[Congressional Record Volume 140, Number 145 (Friday, October 7, 1994)]
[Senate]
[Page S]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]


[Congressional Record: October 7, 1994]
From the Congressional Record Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]

 
      NATURAL RESOURCES AND WASHINGTON STATE IN THE 103D CONGRESS

  Mrs. MURRAY. Mr. President, Washington State is a special place to 
live. Perched on the edge of the Pacific Ocean, it looks west across 
that vast body of water toward Asia. It is bisected by towering peaks, 
across which glaciers march and streams tumble. Islands dot its western 
shores, and open spaces stretch from border to border. The air is 
clean. The water is clear. Wildlife abounds.
  Simply stated, Mr. President, Washington State is defined by its 
natural resources. Whether people hail from small towns or metropolitan 
Puget Sound, they all recognize that few places offer the diversity of 
climate, culture, geography, or economics of Washington State.
  This situation puts my State in a quandary. Natural resources make 
Washington a great place live; unfortunately, there are many different 
ideas regarding how these resources ought to be used.
  Long before I ran for office, my State was divided by conflicts over 
natural resource management. It is a part of life; after all, the 
Federal Government is the largest single landowner in the State. During 
the past two decades, natural resources policy has dominated public 
discourse, usually with mixed results.
  During 1993 and 1994, Congress and the executive branch of Government 
have faced some big natural resource challenges affecting Washington 
State. We confronted one of the longest-running disputes ever--the Old 
Growth forest debate; and, we began to address what is perhaps the most 
complex--the Pacific Salmon crisis.
  Mr. President, I am going to spend a few minutes summarizing the 
actions, accomplishments, and shortfalls of the past 2 years, and talk 
about some of the challenges we will face in the next 2 years. This is 
very important, because how this Government handles these issues has--
and will have--a direct effect on the quality of life for everyone in 
Washington State.


                          CLINTON FOREST PLAN

  In 1992, the situation in our Federal forests was nearly impossible. 
Court injunction had brought everything to a halt. We faced the 
consequences of a decade of over-cutting, 5 years of mismanagement, 
inaction, litigation, and social divisions.
  President Clinton pledged his leadership to the Old Growth forest 
issue. He didn't have anything to gain by stepping in, other than 
trying to set forest policy back on its feet. The inherent controversy 
of the issue virtually guaranteed that one--or both--sides would be 
angered by his actions. The President's goal, in his own words, was to 
resolve the stalemate and bring the 25 million acres of national forest 
under a scientifically credible, legally responsible, and economically 
sustainable management plan. This is a goal I supported at the time, 
and one I still support today.
  After convening a ``forest summit'' in Portland during April 1993, 
the administration created the Forest Ecosystem Management Assessment 
Team. This team was composed of a variety of scientific experts and 
agency personnel. Its charge was to create a set of options for 
ensuring multi-species habitat conservation on the national forests, 
while permitting a sustainable timber harvesting program.
  The plan has not been without its critics. In fact, there have been 
no less than 15 challenges in Federal courts to the forest plan in the 
past summer from environmental groups and the timber industry lawyers 
alike. But, through unprecedented cooperation between Federal and State 
Governments, industry, private landowners, and communities throughout 
the Northwest, the plan is moving forward slowly but surely.
  On June 6, 1994, Judge William Dwyer issued an order dissolving the 
injunction banning timber sales from Federal lands. From that point 
forward, the forest plan went into effect. The first step toward 
resuming the timber sale program has been watershed analysis. This 
involves doing biological assessments of some 150 key watersheds 
throughout the region. Funds have been appropriated for these purposes 
the past 2 years.
  It is hoped these actions will result in a gradual resumption of 
timber sales to a sustainable level of 1 billion board feet per year. 
In the short term, such sales will include off-the-shelf sales that 
have been sold but not harvested, or that have been prepared but not 
sold. Added to an eastside harvest of several hundred million feet, the 
total amount is certainly more than we've seen in recent years. In the 
absence of the Clinton Forest Plan, I believe this entire issue would 
remain tangled in the courts, with little prospect of resuming timber 
management.
  Oral arguments on the legal validity of the plan will take place 
November 10, 1994. All of the pending challenges have been consolidated 
into one case. I eagerly anticipate a final ruling by Judge Dwyer 
before the end of this year on the plan.
  Government policies--first through in-action and now through action--
have created serious economic hardship in timber communities in 
Washington State since 1989. Therefore concurrent with the formation of 
the forest plan, President Clinton crafted the Northwest Economic 
Adjustment Initiative. This economic development aspect of the 
President's plan recognizes the responsibility of Government in helping 
these areas manage change constructively.
  The initiative establishes a framework to assist workers, businesses, 
and communities that rely on a forest-product based economy to adjust 
to their changing economies. The impacted timber communities can access 
funds through 18 existing Federal loan and grant programs. Since last 
year, counties and municipalities throughout the Pacific Northwest 
using resources under the plan have begun escaping the burdens of the 
timber sale injunctions.

  Under the initiative, more than $1.3 billion will be provided through 
congressional appropriation from 1993 through 1997 to the Pacific 
Northwest. In fiscal years 1994 and 1995, the Federal Assistance 
package was nearly $250 million each year.
  The fundamental principle of this plan is stewardship, and the key to 
its success is job creation. By taking care of our natural resources, 
we will be taking care of the towns and people who depend on them. 
Watersheds are being rebuilt and soil erosion is being controlled. 
Incentives are provided for non-Federal land managers to implement 
habitat conservation plans. Our forests are being managed to ensure 
biodiversity, high water quality, and a healthy environment over the 
long term.
  Programs provide displaced timber workers and their families with 
rent and mortgage assistance, job retraining benefits, additional funds 
for food banks, and a flexible mitigation fund, providing funds that 
otherwise would be locally unavailable to assist impacted families and 
individuals. Other programs address the needs of communities to 
replenish and diversify their economies. Grants and low interest loans 
fund the development of industrial areas, the redevelopment of 
downtowns, as well as developing the infrastructure of tourism.
  A big part of implementing the initiative successfully has been 
identifying barriers to participation and eliminating them. Some are 
administrative, and others are statutory. We haven't found them all, 
but we have over come several.
  On the administrative front, the Secretary of Agricultural signed an 
order early this year allowing watershed restoration contracts to be 
offered with a local award preference. This has been critical to 
ensuring job opportunities favor dislocated workers.
  Legislatively, obstacles were identified in the Forest Service 
Community Assistance Program and several Rural Development 
Administration [RDA] programs. Last year, I authored legislation with 
Senator Mark Hatfield and Rep. Norm Dicks to resolve the forest service 
issue in favor of communities such as Pt. Angeles and Aberdeen. This 
year, we passed a similar bill to open RDA programs to all timber 
communities.
  Earlier this year, I received a letter with good news from the city 
of Forks, one of several cities on the Olympic Peninsula hard bit by 
years of Federal timber policy mismanagement. They were celebrating the 
ground-breaking in March for a new mill. This mill will be the largest 
mill on the Northern Olympic Peninsula. It will create 42 jobs, and 
give the city of Forks the opportunity to market themselves to the 
secondary growth manufacturing sector. This would not have been 
possible without the $280,000 Rural Business Enterprise Grant to the 
city of Forks for the development of the Forks Industrial Park.
  Throughout the region, the initiative is designed to provide 31,000 
new job opportunities over 5 years. This morning I heard the national 
unemployment rate had fallen to a 4-year low of 5.9 percent. In 
Washington State, unemployment trend has been very promising. When I 
came to the Senate 2 years ago, double-digit unemployment rates were 
prevalent in counties throughout timber country. Last month, rates in 
these counties ranged from 5.1 percent in Clark, to 5.3 percent in 
Snohomish, to 5.9 percent in Jefferson, to 7.0 percent in Lewis, to 7.5 
percent in Skamania county. Statewide, the rate was 6.1 percent last 
month, compared with 7.5 percent 1 year ago.
  Housing starts in Washington State are up 3.1 percent over the past 
year, compared with annual 3 percent decreases over the previous 4 
years. The bottom line, Mr. President, is after years of conflict and 
controversy, things in my State are looking up.
  Mr. President, I have received other letters like this, as well as a 
year-end report summarizing Northwest Economic Adjustment Initiative. 
Each of these reports different successes of the program over the past 
year. I now ask unanimous consent that these materials be included in 
the Record.
  Mr. President, this plan is by no means perfect. It is very complex, 
and slow to implement. The region will endure years of transition in 
the future, and it should be clear to everyone the problems of the past 
cannot be cured quickly. However, we have made great progress from 
where we were in 1992. There has been a sea-change in forest policy, 
and a shift in direction for the land management agencies. I believe 
these changes are welcome in a region that has been rife with 
controversy for too long.


