FOUR OR FIVE MONTHS OUT OF THE YEAR. AND, YES, THEY'RE ON
           WELFARE. AND, YES, THEY IDENTIFY FOR FOOD STAMPS. NOW, I MUST
           SAY THAT THESE ONCE WERE THE PROUD MEN AND WOMEN OF A FOREST
           PRUKSLT INDUSTRY -- FOREST PRODUCTS INDUSTRY THAT WE
           POLITICALLY DESTROYED. WE POLITICALLY DESTROYED IT. WE ARE HERE
           TODAY FOR POLITICS POLITICS. WE ARE POLITICALLY TRYING TO
           DESTROY WHAT REMAINS OF A RESPONSIBLE WAY OF MANAGING OUR
           FORESTS TODAY NOT BECAUSE IT'S THE RIGHT THING TO DO FROM A
           MANAGEMENT POINT OF VIEW VIEW, BECAUSEIST THE RIGHT THING TO DO

           -- BECAUSE IT'S THE RIGHT THING TO DO POLITICALLY. I KNOW OF NO
           OTHER REASON. I CAN'T UNDERSTAND WHY THE SENATOR FROM NEVADA,
           WHO COMES FROM THE GREAT PUBLIC LAND STATE THAT HE DOES, WOULD
           WANT TO TURN HIS BACK ON ONE SEGMENT OF THE ECONOMY OF A PUBLIC
           LANDS STATE LIKE IDAHO OR NEVADA. HE AND I STAND ARM AND ARM
           TOGETHER ON MINING ISSUES. I WAS IN ELKO, NEVADA, LAST WEEK, A
           COMMUNITY THAT 15 YEARS AGO WAS 5,000 PEOPLE, TODAY, 25,000
           PEOPLE. NOT BECAUSE OF THE HIGH-TECH INDUSTRY BUT BECAUSE OF

           JELLED. GOLD IN THE CARLIN TREND, MINING. HIGH JOBS.
           HIGH-PRICED JOBS BEING PAID TO THOUSANDS OF MEN AND WOMEN IN
           THE MINING INDUSTRY. AND SO WHEN WE BATTLE ON THAT ISSUE, THE
           SENATOR FROM NEVADA AND I STAND ARM AND ARM. BUT WHEN WE TRY TO
           WORK ON A REASONABLE AND RESPONSIBLE FOREST MANAGEMENT PLAN
           THAT ALLOWS SOME TREE CUTTING, I AM TREMENDOUSLY FRUSTRATED
           THAT THE SENATOR FROM NEVADA AND I CANNOT STAND ARM AND ARM ON
           THAT ISSUE ALSO. IT IS AN ISSUE OF JOBS. IT'S AN ISSUE OF RIGHT

           AND RESPONSIBLE WAYS OF MANAGING OUR FORESTS. AND IT IS
           POLITICAL, AND I'M SADDENED THAT IT IS. NOW, THE SUBSTITUTE
           AMENDMENT OFFERED TRANSFERS $10 MILLION. REDUCTION THAT -- $10
           MILLION OF THE REDUCTION THAT I'VE TALKED ABOUT $34 MILLION IN
           TIMBER FUNDS TO PAY FOR SURVEYS ON RARE SPECIES. I DON'T THINK
           THAT'S RESPONSIVE TO THE PROBLEM. OF UNREASONABLE WILDLIFE
           SURVEYS REQUIREMENTS IN THE PRESIDENT'S FOREST -- NORTHWEST FOR
           HE IS PLAN, WHICH WE DISCUSSED IN THIS BODY LAST WEEK. FIRST OF

           ALL, THE FOREST SERVICE TIMBER SALE BUDGET IS WHAT PAYS FOR THE
           SURVEYS IN THE FIRST PLACE. THUS, RATHER THAN A $10 MILLION
           INCREASE FOR THIS PURPOSE, THE NET EFFECT OF THIS PROPOSAL IS A
           $24 MILLION DECREASE. SO WE GIVE THEM NOT EVEN A HALF A LOAF.
           WE GIVE THEM A QUARTER OF A LOAF. SECOND, THE CLINTON
           ADMINISTRATION HAS AGREED THAT MANY OF THESE SURVEYS SHOULDN'T
           BE DONE. INDEED, MANY CAN'T BE DONE. THAT IS PRECISELY WHY THE

