SENATE RESOURCES COMMITTEE March 22, 1994 3:33 P.M. MEMBERS PRESENT Senator Mike Miller, Chairman Senator Steve Frank Senator Drue Pearce Senator Dave Donley Senator Fred Zharoff MEMBERS ABSENT Senator Loren Leman, Vice Chairman Senator Al Adams COMMITTEE CALENDAR SENATE BILL NO. 310 "An Act relating to the management and sale of state timber; relating to the classification of state land that would preclude harvesting of timber or would designate harvesting of timber as an incompatible use; relating to the administration of forest land, proposals for state forest, and the determination of sustained yield; and providing for an effective date." PREVIOUS ACTION SB 310 - See Resources minutes dated 3/2/94 and 3/16/94. WITNESS REGISTER Florian Sever 1706 Edgecumbe Dr. Sitka, Ak. 99835 POSITION STATEMENT: Opposed SB 310. Don Muller P.O. Box 1042 Sitka, Ak. 99835 POSITION STATEMENT: Opposed SB 310. Sean Damron 801 Lincoln St. Sitka, Ak. 99835 POSITION STATEMENT: Opposed SB 310. Matt Kinney P.O. Box 1540 Valdez, Ak. 99686 POSITION STATEMENT: Opposed SB 310. Terry Hermach P.O. Box 2493 Valdez, Ak. 99686 POSITION STATEMENT: Opposed SB 310. Ed Davis, Professional Engineer P.O. Box 1616 Fairbanks, Ak. 99707 POSITION STATEMENT: Opposed SB 310. Troy Reinhart Alaska Forest Association 111 Stedman, #200 Ketchikan, Ak. 99901 POSITION STATEMENT: Supported CSSB 310. Cliff Skillings 111 Stedman #200 Ketchikan, Ak. 99901 POSITION STATEMENT: Supported CSSB 310. Clarence Furbush HC 1, Box 6001 Palmer, ak. 99645 POSITION STATEMENT: Opposed SB 310. Dori McDannold Valley Alaska Center for the Environment HC 03, Box 8012 Palmer, Ak. 99645 POSITION STATEMENT: Opposed SB 310. Winslow Hoffman P.O. Box 1842 Homer, Ak. 99603 POSITION STATEMENT: Opposed SB 310. Kathy Smith Kachemak Bay Conservation Society 1193 Cooper Ct. Homer, Ak. 99603 POSITION STATEMENT: Opposed SB 310 Larry Smith 1520 Lakeshore Dr. Homer, Ak. 99603 POSITION STATEMENT: Opposed SB 310. Diane Jenkins Tok Chamber of Commerce P.O. Box 149 Tok, Ak. 99780 POSITION STATEMENT: Supported CSSB 310. Ted Charles P.O. Box 416 Tok, Ak. 99780 POSITION STATEMENT: Supported SB 310. Joe Young P.O. Box 42 Tok, Ak. 99780 POSITION STATEMENT: Supported SB 310. Byron Bondurant HC 1, Box 1258 Soldotna, Ak. 99669 POSITION STATEMENT: Opposed SB 310. Vesta Leigh P.O. Box 905 Kenai, Ak. 99611 POSITION STATEMENT: Opposed SB 310. Al Gilliam P.O. Box 124 Haines, Ak. 99827 POSITION STATEMENT: Opposed SB 310. Clair Soliman General Delivery Haines, Ak. 99827 POSITION STATEMENT: Opposed SB 310. Bart Henderson Chilkat Guides General Delivery Haines, ak. 99827 POSITION STATEMENT: Commented on SB 310. Gretchen Goldstein Box PPV Port Protection, Ak. 99950 POSITION STATEMENT: Opposed SB 310. Mike Mortell Sumner Straits Fish and Game Advisory Committee P.O. Box 53 Point Baker, Ak. 99927 POSITION STATEMENT: Opposed SB 310. Mike Walleri, General Counsel Tanana Chiefs Conference 122 First Ave., Suite 608 Fairbanks, Ak. 99707 POSITION STATEMENT: Commented on CSSB 310. Chris Maisch Tanana Chief's Conference 122 First Ave., Suite 608 Fairbanks, Ak. 99707 POSITION STATEMENT: Commented on the CSSB 310. Tabitha Gregory Alaska Environmental Lobby P.O. Box 6853 Ketchikan, Ak. 99901 POSITION STATEMENT: Opposed CSSB 310. Robert Mikol P.O. Box 80106 Fairbanks, Ak. 99708 POSITION STATEMENT: Opposed SB 310. Randy Mayo Stevens Village General Delivery Stevens Village, Alaska POSITION STATEMENT: Opposed SB 310. Ronnie Rosenberg 841 9th Ave. Fairbanks, Ak. 99701 POSITION STATEMENT: Opposed SB 310. Terry Brady 2900 Boniface Pkwy. Anchorage, Ak. 99504 POSITION STATEMENT: Supported SB 310. Ken Freeman 7604 Snow View Dr. Anchorage, Ak. 99516 POSITION STATEMENT: Supported CSSB 310. Cliff Eames Alaska Center For the Environment 519 W 8th, #201 Anchorage, Ak. 99501 POSITION STATEMENT: Opposed CSSB 310. Loisann Reeder Susitna Valley Association 9600 Slalom Dr. Anchorage, Ak. 99516 POSITION STATEMENT: Opposed SB 310 and CSSB 310. Jim Minton Flat Horn Lake Property Owners Association P.O. Box 190121 Anchorage, Ak. 99519 POSITION STATEMENT: Opposed CSSB 310. Jim Seely Redshirt Property Association 4330 Seely Ct. Anchorage, Ak. 99502 POSITION STATEMENT: Opposed SB 310 and CSSB 310. Jim Page Seward Forest Products 563 E 