                            Salmon Recovery

  The forest plan set a precedent for resource management that will 
serve us well long into the future. This year, and in coming years, we 
will face what is perhaps the most complex natural resource question--
the Pacific Salmon crisis.
  Everywhere we look along the Pacific coast today, we see salmon runs 
in trouble. In the smallest coastal streams, to the most distant inland 
tributaries, returning wild salmon have dwindled year after year.
  In 1990, petitions were filed with National Marine Fisheries Service 
proposing Endangered Species Act protection for five salmon stocks. In 
December, 1991, the Snake River Sockeye were listed under the 
Endangered Species Act. In early 1992, they were joined by the Snake 
River Spring and Fall Chinook. Most recently, the National Marine 
Fisheries Service has announced plans to look at the prospect for 
extinction for every run of anadromous fish-all salmon, steelhead, and 
sea-run cutthroat trout--in the west.

  The seriousness of the situation struck home this spring, when the 
entire coastal fishing season was shut down as a result of poor ocean 
conditions. This led five counties and the State of Washington to 
declare a state of emergency. Commercial and recreational fishing 
interests went along with this policy, because they recognized the dire 
situation was are facing.
  In response to the problem, the Department of Commerce assembled a 
$15.7 million assistance package for fishing communities. This package 
hasn't been everything people would have liked, but it showed once 
again a government willing to step up and deliver when Government 
policies lead to economic hardships.
  The future for salmon is in doubt if there is not a comprehensive, 
coordinated plan that looks at each phase of the salmon life cycle. 
Such a plan can work on each agency of Government at each level works 
to solve the problem.
  Let me give an idea of how complex this issue has become:
  This year, there were three major court decisions finding the 
Government in violation of salmon-protection laws.
  There are no less than five Federal agencies with legal 
responsibility for keeping salmon healthy.
  There are four laws and two treaties binding us to salmon recovery, 
not including the Endangered Species Act.
  There are three administrative processes currently underway to 
address salmon recovery: the Recovery Plan for ESA-listed stocks; the 
Northwest Power Planning Council's Strategy for Salmon; and the 
Bonneville Power System Operational Review, a comprehensive EIS 
covering the entire Columbia/Snake River system.
  If any of these latter processes are remotely inconsistent, chances 
are that legal wrangling over salmon will continue.
  This past spring, U.S. District Court Judge Malcolm Marsh delivered a 
resounding wake-up call to the Northwest regarding salmon. He ruled on 
a suit brought by the States of Oregon and Idaho against the 1993 
biological opinion for salmon. Judge Marsh found, among other things, 
the National Marine Fisheries Service relied on flawed data to guide 
its conclusion that power dams pose ``no jeopardy'' to listed salmon. 
Overall, the judge condemned Government action to date by saying 
current efforts are ``too heavily geared toward a status quo that has 
allowed all forms of river activity to proceed in a deficit situation--
that is, relatively small steps, minor improvements and adjustements--
when the situation literally cries out for a major overhaul.''
  More recently, another sobering call echoed in the ears of the 
Federal agencies that manage Columbia River fish. The 9th U.S. Court of 
Appeals ordered the Northwest Power Planning Council to reconsider its 
strategy for salmon. Among other things, the Council was found at fault 
for not establishing biological objectives for salmon, and for not 
giving sufficient credence to recommendations by the affected tribes 
and States agencies.
  These decisions--when taken together are at once damning, sobering, 
and enlightening. They leave the Pacific Northwest one judicial step 
removed from total power system paralysis.
  This is the new reality we must face: the courts have effectively 
taken control of the issue. The 1994 biological opinion is based on the 
same flawed data used in the 1993 opinion, and several groups have 
already filed notice of intent to file suit against it; the status quo 
in the power system is now recognized as insufficient by the Federal 
courts.
  Mr. President, as I have said before, salmon are the lowest common 
denominator in our region. We must collectively decide--as a region and 
a people--that we are dedicated to recovering this species, and agree 
to put everything on the table to achieve this goal. All of us together 
must ask ourselves whether we are committed to recovering salmon to 
healthy, harvestable populations. It we are, then we must be willing to 
face the costs, consider every available option, and find a way to 
share the burden with equity.
  There is no silver bullet. A strong, broad-based recovery strategy is 
needed that addresses each phase of the salmon life cycle. Most 
importantly, all of these actions must be coordinated rationally to 
ensure that future crises are handled correctly. Each plan--the 
Recovery Plan, the United States-Canada Treaty, the Forest Plan, and 
the Power Planning Council's Strategy for Salmon--must all be 
coordinated together to ensure maximum benefit to the salmon. We must 
constantly remind ourselves the cost of acting now may be infinitely 
less than being forced to act later.
  This fall and winter, several critical decisions will be made 
affecting the course of the salmon debate. This December, the Power 
Planning Council will unveil its revised Strategy for Salmon. At 
roughly the same time, the National Marine Fisheries Service will 
unveil its draft final recovery plan. Finally, the settlement 
negotiations currently underway before Judge Marsh should yield an 
agreement for a multi-year river operating plan with biological 
objectives.
  Each of these plans must complement the others. They must all 
be consistent, and they must be coordinated. We will know very early 
next year whether significant progress has been made. I am committed to 
working with my colleagues in Congress and the Clinton administration 
to review these events next year and act as necessary to steer the 
region toward a rational salmon policy.