           ADMINISTRATION IS WRITING AN E.I.S. IN AN ATTEMPT TO CHANGE
           THESE REQUIREMENTS. UNFORTUNATELY, TIMBER SALES ARE ENJOINED
           UNDER THE E.I.S. UNTIL THE E.I.S. IS COMPLETED. WELL, I HAPPEN
           TO AGREE WITH THE EDITORIAL STATEMENT THIS PAST SATURDAY IN THE
           "PORTLAND OREGONAN," THE LARGE THE AND MOST RESPECTED NEWSPAPER
           IN ORGANIZE ON, THE "OREGONAN" CLEARLY NOTES THAT SPECIES OF
           RARE ANIMALS AND PLANTS REQUIRED IN THE NORTHWEST FOREST PLAN

           ARE TECHNICALLY IMPOSSIBLE AND THEY USE THE RIGHT WORD --
           PREPOSTEROUS. AND THE SENATE DIDN'T USE THE WORD PREPOSTEROUS,
           BUT THE SENATE LAST WEEK SAID NO TO THE JUDGES. WE'RE NOT GOING
           TO LET THE JUDGE IN THE 11TH CIRCUIT AND IN THE 9TH CIRCUIT
           WRITE POLICY. THAT'S OUR JOB. THAT'S WHAT WE'RE ELECTED TO DO
           DO. THEY'RE ELECTED TO INTERPRET A CONSTITUTION AND NOT TO
           WRITE TIMBER POLICY. THE "OREGONAN" CALLS IT PREPOSTEROUS. THE

           "OREGONAN" FURTHER CALLS IT AS A POISON PILL AND A WAY OF
           BLOCKING ALL LOGGING AND PREVENTING THE PLAN FROM WORKING AS IT
           IS DESIGNED. AND YET WE WANT TO PUT SOME MORE MONEY INTO THAT.
           IT MAKES NO SENSE TO SPEND $10 MILLION FOR A PRESCRIPTION FOR A
           POISON PILL. OWNER FOR A PREPOSTEROUS SURVEY PROCEDURES. THIS
           CONGRESS SHOULD SPEND -- SHOULDN'T SPEND TEN CENTS IN WHAT I
           BELIEVE IS A MOST INAPPROPRIATE FASHION. THAT'S THE FOUB DAIGS

           OF THE DEBATE AS I SEE IT. I BELIEVE THAT IS A REASONABLE
           INTERPRETATION OF WHY WE'RE HERE ON THE FLOOR TODAY. I KNOW OF
           NO OTHER. AT A TIME WHEN WE'VE REDUCED THE OVERALL TIMBER
           PROGRAM IN THIS COUNTRY BY 70%, WE'VE REDUCED EMPLOYMENT BY
           ALMOST 50%, WE'VE DRAMATICALLY TRANSFORMED THE RURAL LANDSCAPE
           TO COMMUNITIES OF UNEMPLOYED PEOPLE AND EMPTY HOMES. THAT'S THE
           POLICY OF THIS GOVERNMENT AT THIS TIME AND SOMEHOW WE WANT TO
           PERPETUATE THAT OR INCREASE IT?