34th Ave., #200 Anchorage, Ak. 99503 POSITION STATEMENT: Supported CSSB 310. Daryl Doutent P.O. Box 38 Chugiak, Ak. 99567 POSITION STATEMENT: Opposed SB 310 and CSSB 310. Ron Brooks P. O. Box 10916 Fairbanks, Ak. 99760 POSITION STATEMENT: Supported CSSB 310. Debbie Miller 1446 Hans Way Fairbanks, Ak. 99709 POSITION STATEMENT: Opposed CSSB 310. Albert Pagh 2849 Parks Hwy. Fairbanks, Ak. 99709 POSITION STATEMENT: Supported CSSB 310. Lane Thompson P.O. Box 80368 Fairbanks, Ak. 99708 POSITION STATEMENT: Commented on CSSB 310. Jan Dawe P.O. Box 82003 Fairbanks, Ak. 99708 POSITION STATEMENT: Opposed CSSB 310. Sean McGuire 351 Cloudberry Fairbanks, Ak. 99709 POSITION STATEMENT: Opposed CSSB 310. Gabe Roden P.O. Box 460 Delta Junction, Ak. 99737 POSITION STATEMENT: Opposed CSSB 310. Douglas Yates P.O. Box 221 Ester, Ak. 99725 POSITION STATEMENT: Opposed CSSB 310. Larry Paquid 966 Gold Mine Trail Fairbanks, Ak. 99712 POSITION STATEMENT: Opposed CSSB 310. ACTION NARRATIVE TAPE 94-24, SIDE A Number 001 CHAIRMAN MILLER called the Resources Committee meeting to order at 3:33 p.m. and announced SB 310 (STATE/PRIVATE/MUNI TIMBER OPERATION/SALE) to be up for consideration. SENATOR FRANK, sponsor, said they had prepared a CS as a result of previous testimony. They had strengthened the public process by adding another public comment period of 90 days. It insured that all FMA's would be public information once the public comment period began. It clarified the environmental protections that were intended by requiring that FMA's be consistent with existing land use plans and that they retain site specific land use plans. A cap was put on the small sale exemption of 1 million acres per region. Biannual operating plans are required so the Department would have an ongoing role in any FMA that was approved. Operating level and inventory plans are also required under an FMA. The CS also clarified the protection for other forest uses. He said they removed provisions of the bill not essential to the central purpose including the requirement that any closures of more than 640 acres come back to the legislature. The reforestation and modifications were taken out, because they were confusing. They retained the activities and lifestyles wording that was important to the public. They also retained the requirement that timber sales be on the five year sale plan for two years in advance. RICK SOLEY, Aide to Senator Frank, ran through the CS with the Committee. TOM BOUTIN, Director, Division of Forestry, said the Department did have some problems with SB 310 because it impacted the public processes in Title 38. The CS takes care of those concerns. Section 1 modifies what must be considered in a forest land use plan only in the instance of an area where there is a plan already in place. Section 2 allows an exemption from 38.05.113 for sales of 500,000 board feet or less. Section 3 gives the Department the ability to do long term negotiated timber sales. SENATOR MILLER asked for a list of the timber sales in the last five years. MR. BOUTIN said he didn't have that information with him, but the state has been averaging 25 million - 30 million board feet per year, about 100 sales per year. FLORIAN SEVER, Sitka, said SB 310 as amended still creates a monumental boondoggle. It's a sweetheart deal struck between the Commissioner of DNR and whoever he wishes to give a long term contract to. This bill will cause more trouble than it's worth. It should be withdrawn. DON MULLER, Sitka, said SB 310 ranks right up with the worst of the bills. It is being put forth by a desperate timber industry. Please vote against this bill, he said. SEAN DAMRON, Sitka, said SB 310 is an embarrassment. Timber harvest can be done better in a sustainable manner. There should be consistency with state and federal lands. MATT KINNEY, Valdez, said he has his own lodge business and that he was able to harvest his logs at the mile 70 beetle kill. He said the land surrounding his lodge is state land which isn't under any management plan at all. He is concerned that the state will come in and harvest the timber. He said this bill has no process for him to have input into what happens to the surrounding land. TERRY HERMACH, Valdez, opposed SB 310, because it's