                         endangered species act

  One issue that faced more attention in Congress over the last 2 years 
than any other is the Endangered Species Act. If there is one State 
that has experienced the highs and lows of ESA more than any other, it 
is my State of Washington. People live in Washington because it is 
special. It is blessed with incredible natural beauty, and it provides 
a unique quality of life for all its citizens.
  Since enactment of ESA 20 years ago, to its saving of the bald eagle, 
to its role in the spotted owl debate, to the endangered salmon crisis 
today, it has always been part of the Washington State policy 
landscape.
  At the heart of almost any natural resource conflict you will find 
ESA. This is particularly true in my State. In the case of salmon, 
changing the Endangered Species Act [ESA] would only address the 
symptom, not the cause. Even without the ESA, we would still have a 
crisis on our hands. There are critics on the right who appear to be 
interested in repealing ESA, or gutting its essential principles; there 
are others on the left who don't want it touched. Let me be very clear 
on this: neither extreme is going to solve the problem.
  The problem we are facing is balancing competing values. The 
fundamantal premise of ESA remains valid: that by taking care of our 
ecosystems, we are ultimately taking care of ourselves. I truly believe 
each generation must leave the environment in no worse condition for 
the next. We also have economic development values that are fundamental 
to a democratic, free market society. Sometimes, these two sets of 
values come into conflict.
  Some have suggested that when such conflicts occur, the ESA is at 
fault, and therefore it must give way. We should not be so quick to 
generalize. As I mentioned above, there are a number of other Federal 
laws requiring actions to protect natural resources. These include the 
Northwest Power Planning and Conservation Act, the Magnuson Fisheries 
Conservation and Management Act, the United States-Canada Treaty, and 
United States treaty obligations under the Boldt decision, the National 
Environmental Policy Act, and the National Forest Management Act. The 
existence of these laws demonstrate that America has always placed a 
high priority on protecting the environment, and continues to do so.
  Until now, ESA has functioned as a fire alarm, going off when species 
are on the brink of extinction. Inevitably, this is a result of 
mismanagement, lack of coordination, or litigation. And it creates 
confusion, controversy, and acrimony. In short, a train wreck. Clearly, 
this is a problem. It affects the lives--and livelihoods--of many 
Washingtonians. Clearly we must find a way to make this law work better 
for people.
  I believe a little preventive medicine would make ESA work much 
better than driving an ambulance to the crash site every time. I've 
spent my whole life dealing with kids. Believe me when I tell you 
everybody wins when a child gets prenatal care, preventative health 
care, and head-start. I think the same would be true of ESA. If the 
agencies work together, ahead of the curve, sharing information and 
recognizing their mutual interests, I believe we can achieve the goals 
of ESA without creating economic chaos.
  I am prepared to support a moderate, thoughtful approach to ESA 
reauthorization that balances these competing concerns and enables the 
agencies of Government to work better for people in this country.


                               conclusion

  Mr. President, I have not begun to scratch the surface of all the 
natural resource issues facing Congress. The 104th Congress will no 
doubt spend innumerable hours wrestling with the challenges I have 
discussed here. But it will also be faced with many others.
  The Clean Water Act must be re-visited. Wetlands policy will continue 
to confound. The Farm bill will surface issues ranging from soil 
erosion, to pesticide use, to water quality. And we have a number of 
pollution-control laws in need of review.
  In the past 2 years, I have seen this system of government attempt to 
come to grips with environmental conflicts. It has not been easy. But I 
believe progress has been made on several fronts, and I will always 
subscribe to the theory that reasonable people can come together to 
solve problems. We almost saw it happen with the Superfund re-
authorization bill this year.
  We had a number of small victories as well. In addition to the 
community assistance bills I mentioned above, I pushed through a bill 
to preserve the ban on log exports from public lands. I also introduced 
early retirement legislation to help the Forest Service downsize to 
meet its changing mission and budget structure. This bill was enacted 
early this year as part of a larger government downsizing program. And 
finally, like so many other years, Congress used its power of the purse 
to steer environmental policy. The Interior appropriations 
subcommittee, on which I am privileged to serve, has provided funding 
to support the forest plan and help communities pursue conservation 
goals throughout the country.
  I look forward to the coming Congress with anticipation. There will 
be many on-going issues to monitor, especially involving forest policy 
and salmon recovery. The U.S. Senate and the House of Representatives 
should be the places where society finds its compromises. As always, 
the heart and soul of my home State will be at the center of our 
debates. I hope, as an institution, we will be able to work through our 
differences and find solutions that serve the interest of our States, 
our constituents, our families, and future generations.
  The material follows:

    The President's Economic Adjustment Initiative for the Pacific 
   Northwest and Northern California--Implementation in Washington, 
                        State--Fiscal Year 1994

       Timber impact areas: Chelan; Clallam; Columbia; Cowlitz; 
     Ferry; Grays Harbor; Kittitas; Klickitat; Lewis; Mason; 
     Okanogan; Pacific; Pend Orielle; East Skagit; East Snohomish; 
     Stevens; Whatcom; Yakima; Quilcene, Queets, Clearwater in 
     Jefferson County * * *.


                                preface

       Washington state has been responding to the impacts of 
     federal forest management policies since 1989. Programs 
     provide displaced timber workers and their families with rent 
     and mortgage assistance, timber retraining benefits, 
     additional funds for food banks, and a flexible mitigation 
     fund. This fund provides resources that otherwise would be 
     locally unavailable to assist impacted individuals and 
     families.
       A notable success in this area is the ``New Chance'' 
     Program. New Chance is a 10-week program for unemployed men 
     and women who need or want help in exploring retraining 
     options and new career opportunities. Coursework is 
     customized to meet individual needs, and may include self-
     esteem assessment, life planning, interest inventories, 
     reading, writing, math and computer training, as well as 
     education and training exploration.
       Other state programs address the needs of communities to 
     replenish and diversify their economies. Grants and low 
     interest loans fund the development of industrial areas, the 
     redevelopment of downtowns, as well as tourism support 
     facilities.
       An example of a success in this area is the partnership 
     between the Timber Public Works Trust Fund and the Community 
     Economic Recovery Board to finance a water project for the 
     City of Omak in Okanogan County. The project resulted in a 
     new water supply for the city so that it could pursue its 
     economic diversification strategy. It also gave Omak Wood 
     Products the means to retain 400 jobs and satisfy 
     Environmental Protection Agency water discharge requirements.
       Another state priority is the development of value-added 
     forest products industries. The state's Forest Products 
     Program provides technical assistance, grants and loans to 
     firms wishing to diversify, retool, expand into new markets 
     and develop new product lines.
       The example from Forest Products program:
       During the 1993 state legislature two programs were created 
     with the goals of habitat restoration and job creation. To 
     date, the program has granted a total of $8,398,033 to 30 
     projects utilizing $6.5 million appropriated to Jobs of the 
     Environment and $8 million for fish restoration. These 
     projects will create 359 new jobs of displaced forest 
     products workers.
       The state continues its commitment to the timber impacted 
     workers, communities and businesses of the state. The 
     President's Initiative enhances these efforts.