           I THINK NOT. THE ONLY EXPLANATION POSSIBLE THAT I BELIEVE IS
           REASONABLE AND RIGHT IS THE POLITICS OF IT. WE ARE ON THE FLOOR
           TODAY BECAUSE THE NATIONAL SIERRA CLUB AND OTHERS HAVE SAID WE
           OUGHT NOT BE CUTTING TREES ON PUBLIC LANDS AT ALL. ZERO, END OF
           STATEMENT. NOT FOR HEALTH, NOT FOR FIRE PREVENTION, NOT TO
           CREATE VIBRANT AND YOUNG, YOUTHFUL STANDS, JUST DON'T CUT THEM
           AT ALL. LET MOTHER NIGHT BE OUR MANAGER -- LET MOTHER NATURE BE
           OUR MANAGER. NOW, THAT'S NOT GOOD BUSINESS. WE KNOW THAT'S NOT

           GOOD BUSINESS, ESPECIALLY WHEN MAN FOR THE LAST 40 OR 50 YEARS
           HAS PUT OUT ALL THE FIRES AND NOT ALLOWED MOTHER NATURE TO
           MANAGE. NOW WHEN SHE HAS AN OPPORTUNITY TO MANAGE WHERE THERE
           ARE 50 TREES INSTEAD OF FIVE THAT WOULD HAVE BEEN TRUE A
           HUNDRED YEARS AGO, WE CREATE MONSTROUS WILDFIRES THAT NOT ONLY
           DESTROY THE STANDS BUT SCALD THE LAND AND MAKE IT STERILE AND
           NONPRODUCTIVE FOR DECADES TO COME. THAT'S WHERE MAN I THINK HAS
           TO STEP BACK IN AS A GOOD STEWARD, A RIGHT AND RESPONSIBLE
           STEWARD, FOR ALL OF THE ENVIRONMENTAL REASONS, THE WATER

           QUALITY REASONS, AND THE WILDLIFE HABITAT REASONS THAT YOU
           MANAGE A FOREST FOR. WITH THOSE COMMENTS, LET ME YIELD SUCH
           TIME AS IT REQUIRED TO THE SENATOR FROM ARKANSAS.
           

           THE PRESIDING OFFICER: THE SENATOR FROM ARKANSAS IS RECOGNIZED.
           

           MR. HUTCHINSON: I HAVE ONE UNANIMOUS CONSENT REQUEST FOR A
           COMMITTEE TO MEET DURING TODAY'S SESSION OF THE SENATE. IT HAS
           THE APPROVAL OF THE MY FOR THE LEADER. I ASK UNANIMOUS CONSENT
           THAT THIS REQUEST BE AGREED TO AND THAT THIS REQUEST BE PRINTED
           IN THE RECORD.
           

           THE PRESIDING OFFICER: WITHOUT OBJECTION, SO ORDERED. THE
           SENATOR FROM ARKANSAS.
           

           MR. HUTCHINSON: I WANT TO THANK THE SENATOR FROM IDAHO FOR
           LAYING OUT THE ISSUES IN THIS DEBATE SO CLEARLY AND ASSOCIATE
           MY REMARKS WITH HIM. I RISE TO STRONGLY SPEAK AGAINST THE
           BRYAN-WYDEN AMENDMENT FOR A VARIETY OF REASONS BUT MOST
           IMPORTANTLY BECAUSE IT SIMPLY DOES NOT SUPPORT HEALTHY AND
           SUSTAINABLE NATIONAL FORESTS. MANY SENATORS I SUSPECT TODAY
           WILL SPEAK TODAY CLAIMING THAT THIS REDUCTION TO THE TIMBER
           MANAGEMENT PROGRAM MAKES SOUND FISCAL AND ENVIRONMENTAL SENSE.
           THAT'S -- FROM MY PERSPECTIVE, AS AN ARKANSAN, AS THE SENATOR
           FROM ARKANSAS, I CAN TELL YOU I THINK THAT'S FART FROM THE

           TRUTH AND THAT THERE ARE -- FAR FROM THE TRUTH AND THAT THERE
           ARE 35,400 WORKERS IN MY STATE THAT MAKE UP THE FOREST PRODUCTS
           INDUSTRY WHO STRONGLY OPPOSE THIS AMENDMENT. IF OUR FORESTS
           AREN'T HEALTHY AND IF WE CONTINUE TO IGNORE THE PROBLEMS FACING
           THESE PUBLIC LANDS, WE RUN THE RISK OF JEOPARDIZING THESE JOBS
           AND THE FUTURE HEALTH AND SUSTAINABILITY OF OUR NATION'S
           FORESTS. DURING THE AUGUST RECESS, I MET WITH THE FOREST
           SERVICE ON THE WITICHAW NATIONAL FOREST IN ARKANSAS LAST MONTH.
           SOMETIMES OUR DISTINGUISHED SENATOR FROM THE WEST FORGET THAT