a very poor utilization of state land. Cutting the beetle kill spruce is fine, but going into healthy tracts of timber to cut for export to the orient is a foolish attempt, at best, to utilize the land, he said. Number 416 ED DAVIS, Professional Engineer, said he is a recreational user depending on the remote and wild character of Alaska's resources . He personally knows several people who dedicated 3 years of their lives to developing the agreements on which the Forest Practices Act was conceived. This Act reflects painstaking consensus building efforts by five representatives of the forest products industry, five representatives of other forest users, and including representatives from DNR, ADF&G, DEC, DGC, and DCED. They wanted to avoid the divisive and bitter disputes that have plagued elected officials in the Pacific Northwest. They envisioned a responsible timber industry that would have wide spread support throughout the communities in which they are located. They sought agreements by consensus rather than by disputes and endless court decisions. SB 310 is designed to benefit only one of the many users of our state's forest. Both versions of SB 310 represent bad public policy, MR. DAVIS said. In reference to Mr. Boutin's comment that he had seen some sites in the Fairbanks area which would grow 20,000 board feet per acre. He said, if you take a look at the 1984-85 inventory, there is only 18,800 acres up there that fit that description. That would be gone very quickly under the five year plan which would cut 14,300 acres per year. No other lands up there come close to having that volume of timber. TROY REINHART, Executive Director, Alaska Forest Association, supported CSSB 310. He said they realized there are many misconceptions regarding this proposed legislation. They feel the CS addresses the public concern with the earlier bill and strengthens the state's ability to manage its forest lands. It will allow DNR to respond to forest health problems and bring positive returns to the state treasury. It will result in a sustained yield harvest of state forest land and allows for public input. CLIFF SKILLINGS, Ketchikan, said SB 310 provides the potential for increased wage jobs and employment in remote areas where employment levels have historically been low. Number 516 CLARENCE FURBUSH, Matsu, said he objects very much to SB 310, because it doesn't give opportunity to private individuals to own and manage land resources. This would increase unemployment and welfare. DORI MCDANNOLD, Valley Alaska Center for the Environment, opposed SB 310. It is a farce, she said, the basic premise being use of FMAs which are not acceptable. She said the state does not make money on large timber sales. WINSLOW HOFFMAN, Homer resident, opposed CSSB 310. All uses of the forest have been swept aside in the attempt to extract timber and there is no benefit to the state to enter into forest management agreements, he said. KATHY SMITH, Kachemak Bay Conservation Society, still opposed SB 310. They remain concerned with the long term contracts and FMAs which have not been successful elsewhere. They are a very inefficient way of managing timber resources. The rotation period on regeneration time of second growth forest in Alaska is 80 or 120 years plus, so there is no incentive for timber companies to make any investment in reforestation under FMAs. Basically SB 310 gives the timber to timber barons and the Alaska Forest Association. LARRY SMITH, Homer resident, said he was a member of the Forest Practices Review Steering Committee. He said there are some things in SB 310 that shake the Agreement. He said large timber sales tend to make timber less available to the small guys. The provision in the state law requiring primary processing of round logs fell to a constitutional challenge. He suggested getting a good legal analysis of the FMAs and how they would work in the U.S., because Canadian law is totally different from American law on questions like this. Otherwise, our experience with the four large timber sales in the state have all been disasters. He noted there are some improvements in the new version of the bill, but there are also somethings wrong. Section 1 needs to assert that coastal districts need