                           *   *   *   *   *



the wa-cert

                           *   *   *   *   *


       Appendix B provides the complete listing of these projects 
     and their status at the close of the federal fiscal year.


                           highlights of 1994

       This section highlights accomplishments in four broad 
     categories: 1) Workers and Families, 2) Communities and 
     Infrastructure, 3) Business and Industry and 4) Ecosystem 
     Enhancement.

                           Workers and family

       The Department of Labor awarded two grants through the Se 
     Title III Secretary's Reserve. The first grant was to the 
     Olympic Consortium. The Olympia Consortium serves Clallam, 
     Jefferson and Kitsap Counties. The $1.2 grant will be used to 
     provide retraining assistance to workers.
       The second grant of $600,000 was awarded to the Pacific 
     Mountain blank blank. The PTC is using the funds to augment 
     an earlier grant received when the ITT Rayonier plant closed 
     in Grays Harbor County.
       Of the $12 million available to the region in DOL Title III 
     monies, $1.2 million were allocated in Washington state.

                     Communities and infrastructure

       Funding in this category is available the Economic 
     Development Administration (EDA), the USDA Farmers Home, 
     Rural Development Administration (RDA), the US Forest Service 
     (USFS) and state resources.
       The US Forest Service awarded $2.7 million in grants to 
     projects in timber impact counties. Awards range from an 
     $18,000 grant to the Skamania Economic Development Council 
     for the Downtown Stevenson Improvement Project, to a $40,000 
     grant to the City of Cosmopolis in Grays Harbor County for 
     and Inflow and Infiltration Study, the first step towards the 
     community solving a sewer system problem.
       The Cosmopolis project is one example of agencies working 
     together to benefit a community. When the USFS funded study 
     is complete, RDA will step to the table to begin structuring 
     the financial package for construction phase of the project.
       Another example of partnering is the City of Oroville's 
     Dorothy Scott Airport Light Industrial Park. This project got 
     its start prior to the Initiative when the state's Timber 
     Public Works Trust Fund and Community Economic Revitalization 
     Board provided $175,000 in loans and $500,000 grant to the 
     project. Then the USFS stepped to the table with a $150,000 
     grant. The final piece of the financing puzzle is a $790,000 
     EDA grant, which is imminently pending. The project will 
     foster creation of 175 jobs.
       Of the $3 million available to the region in EDA Technical 
     Capacity grants were awarded to jurisdictions in Washington 
     state.
       RDA has been very successful in investing its allocations 
     in Washington state. Highlights include a $2,399,400 
     Community Facilities loan to the Quinault Indian Nation for 
     consolidation of its administrative buildings, a $280,000 
     Rural Business Enterprise Grant to the City of Forks for the 
     Forks Industrial Park Project, and a $1,200,000 Water and 
     Wastewater grant and $2,102,600 in loans to the Malaga Water 
     District in Chelan County.

                           *   *   *   *   *


Ecosystem enhancement

                           *   *   *   *   *


       The USFS allocated $6,327,000 to 202 Jobs in the Woods 
     contracts. Nearly all the program was through small contracts 
     to local individuals and businesses. Wages ranged from $10.64 
     to $24.95, with most over $15.43 plus fringe benefits. 
     Projects occurred in the Gifford Pinchot, Okanogan, Olympic, 
     Mount Baker-Snoqaulmie and Wenatchee National Forests. 
     Overall, the USFS employed displaced timber workers on 
     restoration projects.
       The USFS entered into a partnership with the Pacific 
     Mountain PIC and the Grays Harbor Reemployment Center. The 
     success of this effort is described below.
                                  ____


                         Partnering for Success

                           (By Glenda Burch)

       The Olympic National Forest (USFS) and the Pacific Mountain 
     Private Industry Council (PIC) entered into a Participating 
     Agreement to complete USFS restoration projects while 
     providing, as well as training and development, to dislocated 
     timber workers who lack adequate skills to compete for public 
     or private sector jobs in the field of ecosystem restoration.
       The Agreement was reached after numerous discussion with 
     the Governor's Timber Team, the USFS, and later the PIC and 
     members of the WA-CERT. As the USFS has the responsibility 
     for administration of lands in the National Forest, and the 
     PIC has a large population of dislocated timber workers, it 
     seemed that each entity could possibly benefit the other. 
     They realized the advantages of forming a partnership to 
     accomplish individual goals.
       The USFS agreed to provide technical oversight of specific 
     projects and to reimburse the PIC for expenses incurred on a 
     time and materials basis (versus putting jobs out for bid). 
     The PIC agreed to recruit, train, employ and supervise local 
     dislocated timber workers to complete USFS restoration 
     projects.
       As a result of this Agreement, ten local dislocated workers 
     are employed at family wage jobs. In addition, participants 
     receive coverage through the Washington State Basic Health 
     Plan, standard unemployment insurance coverage, and Workmen's 
     Compensation Coverage. The workers demonstrated the ability 
     to quickly learn the complex and specialized tasks involved 
     in watershed and timber restoration and receiving college 
     credit for their training.
       This Agreement allows the USFS to: a) participate in the 
     restoration of the resource bases and the economies and lives 
     that have long depended on that base, and b) meet the goals 
     set for it by the Administration of using currently 
     appropriate funds to the benefit of dislocated timber workers 
     and their communities.
       This project demonstrates the value of forming partnerships 
     which create win-win situations for all: the dislocated 
     timber workers, timber impacted communities, local and 
     federal agencies, and the natural resources base.
       It shows what can be done when people are willing to work 
     together.
                                  ____


  JOBS IN THE WOODS, FISCAL YEAR 1994--U.S. FOREST SERVICE IN WASHINGTON STATE--WATERSHED RESTORATION CONTRACT  
                                  ACTIVITY SUMMARY ESTIMATED FOR SEPT. 30, 1994                                 
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                 GIP           OKA           OLY           MBS           WEN          Totals    
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Number contracts..........            35            14            66            47            40             202
Number people.............  ............  ............  ............  ............            76  ..............
Hourly wages..............                                                                                      
(5) $10.64 to $24.95--most                                                                                      
 over $15.43 plus fringe                                                                                        
 benefits                                                                                                       
Pieces equipment..........  ............  ............  ............  ............            76  ..............
Days worked...............  ............  ............  ............  ............           800  ..............
                           =====================================================================================
Dollar awards to date.....      $300,000       $64,000      $513,000    $1,300,000      $800,000      $2,977,000
To be awarded.............       500,000       450,000     1,200,000       700,000       500,000      3,350,000 
                           -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Total dollars.......       800,000       514,000     1,713,000     2,000,000     1,300,000    \1\6,327,000
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\Please note that this is direct dollar amount to contractors. Total appropriation for the Forests in the     
  State was $8,300,000 which includes project planning and contract administration.                             
                                                                                                                