           THERE ARE NATIONAL FORESTS ALL ACROSS THE SOUTH. AND IN THE
           STATE OF ARKANSAS, I WOULD SAY TO MY GOOD FRIEND, THE SENATOR
           FROM OREGON, THAT WE HAVE TWO LARGE NATIONAL FORESTS, THE
           WISITAW NATIONAL FOREST AND THE OZARK NATIONAL FOREST. AND
           MEETING WITH THE FOREST -- NATIONAL FOREST SERVICE ON THE
           WISHITAW NATIONAL FOREST LAST MONTH, I DISCOVERED THAT BECAUSE
           OF THE DECREASING BUDGETS IN THE TIMBER SALES ACCOUNT, THEY ARE
           DOING ONLY ONE-THIRD OF THE VEGETATION MANAGEMENT REQUIRED BY
           THE FOREST PLAN. SO FORGIVE ME IF I FIND IT IRONIC THAT THIS

           SECOND-DEGREE AMENDMENT, THE SUBSTITUTE AMENDMENT, WOULD SHIFT
           $10 MILLION FROM THE TIMBER MANAGEMENT PROGRAM TO THE SURVEYS
           IN THE NORTHWEST, WHEN IN THE STATE OF ARKANSAS AND OUR
           NATIONAL FORESTS, THEY'RE ONLY DOING ONE-THIRD OF THE
           VEGETATION MANAGEMENT REQUIRED BY THE FOREST PLAN. BECAUSE OF
           THE SEVERE EROSION OF FUNDING THAT THE SENATOR FROM IDAHO HAS
           ALLUDED TO, THE FOREST IS UNABLE TO ACHIEVE THE DESIRED FUTURE
           CONDITIONS REQUIRED FOR A HEALTHY AND SUSTAINABLE ECOSYSTEM.

           EXTREMISTS, LITIGATION, APPEALS OR LACK OF PUBLIC SUPPORT DID
           NOT BRING ABOUT THIS CRISIS. IT IS THE RESULT OF A MISGUIDED
           ADMINISTRATION REDUCING TIMBER HARVEST WITHOUT TAKING INTO
           CONSIDERATION THE REAL IMPACTS OF THE CONDITIONS OF THE FORESTS
           AND THE COMMUNITIES ASSOCIATED WITH THESE NATIONAL FORESTS. THE
           TIMBER MANAGEMENT PROGRAM IS FUNDED AT A LEVEL EQUAL TO THE FY
           199FUNDING LEVEL. LEVEL FUNDING BEFORE THIS AMENDMENT, BEFORE
           THESE ADDITIONAL CUTS, LEVEL FUNDING FUNDING, NO INCREASE AND
           YET THE DEMANDS ON THE PROGRAM HAVE INCREASED DRAMATICALLY. THE

           PROGRAM OBJECTIVE FOR THE TIMBER SALE PROGRAM IS A SUSTAINABLE
           -- AND QUOTE -- "A SUSTAINABLE YIELD OF FOREST PRODUCTS THAT
           CONTRIBUTES TO MEETING THE NATION'S DEMANDS AND RESTORING,
           IMPROVING OR MAINTAINING THE FOREST ECOSYSTEM HEALTH. YET THE
           AMENDMENT BEFORE US REDUCES THE FUNDING LEVEL WHEN MORE THAN 40
           MILLION ACRES OF OUR NATIONAL FORESTS ARE AT HIGH RISK OF
           CATASTROPHIC FIRE DUE TO AN ACCUMULATION OF DEAD AND DYING
           TREES, AN ADDITIONAL 26 MILLION ACRES ARE AT RISK OF INSECT AND