notice of proposed sales. Although in section 2, 1 million board feet per region might be a good cap, 500,000 board feet is too large to allow in a negotiated timber sale in the Division of Forestry. TAPE 94-24, SIDE B Number 549 DIANE JENKINS, Tok Chamber of Commerce, said the Tanana Valley Basin is comprised of over 29 million acres, roughly 15 million owned by the state, 10 million owned by the feds, and 2.3 million are owned by native communities. They are talking about approximately 1.5 million acres to be harvested and managed. There are still 27.5 million acres left in the Basin, using just 5% for timber harvest. She didn't think they would be cutting out the small scale companies by letting the bigger companies cut the larger tracts. She supported CSSB 310. TED CHARLES, Tok resident, supported the CSSB 310, because it would provide more jobs for the Tanana Valley. JOE YOUNG, Young's Timber, Inc., supported SB 310. He said the world wide environmental concept calls for sustainable utilization which is what SB 310 does. BYRON BONDURANT, retired agricultural civil engineer and educator, said he spent considerable time in international development. He felt the proposed CSSB 310 was just cosmetic, and still flawed in content and context. It is not a management development bill, but merely a giveaway bill. There is nothing value added about it. He said it will do nothing but create a few temporary jobs and line the pockets of big business. VESTA LEIGH, Kenai resident, asked if the uses in section 1 were listed in manner of importance. MR. BOUTIN said there was no priority. She thought SB 310 was a poor representation for all the people of Alaska. It would make a few people very rich and give others jobs, but the whole population would be losing. AL GILLIAM, Haines resident and member of the Alaska Wilderness, Recreation, and Tourism Association, said his business revolves around guiding a variety of people into and around the Haines State Forest. His business would be severely impacted by passing SB 310. He said it pulls the rug out from under people who have built their businesses based on the multiple use of our lands. Statistics show a direct link between the amount of timber removed from the Chilkat Valley and a sharp decline in the number of subsistence harvested moose and fur animals from the Haines forest, MR. GILLIAM said. CLAIR SOLIMAN, testifying from Haines, said she didn't see how they could hold a hearing on something without adequate notice. BART HENDERSON, Chilkat Guides, said he was concerned there would be local input into any long term large scale sales. Number 389 GRETCHEN GOLDSTEIN, Port Protection, said the proposed CSSB 310 is still not acceptable for our state needs. Section 2 on page 2 should be omitted, because the public should review all timber sales regardless of size. The state should not enter into any long term Forest Management Agreements. MIKE MORTELL, Sumner Straits Fish and Game Advisory Committee, said they voted unanimously to oppose SB 310. Their main concern would be destruction of local salmon streams and wildlife habitat. He said there's hardly anything left on the lower end of Prince of Wales Island where he lives. What little fringe they have left is used for subsistence and fishing. He said this bill wouldn't create any jobs for their community. A bunch of guys had come up from Oregon and logged Prince of Wales and then they went home leaving the residents with the aftermath. MIKE WALLERI, General Counsel for Tanana Chief's Counsel, and Chris Maisch, Director of their Forestry Program, joined the Committee. MR. WALLERI said the CS addressed a number of the issues raised in their earlier testimony. It reinstates multiple use designations, it protects private land from trespass by timber access roads, it reinstates the mandated planning processes for areas covered by area and forest plans, it continues the avenues of public input into the forest planning process. Additionally, the inclusion of a number of considerations the Commissioner must weigh in the evaluation of FMA's is in some ways an improvement over existing law providing for greater protections of other uses, in particular the protection of subsistence habitat and those types of