Note.--Nearly all the program was through small contracts to local individuals and businesses. There were a few 
  agreements with ``Private Industry Councils'', ``WA Conservation Corps'' and others (less than 5 percent) who 
  hire woods workers direct. The attached report from the Wenatchee National Forest provides an example of the  
  magnitude of the program and how successful it was at targeting jobs in the impact countries. ``Competition   
  territory procedures'' on the attachment were used.                                                           


                                              WENATCHEE NATIONAL FOREST FISCAL YEAR 1994 JOBS IN THE WOODS                                              
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                                                             No.        No.             
       Contract no.               Contractor county             County of award           Award     Wage from   Wage to   employees  equipment    Work  
                                                                                         amount                                                   days  
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1..........................  Yak........................  Chel.......................       $6,400      14.09  .........          1          1  Incomp  
2..........................  Yak........................  Chel.......................       12,600      14.09  .........          1          1  Incomp  
3..........................  King.......................  Kit........................       12,000      16.43  .........          1          1  Incomp  
4..........................  Kit........................  Yak........................      127,000      16.18  .........          3          2  Incomp  
5..........................  Kit........................  Kit........................       10,700      16.18      22.00          1          1  Incomp  
6..........................  Yak........................  Yak........................        7,400      22.05  .........          1          1  Incomp  
7..........................  Yak........................  Yak........................       14,900      22.05  .........          1          1  Incomp  
8..........................  King.......................  Kit........................       25,000      15.43      21.25          2          2  21 days 
9..........................  Chel.......................  Chel.......................       59,000      13.71      22.31         10         10  Incomp  
10.........................  Chel.......................  Chel.......................      116,000      17.86      25.80          2          2  Incomp  
11.........................  Chel.......................  Chel.......................       65,000      17.86      25.80          2          2  Incomp  
12.........................  Chel.......................  Chel.......................        7,000      19.58  .........          1          1  Incomp  
13.........................  Chel.......................  Chel.......................       80,000      19.58  .........          9          9  Incomp  
14.........................  Chel.......................  Chel.......................       29,000      17.86      25.80          2          2  Incomp  
15.........................  Chel.......................  Chel.......................       73,000      13.71  .........          1          1  Incomp  
16.........................  Pierce.....................  Kit........................       21,800      16.18      22.00          1          1  Incomp  
17.........................  Oka........................  Chel.......................       80,000      17.86      25.80          7          7  Incomp  
18.........................  Yak........................  Yak........................        4,000      10.64  .........          3  .........  36 day  
19.........................  Chel.......................  Chel.......................       12,000      18.45  .........          1          1  14 day  
20.........................  Chel.......................  Chel.......................       12,000      18.45  .........          1          1  11 day  
21.........................  Chel.......................  Chel.......................        4,400      18.45  .........          1  .........  9 day   
22.........................  Yak........................  Yak........................       13,000      24.95  .........          1          1  14 day  
23.........................  Yak........................  Yak........................        8,000      24.95  .........          1          1  21 day  
24.........................  Yak........................  Yak........................        8,000      24.95  .........          1          1  21 day  
25.........................  Chel.......................  Chel.......................       20,000      18.45  .........          1          1  14 day  
26.........................  Snoh.......................  Kiti.......................       16,000      16.88      22.00          1          1  Incomp  
27.........................  Yak........................  Yak........................       17,000      18.00      22.00          1          1  Incomp  
28.........................  King.......................  Yak........................        6,000      18.00      22.00          1          1  Incomp  
29.........................  Yak........................  Yak........................        6,000      18.00      22.00          1          2  Incomp  
30.........................  Kiti.......................  Kiti.......................        7,000      22.00  .........          1          2  Incomp  
31.........................  Yak........................  Yak........................       46,000      18.00      22.00          1          2  Incomp  
32.........................  ...........................  Nach.......................       20,000      18.00  .........          1          1  Incomp  
33.........................  ...........................  Nach.......................       15,000      16.88  .........          2          1  Incomp  
34.........................  ...........................  Nach.......................        5,000      16.88  .........          1          1  Incomp  
35.........................  ...........................  Nach.......................       15,000      22.00  .........          1          2  Incomp  
36.........................  ...........................  Chel.......................      130,000      16.88      22.00          4          4  Incomp  
37.........................  ...........................  Chel.......................        9,000      18.00  .........          1          1  Incomp  
38.........................  ...........................  Cle........................       10,000      16.88  .........          1          1  Incomp  
39.........................  ...........................  Cle........................        9,000      18.00  .........          1          1  Incomp  
40.........................  ...........................  Cle........................       48,000      16.88      18.00          1          2  Incomp  
                                                                                      ---------------------------------------------------------         
      Actual award total...  ...........................  ...........................      925,000  .........  .........  .........  .........  ........
      Estimated 9/30 total.  ...........................  ...........................    1,300,000  .........  .........         56         51  ........
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Note.--The awarded amounts are probably higher by now due to modifications.                                                                             

    K. 15 Certification of Location Within ``Competition Territory''

       Definition. The term, ``Competition Territory,'' as used in 
     this solicitation, means the geographical area within which 
     the offeror must have an existing and ongoing place of 
     business, so as to qualify the offeror as being eligible to 
     be considered for contract award.
       Competition is limited to individuals and businesses within 
     the following counties:
       Washington: Okanogan, Douglas, Chelan, Kittitas, Yakima, 
     Klickitat, Skamania, Clark, Cowlitz, Wahkiakum, Pacific, 
     Lewis, Pierce, Thurston, Grays Harbor, Mason, Jefferson, 
     Clallam, Kitsap, Island, San Juan, King, Snohomish, Skagit, 
     and Whatcom;
       Oregon: Wasco, Jefferson, Deschutes, Lake, Klamath, 
     Jackson, Josephine, Curry, Coos, Douglas, Lane, Linn, Benton, 
     Lincoln, Marion, Yamhill, Polk, Clackamas, Multnomah, Hood 
     River, Tillamook, Washington, Columbia, and Clatsop;
       California: Siskiyou, Shasta, Tehama, Glenn, Lake, Trinity, 
     Humboldt, Del Norte, and Mendocino.
       Certification. The offeror certifies that it [] IS [] IS 
     NOT located in the competition territory counties as listed 
     above.
       Penalty for False Certification. Any contract awarded as a 
     result of a false certification will be subject to 
     termination and reprocurement. Any offeror who falsely 
     certifies will be subject to criminal penalties and all 
     reasonable costs associated with termination and 
     reprocurement.
                                  ____