           DISEASE INFESTATION. WE RISK A CRISIS -- WE HAVE A CRISIS NOW.
           WE RISK A CATASTROPHE. WE HAVE LEVEL FUNDING IN THE
           APPROPRIATIONS BILL BEFORE US, AND THE AMENDMENT WOULD SUGGEST
           THAT WE SHOULD CUT EVEN FURTHER IN A PROGRAM THAT HAS WANT THE
           RESOURCES TO DO THE JOB THEY'VE BEEN CHARGED WITH DOING AS IT
           STANDS. AND THE -- AND I MIGHT ADD THAT THE ADDITION OF SENATOR
           WYDEN AS A COSPONSOR OF THE AMENDMENT, WELL, THE SECOND-DEGREE
           AMENDMENT ONLY EXACERBATES THE PROBLEM THAT THE UNDERLYING

           AMENDMENT CREATES. IN SHIFTING AN ADDITIONAL $10 MILLION OUT OF
           TIMBER MANAGEMENT AND MOVING IT TO THE NORTHWEST. THIS IMPACTS
           EVERY NATIONAL FOREST, EVERY TIMBER MANAGEMENT PROGRAM IN THE
           NATION. IT DILUTES WHAT CAN BE DONE IN THOSE AREAS WHERE THERE
           ARE ALREADY SUFFERING, WHERE THEY'RE ALREADY SHORT, TO MOVE
           ADDITIONAL RESOURCES BECAUSE OF THE SITUATION FACED IN THE
           NORTHWEST. I THINK THAT'S WRONG. IT IS NOT ECONOMICALLY NOR
           ENVIRONMENTALLY ADVISABLE. THE DEBATE TODAY WILL SPEAK ABOUT

           DOING THE -- DOING RIGHT BY THE VIME. WELL, HOW CAN YOU JUSTIFY
           REDUCING A LEVEL FUNDED PROGRAM THAT'S DEALING WITH MILL YOPZ
           OF ACRES OF LAND THAT ARE TOO CROWDED FOR NEW HEALTHY TREES TO
           GROW. YOU ALSO HEAR TALK TODAY ABOUT HOW THIS PROGRAM IS AIN'T
           ENVIRONMENTAL OR ENVIRONMENTALLY DESTRUCTIVE. THAT'S NOT WHAT I
           HAVE SEEN IN THE MANAGEMENT THAT'S BEING DONE IN THE WISHITAW,
           THE OZARK, THE ST. FRANCIS NATIONAL FORESTS IN ARKANSAS. OUR
           NATIONAL FORESTS ARE ADDING 23 BILLION BOARD FEET EACH YEAR

           YEAR, WHILE THREE BILLION IS BEING HARVESTED EACH YEAR. SIX
           BILLION BOARD FEET DIE EACH YEAR FROM INSECTS, DISEASE, FIRE
           AND OTHER CAUSES CAUSES. AND THE AMENDMENT BEFORE US WILL ONLY
           MAKE THAT SITUATION WORSE. THE MAJORITY OF THE TIMBER SALES IN
           THE PROGRAM ARE DONE FOR OTHER ECOSYSTEM -- FOR
           
           OTHER ECOSYSTEM OBJECTIVES: IMPROVING HABITAT FOR WILDLIFE,
           REDUCING FUELS THAT MAY INCREASE FIRE RISK, ESPECIALLY IN THE
           URBAN INTERFACE AREAS. COMBALINGT INSECT AND DWEEZ INFESTATIONS
           AND IMPROVING TREE -- AND DISEASE INFESTATIONS AND IMPROVING