issues. They still have a few concerns regarding sustained yield, notice on the small tracts, and emergency sales coordination of the timber sales and state processing, below cost sales, consistency with local government plans, and the length and deactivation of the FMAs. MR. WALLERI explained a 20 year length for FMAs is probably appropriate given the fact that plant equipment will be fully depreciated in 10 - 15 years. The extension of another 20 years has some negative downside in that it actually subsidizes fully depreciated equipment and plants, as a disincentive to future investment in the industry. The only reason for a 40 year agreement would be to pass on an FMA to your children which isn't really a sound policy. The bill does not deal with deactivation of an FMA in any detail. They are very concerned that there will be residual obligations after the term of the FMA, like reforestation, stabilization, and monitoring. They think the bill should specifically authorize and require that the provisions of the FMA address those concerns and specifically authorize the Department to require a bond as a method for insuring residual obligations are met under an FMA. MR. WALLERI said that they continue to be concerned about an FMA resulting in a below cost sale which is just not economic sense. The FMA should require that they pay for themselves and they not result in a net loss of revenue to the state. MR. MAISCH specifically addressed the sustained yield issue. The bill continues to define sustained yield to allow harvest on a declining yield basis as defined currently in Title 41. Interior forest operations require longer rotation cycles than in the coastal forests and they feel that sustained yield should be defined as "even flow." Such harvest may adversely affect coastal harvest, so they propose amending the definition of sustained yield as it relates to just the Tanana Valley State Forest lands and to use the definition used by the Society of American Foresters: "Sustained yield shall mean the yield that a forest can produce continuously at a given intensity of management providing continuous production so planned to achieve at the earliest practical time a balance between increment and cutting." They believe the state should continue to give notice (page 2, line 18) to local communities on small sales. On page 4, line 4 of the CS the greatest advantage of FMAs to local communities and the industry is they would allow coordination of timber sales and encourage instate timber processing. Neither factor is considered by the Commissioner in evaluating FMA proposals. They believe these criteria should be included in the factors to be considered in the actual evaluation process, MR. MAISCH said. Number 217 SENATOR ZHAROFF asked if the proposed definition of sustained yield would reflect on lands in the Tanana Valley State Forest only. MR. MAISCH answered yes. SENATOR ZHAROFF asked if they do support this bill now. MR. MAISCH answered that they were clearly opposed to the first bill, but they haven't formally developed a position on the CS. The sustained yield issue is probably the most critical to them. TABITHA GREGORY, Ketchikan resident representing the Alaska Environmental Lobby, opposed SB 310, because FMAs or negotiated long term contracts effectively reduce public oversite on large tracts on state forested lands. FMAs favor a large scale timber industry dominated by a single company over a more diversified timber industry shared by numerous smaller companies. This makes the Alaskan economy more vulnerable to the boom and bust cycles. This bill disregards many other uses of forest land. The state has an obligation to protect the other activities. She said that Alaskans have worked hard to expand their economic base. Why at this point are some individuals encouraging our timber industry to move backwards away from diversification and into a single product market, she asked. If a large business comes in and gets the community to rely on it and then has to close for some reason, as with the mill in Sitka, the community then again has big problems, she stated. TAPE 94-25, SIDE A Number 001 ROBERT MIKOL said he was concerned with the FMAs and long term contracts, because they could very well