                                                    Clallam County


                                        Commissioners' Office,

                                 Port Angeles, WA, August 9, 1994.
     Hon. Sidney R. Yates,
     Washington, DC.
       Dear Senator Yates: Re: HR 4602. We County Commissioners 
     are on the front lines in our community and have an intimate 
     knowledge of the impacts of the decisions that have created 
     the current need for Northwest Economic Adjustment Initiative 
     (NWEAI) We are aware of the WA-CERT process as we have 
     representatives and observers in attendance at the meetings. 
     You have used the Department of Interior and the United 
     States Forest Service of the Department of Agriculture 
     appropriation's bill in the past to fund the Initiative. We 
     are concerned about funding levels and funding issues in for 
     fiscal 1995 (H.R. 4602) as the United States Forest Service 
     and the Department of the Interior are the two main sources 
     of the funds for the economic initiative. We believe that the 
     very life of our communities depends on the continuance of 
     the Initiative's funding as promised by the Administration
       We believe that the process that has been developed by the 
     WA-CERT to disperse the funds is working. As with any new 
     approach to a problem it has taken time for the system to get 
     in place. We believe that many of the barriers and 
     impediments that have slowed the train of funding to the 
     communities have been changed, identified or are in the works 
     to be changed to make the process work. All the agencies that 
     are at the table are working out conflicts in time-tables, 
     accepting responsibility to be lead agency and finding 
     appropriate shortcuts for the applicants to speed-up the 
     process. In some cases, using each other's applications is 
     helping cut down the mountains of paper. We find this very 
     refreshing as opposed to each agency working in isolation. 
     That is not to say that there are not levels of the agencies 
     that seem to still think in old ways.
       The exciting thing that is happening on the home front is 
     that all the entities such as the Cities, County, Tribes, 
     Non-profits, groups and individuals with an idea are talking 
     together and no longer working in isolation. The Initiative 
     has caused applicants within a number of county to sit down 
     together and, again, together set priorities for funding 
     requests. This process has helped develop a comprehensive 
     picture of their needs and barriers. As they talk together 
     they are discovering how projects fit together and which 
     should come first in the scheme of things. The priority 
     criterion in the prioritization process is job development. 
     We are delivering projects to the CERT for their 
     consideration that will produce jobs, improve our economy and 
     give our community's stability.

                                 Alaska

       We are thankful for the additional $4 million USFS funds 
     for Community Assistance and Old Growth Diversification that 
     the Senate Budget proposed. We suggest that the Conference 
     Committee send funds for Alaska through the Forest Service. 
     Alaska can then develop their own program.
       We do not believe that including Alaska's funding in with 
     the three States that have been impacted by the President's 
     Forest Plan is appropriate. Including Alaska could slow the 
     process for the States now under the plan while Alaska works 
     to get on line. We have concerns that their inclusion in the 
     budget for the NWEAI would cause problems for the Alaska 
     People due to the complex process involving local, state and 
     federal people currently in place. We support the aid to the 
     Alaska Communities that have been devastated by mill closures 
     and other forest related problems. We believe they should be 
     funded in a separate line item and based on our experience, 
     as soon as possible.


                      funds for eastern washington

       We urge the Conference Committee to recognize the immediacy 
     of East Side problems and increase the appropriation within 
     the President's Northwest Economic Adjustment Initiative for 
     those areas.
       The devastating fires that are still burning have really 
     highlighted the concern many of us have had over the last 
     number of years. That part of the state had already started 
     to feel the impact of changing Federal forest policies and 
     now the fires have created incredible urgency for assistance 
     to that part of the state.


         jobs in the woods under the department of the interior

       We urge the Conference Committee to seriously consider 
     funding the full $30 million as requested by the 
     Administration. We understood that the President's Northwest 
     Economic Adjustment Initiative is based on a Memorandum of 
     Understanding with the three states for an annual 
     appropriation of $30 million. This program is vital to the 
     recovery of many timber families. There are plans in the 
     process that will bring together planners at the federal, 
     state and local levels to develop plans for watershed 
     restoration from the sea to the mountain top. Watershed 
     Restoration is vital to our forest--we must have the funding 
     to accomplish this task. Many of our counties are also 
     impacted by the salmon issue. The Jobs in the Woods program 
     is also beneficial to the fish in the streams that will be 
     enhanced.


                        usfs stewardship program

       We believe that watershed restoration is the base of the 
     President's Forest Plan and that the Stewardship program 
     assists in the inclusion of the state and private lands in 
     the process. The Stewardship program should be funded at the 
     Administrations requested level of $4 million. Watershed 
     restoration work across the landscape is a vital portion of 
     The Forest Plan. National Forest System Funds can not be used 
     for work on state and private lands. We need the flexibility 
     of Stewardship Funds as we work to accomplish the work of 
     improving the health of our streams and meeting the needs of 
     the various species that use those areas. Again, there will 
     also be jobs available to the workers. Due to the lower 
     elevations of many of these lands, this could stretch the 
     number of months available for working in woods.


                   old growth diversification funding

       We urge the Conference Committee to fund the Old Growth 
     Diversification program at the FY 94 level of $6,410,000. As 
     we work to assist our timber dependent communities, the 
     people that have worked on WA CERT and at home have found 
     that this program has been the most useful one in the NWEAI 
     due to its' flexibility We believe the amount appropriated by 
     both houses is not sufficient. We understand the need to have 
     a balanced budget. This item is so important we would support 
     the above level even if it was necessary to consider reducing 
     other Initiative programs.
       We can give you real-life examples of what we are doing in 
     our county with the help of the NWEAI.
       Our families and the County Governments that serve them are 
     struggling with the economic impacts and the social 
     consequences of the Federal decisions that have changed our 
     lives. We are constantly trying to manage with the tighter 
     budgets as are you. We feel the pain of our people as we see 
     them every day. We need the help as indicated above. We thank 
     you for your time as you consider our request and sincerely 
     hope you will provide the economic assistance requested.
                                                Lawrence Gaydeske,
                                                            Chair.
                                  ____



                      timber county commissioners

       Asotin County Commissioner Harley Williams.
       Columbia County Commissioner George Wood.
       Garfield County Commissioner Steve Ledgerwood.
       Chelan County Commissioner Tom Green.
       Clallam County Commissioner Lawrence Gaydeski.
       Clark County Commissioner John Magnano.
       Cowlitz County Commissioner Van Youngquist.
       Ferry County Commissioner Gary Kohler.
       Grays Harbor County Commissioner Dick Dixon.
       Island County Commissioner Mike Shelton.
       Jefferson County Commissioner Robert Hinton.
       King County Councilmember Ken Pullen.
       King County Executive Gary Locke.
       Kintsap County Commissioner Win Granlund.
       Kittitas County Commissioner Don Sorenson.
       Klickitat County Commissioner Ron Ihrig.
       Lewis County Commissioner Richard Graham.
       Mason County Commissioner Marv Faughender.
       Okanogan County Commissioner Ed Thiele.
       Pacific County Commissioner Pat Hamilton.
       Pend Oreille County Commissioner Mike Hanson.
       Pierce County Councilmember Dennis Flannigan.
       Pierce County Executive Doug Sutherland.
       San Juan County Commissioner Tom Starr.
       Skagit County Commissioner Harvey Wolden.
       Skamania County Commissioner Dean Evans.
       Snohomish County Councilmember Karen Miller.
       Snohomish County Executive Bob Drewel.
       Stevens County Commissioner Fran Bessermin.
       Thurston County Commissioner Dick Nichols.
       Wahkiakum County Commissioner Red Almer.
       Watcom County Councilmember Bob Imhof.
       Whatcom County Executive Shirley Van Zanten.
       Yakima County Commissioner Chuck Klarich.
                                  ____