           TREE GROWTH FOR FUTURE TIMBER. WE CANNOT IGNORE THE
           CONTRIBUTIONS THAT THE TIMBER MANAGEMENT PROGRAM MAKES EACH
           YEAR. EVEN IF IT MIGHT SOUND POLITICALLY ADVANTAGEOUS. THE
           BYPRODUCT OF A HEALTHY, SUSTAINABLE TIMBER PROGRAM IS EQUALLY
           AS IMPORTANT AS HEALTHY, RURAL COMMUNITIES. THE TIMBER SALES
           PROGRAM GENERATES REGIONAL INCOME OF $2 BILLION -- OVER $2
           BILLION, IN FACT, $2.3 BILLION IN FEDERAL INCOME TAX SEATS. 70%
           OF THE TIMBER FROM NATIONAL FORESTS IS SOLD TO SMALL BUSINESSES

           THAT COULD BE FORCED TO CLOSE THEIR DOORS IF WE SUPPORT FURTHER
           REDUCTIONS TO THE PROGRAM. A $1 MILLION REDUCTION IN THE TIMBER
           SALES PROGRAM ON THE WISHITAW OR ST. FRANCIS NATIONAL FOREST
           SIMPLY MEANS 10,000 ACRES OF FOREST DESIGNATED FOR TREATMENT BY
           THE FOREST PLAN THAT WILL BE UNTREATED. THAT'S WHAT IT WILL
           MEAN. $1 MILLION REDUCTION, 10,000 ACRES THAT WILL GO
           UNMANAGED, UNTREATED. THAT'S THAT'S THE GOAL. PERHAPS THAT'S
           THE BACK-DOOR OBJECTIVE OF AN AMENDMENT LIKE THIS, THE

           BYPRODUCTS, ROUND ROUNDWOOD AND SAW LOGS WILL BE UNAVAILABLE.
           COMMUNITIES WILL LOSE A00 YEARS OF WORK AND OVER $15 MILLION
           FROM THE LOCAL ECONOMY. BY ANY REASONABLE STANDARD, THE UNITED
           STATES FOREST PRACTICES ARE THE BEST IN THE WORLD. ENSURING
           FORESTS ARE REGENERATED AND THAT WATER QUALITY AND WILDLIFE
           HABITAT ARE PROTECTED OR ENHANCED. DECREASING THIS PROGRAM IS
           WRONGHEADED. IT WILL ONLY SET US BACK ENVIRONMENTAL. IT WILL
           SURELY NEGATIVELY IMPACT ECONOMICALLY. I SUGGEST THAT WE DO THE

           RIGHT THING, SUPPORT NO LESS THAN LEVEL FUNDING FOR THIS
           IMPORTANT PROGRAM AND OPPOSE THE BRYAN-WYDEN AMENDMENT. I THANK

           THE CHAIRMAN. I YIELD THE FLOOR. MR. CRAIG: MR. PRESIDENT?
           
           

           THE PRESIDING OFFICER: THE SENATOR FROM IDAHO.
           

           MR. CRAIG: MR. PRESIDENT, I YIELD THE CHAIRMAN OF THE FULL
           COMMITTEE OF ENERGY AND NATURAL RESOURCES, SENATOR MURKOWSKI,
           SUCH TIME AS HE MAY CONSUME.
           

           THE PRESIDING OFFICER: THE SENATOR FROM ALASKA IS RECOGNIZED.
           

           MR. MURKOWSKI: I THANK YOU, MADAM PRESIDENT. AND WISH YOU A
           GOOD AFTERNOON. LET'S START OUT WITH SOME FACTS HERE, BECAUSE
           WHAT IS APPROPRIATE IS TO RECOGNIZE JUST WHAT THE CURRENT
           POLICY THE ADMINISTRATION IS TOWARDS THE UNITED STATES FORESTS
           MANAGED BY THE FOREST SERVICE. AND CLEARLY, AS WE LOOK AT WHERE
           WE ARE TODAY, AS THIS CHART SHOWS, THE U.S. FOREST SERVICE

           VOLUME SOLD, VIA VEE THE ANNUAL MORTALITY. THE ANNUAL MORTALITY
           ARE THOSE
{END: 1999/09/13 TIME: 15-30 , Mon.  106TH SENATE, FIRST SESSION}