lock up multi-land use. People in the interior feel the bill will threaten wildlife habitat, because trees in the interior are slow growing. Much of the land is easily accessible by road and are prime grounds for subsistence, hunting, etc. This bill does nothing to support sustainable jobs. These are generally considered low scale, low wage, and unattractive jobs. The Department of Labor reports that approximately 40% of these jobs go to non-resident workers. RANDY MAYO, Chief, Stevens Village Counsel, testified against SB 310 and amendments for all the reasons mentioned. He said the Tanana Valley is already heavily impacted by the Haul Road. There is little regard for the people who live there or the resources. RONNIE ROSENBERG, Fairbanks resident, said that SB 310 ties the Commissioner's hands by mandating the development of commercial forest land under principles of sustained yield as a priority. She said FMAs don't work where they have been tried. It is extremely foolhardy to enter into something that will just perpetuate the boom and bust economy. TERRY BRADY, Special Consultant Forester, supported CSSB 310. He would like it to require bonding in case there is a default in the contract. We are facing the worst disaster of the century with the bark beetle infestation and SB 310 would give the state tools to deal with it. CARL PARKER, Resource Development Counsel, supported SB 310. FMAs are a desirable tool in accomplishing timber development. It would help diversify the timber industry. The CS is a much stronger version. It is important to recognize that all provisions of the Forest Practices Act, including fish habitat, water quality, and buffer zone considerations would apply to the FMAs. KEN FREEMAN, Anchorage, supported SB 310, because it encourages reasonable, responsible timber development, and increased long term high paying jobs for Alaskan citizens in the forest industry. Forest Management Agreements are an example of good public policy, because the government owner can dictate the specific conditions of a timber harvest. They also provide incentive for private industry to invest in proper forest management and local manufacturing facilities while shifting the cost to the private sector. CLIFF EAMES, Alaska Center for the Environment, opposed CSSB 310. FMAs are a 20-40 year lock up of a single resource for a single purpose that is incompatible with most other uses. They don't think the purposes of the state forests should be changed. Emergency sales should not be exempt from the 5 year schedule requirements. Regarding the spruce bark beetle infestation, he said that has been exaggerated. He said state biologists have been telling us consistently that the impact of the beetle will have little or no impact on the resources. LOISANN REEDER, Susitna Valley Association, opposed both SB 310 and CSSB 310. Jeff Parker, Alaska Sportfishing Association and Trout Unlimited, asked her to state for the record that his organization opposes this legislation also. MS. REEDER said the CS addresses some of the concerns voiced at previous hearings. It still has 3 major areas of concern: the exemption of small sales from the 5 year schedule, use of FMAs, and large scale long term timber harvesting. JIM MINTON, Flat Horn Lake Property Owners Association, highlighted some surveys and gave the Committee an overview of the Susitna Guideline Project. Participants cited importance of the recreation and tourism industry to the Valley economy and quality of life. He asked how many times the public had to keep saying there is no question that FMAs advance timber harvesting as a priority use of the land. Number 340 JIM SEELY, Redshirt Landowners Association, opposed SB 310 and CSSB 310. He testified that this legislation is so important that it should go back to the voters. Town meetings should be held and people should be asked if this is what they want in their forest. JIM PAGE, Seward Forest Products, said that FMAs work. He has seen them work in Canada, Sweden, and Norway. He said the mill in Seward has yet to receive any state wood. He supported CSSB 310, because it starts to manage the state's forest resources which are renewable. Under section 2 (c) he didn't see the reason to have a 1 million