                                                   Okanogan County


                                        Commissioners' Office,

                                    Okanogan, WA, August 23, 1994.
     To: Members of the Interior Appropriations Conference 
         Committee.
     From: Timber County Commissioners in Washington State.
     Re: HR 4602.
       We County Commissioners are on the front lines in our 
     community and have an intimate knowledge of the impacts of 
     the decisions that have created the current need for 
     Northwest Economic Adjustment Initiative. (NWEAI) We are 
     aware of the WA-Cert process as we have representatives and 
     observers in attendance at the meetings. You have used the 
     Department of Interior and the United States Forest Service 
     of the Department of Agriculture appropriation's bill in the 
     past to fund the Initiative. We are concerned about funding 
     levels and funding issues in for fiscal 1995 (H.R. 4602) as 
     the United States Forest Service and the Interior are the two 
     main sources of the funds for the economic initiative. We 
     believe that the very life of our communities depends on the 
     continuance of the Initiative's funding as promised by the 
     Administration.
       We believe that the processes that have been developed by 
     the WA-CERT to disperse the funds are working. As with any 
     new approach to a problem it has taken time for the system to 
     get in place. We believe that many of the barriers and 
     impediments that have slowed the train of funding to the 
     communities have been changed, identified or are in the works 
     to be changed to make the process work. All the agencies that 
     are at the table are working out conflicts in time-tables, 
     accepting responsibility to be lead agency and finding 
     appropriate shortcuts for the applicants to speed-up the 
     process. In some cases, using each other's applications is 
     helping cut down the mountains of paper. We find this very 
     refreshing as opposed to each agency working in isolation. 
     That is not to say that there are not levels of the agencies 
     that seem to still think in old ways.
       The exciting thing that is happening on the home front is 
     that all the entities such as the Cities, County, Tribes, 
     Non-profits, groups and individuals with an idea are talking 
     together and no longer working in isolation. The Initiative 
     has caused the applicants within each county to sit down 
     together, and again, together set priorities for funding 
     requests. This process has helped develop a comprehensive 
     picture of their needs and barriers. As they talk together 
     they are discovering how projects fit together and which 
     should come first in the scheme of things. The priority 
     criterion in the prioritization process is job development. 
     We are delivering projects to the CERT for their 
     consideration that will produce jobs, improve our economy and 
     give our community's stability.


                      funds for eastern washington

       We urge the Conference Committee to recognize the immediacy 
     of East Side problems and increase the appropriation within 
     the President's Northwest Economic Adjustment Initiative for 
     those areas. The devastating fires that are still burning 
     have really highlighted the concern many of us have had over 
     the last number of years. That part of the state had already 
     started to feel the impact of changing Federal forest 
     policies and now the fires have created incredible urgency 
     for assistance to that part of the state.


           jobs in the woods under the department of interior

       We urge the Conference Committee to seriously consider 
     funding the full $30 million as requested by the 
     Administration. We understood that President's Northwest 
     Economic Adjustment Initiative is based on a Memorandum of 
     Understanding with the three states for annual appropriation 
     of $30 million. This program is vital to the recovery of many 
     timber families. There are plans in the process that will 
     bring together planners at the federal, state and local 
     levels to develop plans for watershed restoration from the 
     sea to the mountain top. Watershed Restoration is vital to 
     our forest. We must have the funding to accomplish this task. 
     Many of our counties are also impacted by the salmon issue. 
     The jobs in the Woods program is also beneficial to the fish 
     in the streams that will be enhanced.


                            usfs stewardship

       We believe that watershed restoration is the base of the 
     President's Forest Plan and that the Stewardship program 
     assists in the inclusion of the state and private lands in 
     the process. The Stewardship program should be funded at the 
     Administrations requested level of $4 million. Watershed 
     restoration work across the landscape is vital portion of The 
     Forest Plan. USFS funds can not be used for work on state and 
     private lands. We need the flexibility of these funds as we 
     work to accomplish the work of improving the health of our 
     streams and the meeting the needs of the various species that 
     use those areas. Again, there will also be jobs available to 
     the workers. Due to the lower elevation of many of these 
     lands, this could stretch the number of months available for 
     working in the woods.
       For the impacts and future benefits please see the letter 
     from Ron Nielsen, Executive Director of Olanogan County 
     Council for Economic Development.
     Edwin E. Thiele,
       Chairman.
     Ronald V. Weeks,
       Member.
     Dave Schulz,
       Member.
                                  ____

                                           Okanogan County Council


                                     for Economic Development,

                                                  August 19, 1994.
     Commissioner Ed Thiele,
     Okanogan, WA.
     In response to Harriette Buchmann's letter dated August 1994.
       Dear Commissioner Thiele: Regarding the President's Federal 
     Economic Adjustment Initiative (NWEAI), we are still very 
     early in the program to give you detailed analysis of 
     benefits. However, here's what I can provide as of this 
     moment.
       There were 16 Okanogan County applications submitted in 
     February of 1994, of which two applications have been 
     awarded. The two applications are:
       The City of Oroville's request for funding associated with 
     their industrial park. The city was awarded $790,000 from the 
     Economic Development Association from the US Department of 
     Commerce and a $150,000 grant from the US Forest Service 
     Department of Agriculture.
       The other award was made to our office in the amount of 
     $60,000 to develop and implement a business investment plan 
     for the communities of Oroville and Twisp Industrial Parks. 
     OCCED will also serve as the focal point of coordination in 
     Okanogan County for the Federal Economic Adjustment 
     Initiative.
       Anticipated benefits from this program would be as follows:
       In the City of Oroville the federal funding filled the 
     financial gap to complete the construction of the Industrial 
     Park, which should begin the later part of this year or the 
     beginning of 95 (weather permitting) with the park expected 
     to be turn key in the later part of 95 or the early part of 
     96. The Federal investment of $940,000 was a significant 
     portion of the overall $1.6 million to build the park without 
     that there would be no Oroville Industrial Park. Regarding 
     OCED's work in the recruitment of industrial tenants, we 
     anticipate that we will have two anchor tenants creating 
     approximately 60 new jobs with an estimated annual payroll of 
     $1.5 million which will be directly infused into the area 
     economy. Using the economic multiplier of 2.1, the estimated 
     economic value realized by Okanogan County would be 
     $3,150,000, and its anticipated that the employment in the 
     park the second year could conservatively double.
       In closing please remember we are still very early in the 
     program and will be glad to give you a more detailed analysis 
     at a later date. If you have any questions please feel free 
     to contact me.
           Regards,
                                                      Ron Nielsen,
                                        Executive Director, OCCED.
                                  ____

