OF THE TIMBER INDUSTRY. 



I KNOW OF ROAD LOCATERS WHO LAID OUT LOGGING ROADS AWAY FROM 



SALMON STREAMS, TO PROTECT THOSE STREAMS, ONLY TO HAVE THE LOGGER 



PHONE THE REGIONAL FORESTER TO HAVE THE FIELD DECISION OVERRULED 

 BECAUSE IT CAUSED THE LOGGER UNWARRANTED EXPENSE. 



I SAT IN A STAFF MEETING IN THIS VERY TOWN AND HEARD A FOREST 

 SUPERVISOR EXPLAIN WHY A LOGGER, WHO HAD ILLEGALLY DUMPED A 

 NUMBER OF TREES IN A SALMON STREAM, DIDN'T HAVE TO REMOVE THOSE 

 TREES FOR SEVERAL WEEKS BECAUSE OF UNWARRANTED EXPENSE. 



I KNOW THAT THE REGIONAL OFFICE WAS AWARE THAT THE PULP COMPANIES 

 HAD ESTABLISHED PHONY INDEPENDENT LOGGING COMPANIES IN ORDER TO 

 BID ON SALES ESTABLISHED TO PROTECT THE INDEPENDENT LOGGER. THESE 

 PHONY COMPANIES HAD NO EQUIPMENT OR HISTORY OF LOGGING, THEY WERE 

 PURE PAPER COMPANIES FINANCED BY THE MILLS. YET THE FOREST 

 SERVICE AWARDED THESE COMPANIES INDEPENDENT SALES. 



I HAVE SAT IN A STAFF MEETING WERE THE REGIONAL FORESTER 

 PROCLAIMED THAT TO HAVE A LOGGER ENTER A WATERSHED SEVERAL TIMES 

 TO LOG CREATED UNWARRANTED EXPENSE, THEREFOR THE LOGGER SHOULD BE 