board foot threshold. It should be based on the biological needs of the forest. DARYL DOUTENT, Anchorage, opposed SB 310 and CSSB 310. The effect in either case will be of increasing timber harvest at the expense of other uses. Any large scale expansion or long term contracts are inappropriate. RON BROOKS, Fairbanks, said beetle kill forests do have an effect on hunting, fishing, recreation, and tourism. He said this bill is excellent, because it does address forest health. He said it is just the first step toward economic development in the Tanana Forest. DEBBIE MILLER, Fairbanks resident, opposed CSSB 310. She was against 20 year FMAs. Looking at Canadian statistics, 65% of the boreal zone in Canada have been logged. 50% of those logged areas have not regenerated. We are considerably farther north than northern Alberta and she questioned whether clear cutting is right. ALBERT PAGH, Fairbanks, said he has been in the sawmill and logging business for 24 years. He supported CSSB 310. He thought local industry was protected in the bill. He thought there should be a bond requirement equal to at least three years of reforestation. LANE THOMPSON, Civil Engineer, said he was in favor of a healthy sustainable logging industry in the interior. He said he would like to have more time for public comment on this important issue. He thought they needed an inventory of the state timber before making any decisions. JAN DAWE, Fairbanks resident, said she needed more time to study the bill and to receive feedback from the forestry professionals she has contacted. She said the CS is an improvement over the original bill. She is still concerned with the public process. She does oppose the CS to SB 310, because it favors FMAs and makes production of commercial timber the higher purpose of a state forest. SEAN MCGUIRE, Fairbanks, said people need more time to figure this bill out. TAPE 94-25, SIDE B Number 580 He said there is a very strong negative reaction to large scale clear cuts in the interior. This bill is specifically tailored to open the door to large scale clear cutting. MR. MCGUIRE said 20 year contracts is the key to letting in the large timber corporations. There is a lot of support for small scale local timber harvest, but the division comes when they talk about large scale cutting. GABE RODEN, Delta Junction, said they needed more time to consider the CS. There are still a lot of things they can't accept in the Substitute bill. She said they needed to remember the timber that will be harvested on University and Mental Health lands and add that to what will be harvested under SB 310. The forest needs to be managed for multiple purposes. Sustained yield should meet present needs and those of generations to come. Timber cutting should go to local residents. Low cost contracts on timber should be eliminated. There should be continued use of existing trails and access routes within state forest for subsistence use. Number 524 DOUGLAS YATES, Ester resident, appreciated the opportunity to testify, but he saw little to recommend this effort to mandate large scale logging in the state forest. Opening forests to FMAs will promote a level of harvest that will in all probability squeeze small loggers out of the market. This legislation favors powerful outside interests over those Alaskans that are currently making a living from Alaska's resources. He asked if they had given any consideration to the burgeoning population in Alaska's villages or to what will occur when subsistence resources are reduced in the areas of logging clear cuts. The provision for public input appears in a superficial way with no real powers to affect decisions on the way areas are cut. The bill gives the Commissioner complete discretion to make decisions regardless of public comment. Number 486 LARRY PAQUID, Fairbanks resident, said FMAs still concentrate too much power in the hands of the Commissioner of the Department of Natural Resources, a politically appointed position. SB 310 makes development of commercial forests the most important use locking out all the other uses. He thought the exempt emergency sales needed to be defined. Number 465 SENATOR MILLER thanked everyone for their testimony and adjourned the meeting at 4:05 p.m.