                                              Pend Oreille County,


                                       Board of Commissioners,

                                     Newport, WA, August 15, 1994.
     To: Patty Murray.
       We, Pend Oreille County Commissioners, are on the front 
     lines in our community and have an intimate knowledge of the 
     impacts of the decisions that have created the current need 
     for Northwest Economic Adjustment Initiative (NWEAI). We are 
     aware of the WA-CERT process as we have representatives and 
     observers in attendance at the meetings. You have used the 
     Department of Interior and the United States Forest Service 
     of the Department of Agriculture appropriations bill in the 
     past to fund the Initiative. We are concerned about funding 
     levels and funding issues in fiscal 1995 (H.R. 4602) as the 
     United States Forest Service and the Interior are the two 
     main sources of the funds for the economic initiative. We 
     believe that the very life of our communities depends on the 
     continuance of the Initiative's funding as promised by the 
     Administration.
       We believe that the processes that have been developed by 
     the WA-CERT to disperse the funds are working. As with any 
     new approach to a problem it has taken time for the system to 
     get in place. We believe that many of the barriers and 
     impediments that have slowed the train of funding to the 
     communities have been changed, identified or are in the works 
     to be changed to make the process work. All the agencies that 
     are at the table are working out conflicts in time-tables, 
     accepting responsibility to be lead agency and finding 
     appropriate shortcuts for the applicants to speed up the 
     process. In some cases, using each other's applications is 
     helping cut down the mountains of paper. We find this very 
     refreshing as opposed to each agency working in isolation. 
     That is not to say that there are not levels of the agencies 
     that seem to still think in old ways.
       The exciting thing that is happening on the home front is 
     that all the entities such as the Cities, County, Tribes, 
     Non-profits, groups and individuals with an idea are talking 
     together and no longer working in isolation. The initiative 
     has caused the applicants within each county to sit down 
     together and again, together, set priorities for funding 
     requests. This process has helped develop a comprehensive 
     picture of their needs and barrier. As they talk together 
     they are discovering how projects fit together and which 
     should come first in the scheme of things. The priority 
     criterion in the prioritization process is job development. 
     We are delivering projects to the CERT for their 
     consideration that will produce jobs, improve our economy and 
     give our communities stability.

                                 Alaska

       We are thankful for the additional $4 million USFS funds 
     for Community Assistance and Old Growth Diversification that 
     the Senate Budget proposed. We ask that you accept their 
     recommendation and divide the amount equally among the four 
     states. We encourage you to earmark the funds for the 
     three states impacted by the President's Forest plan 
     through the NWEAI and send funds for Alaska through the 
     Forest Service. Alaska can develop their own program.
       We do not believe that including Alaska's funding in with 
     the three states that have been impacted by the President's 
     Forest Plan is appropriate. Including Alaska could slow the 
     process for the states now under the plan while Alaska works 
     to get on line. We have concerns that their inclusion in the 
     budget for the NWEAI would cause problems for the Alaska 
     people due to the complex process involving local, state and 
     federal people currently in place. We support the aid to the 
     Alaska communities that have been devastated by mill closures 
     and other forest related problems. We believe they should be 
     funded in a separate line item and based on our experience, 
     as soon as possible.


                      funds for eastern washington

       We urge the Conference Committee to recognize the immediacy 
     of East Side problems and increase the appropriation within 
     the President's Northwest Economic Adjustment Initiative for 
     these areas. The devastating fires that are still burning 
     have really highlighted the concern many of us have had over 
     the last number of years. That part of the state had already 
     started to feel the impact of changing Federal forest 
     policies and now the fires have created incredible urgency 
     for assistance to that part of the state.


           jobs in the woods under the department of interior

       We urge the Conference Committee to seriously consider 
     funding the full $30 million as requested by the 
     Administration. We understood that the President's Northwest 
     Economic Adjustment Initiative is based on a Memorandum of 
     Understanding with the three states for an annual 
     appropriation of $30 million. This program is vital to the 
     recovery of many timber families. There are plans in the 
     process that will bring together planners at the federal, 
     state and local levels to develop plans for watershed 
     restoration from the sea to the mountain top. Watershed 
     Restoration is vital to our forest. We must have the funding 
     to accomplish this task. Many of our counties are also 
     impacted by the salmon issue. The Jobs in the Woods program 
     is also beneficial to the fish in the streams that will be 
     enhanced.


                            usfs stewardship

       We believe that watershed restoration is the base of the 
     President's Forest Plan and that the Stewardship program 
     assists in the inclusion of the state and private lands in 
     the process. The Stewardship program should be funded at the 
     Administrations request level of $4 million. Watershed 
     restoration work across the landscape is a vital portion of 
     the Forest Plan. USFS funds cannot be used for work on state 
     and private lands. We need the flexibility of these funds as 
     we work to accomplish the work of improving the health of our 
     streams and meeting the needs of the various species that use 
     those areas. Again, there will also be jobs available to the 
     workers. Due to the lower elevations of many of these lands, 
     this could stretch the number of months available for working 
     in woods.


                   old growth diversification funding

       We urge the Conference Committee to fund the Old Growth 
     Diversification program at the FY 94 level of $6,410,000. As 
     we work to assist our timber dependent communities, the 
     people that have worked on WA-CERT and at home have found 
     that this program has been the most useful one in the NWEAI 
     due to its flexibility. We believe the amount appropriated by 
     both houses is not sufficient. We understand the need to have 
     a balanced budget. This item is so important we would support 
     the above level even if it was necessary to consider reducing 
     other initiative programs.
       We can give you real-life examples of what we are doing in 
     our county with the help of NWEAI.
       Our families and the County Governments that serve them are 
     struggling with the economic impacts and the social 
     consequences of the Federal decisions that have changed our 
     lives. We are constantly trying to manage with the tighter 
     budgets as are you. We feel the pain of our people as we see 
     them every day. We need the help as indicated above. We thank 
     you for your time as you consider our request and sincerely 
     hope you will provide the economic assistance requested.
           Sincerely,
     Mike Hanson,
       Chairman.
     Micahel D. Keogh,
       Member.
     Karl D. McKenzie,
       Member.

                          ____________________