[Congressional Record Volume 142, Number 97 (Thursday, June 27, 1996)]
[Senate]
[Pages S7206-S7207]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




                CONGRATULATIONS TO PLUMCREEK TIMBER CO.

 Mrs. MURRAY. Mr. President, I rise today to congratulate 
PlumCreek Timber Co., headquartered in Seattle, WA. Today, Secretary 
Babbitt will announce the administration's approval of PlumCreek's 
Habitat Conservation Plan and Secretary Glickman will announce the 
administration's commitment to expedite the I-90 land exchange.
  This HCP is the largest to be approved to date. It covers 170,000 
acres of land owned by PlumCreek in Washington's central Cascade 
Mountains. Under the HCP, PlumCreek has agreed to provide unprecedented 
habitat protections on an ecosystem wide basis. The plan will protect 
wildlife habitat in 23 watersheds covering over 418,000 acres of mixed 
public and private lands.
  Designed to complement the President's forest plan, the HCP will 
maintain current levels of old growth and ensure that all species will 
find adequate habitat within the planning area. It also emphasizes 
protection for streamside habitat and other special areas, such as 
wetland and caves. The plan will benefit all species, not just those 
currently listed under the Endangered Species Act. In exchange, 
PlumCreek will receive a long-term permit that will provide the company 
with regulatory certainty.
  Mr. President, one of the primary reasons Secretary Babbitt has taken 
a special interest in this plan--and why I support it--is that it 
demonstrates how the Endangered Species Act can and does work on a 
large scale both to protect species and allow companies to manage 
actively their forests. It simply take a commitment by the government 
and by a private entity to work together toward common, realistic goals 
and respect private rights.
  I want also to acknowledge that some of the environmental groups who 
have reviewed this HCP find it unsatisfactory. I agree that this is not 
a perfect document. But the process has worked and approval of this HCP 
demonstrates that we need not dismantle the ESA in order to have 
reasonable management of private timber lands.
  I want to emphasize that I believe it is time to turn over a new leaf 
in resource conservation. We must acknowledge that private landowners 
should be held to a more flexible standard than public resource 
managers. We must start to trust each other a little more and believe 
that Federal land managers and our private landowners can be, and 
generally are, good stewards of the land. This HCP establishes a long-
term relationship that we should foster.
  Mr. President, PlumCreek and the administration are also celebrating 
their commitment to enter into serious large-scale land exchange 
negotiations. Under the land exchange agreement acknowledged today, 
PlumCreek will refrain from entering or harvesting timber for the next 
2 years in some roadless areas on its land in order to encourage the 
Forest Service to expedite land exchange negotiations. The lands at 
issue are those enmeshed in a checkerboard ownership pattern around 
Interstate 90 and the central Cascade Mountains.
  The I-90 corridor is among the most sensitive areas in the region for 
the

[[Page S7207]]

northern spotted owl, the marbled murrelet, and the gray wolf, and may 
be a recovery area for other species. Despite the area's biological 
importance, the checkboard pattern of ownership is not conducive to 
coordinated environmental protection.
  Forrest and timber management of these lands has also been difficult. 
Public and private landowners are often in conflict because of their 
differing roles and objectives. A large-scale land exchange would 
reduce, if not eliminate, these conflicts. It would place valuable 
wildlife habitat under public management and block-up lands identified 
by President Clinton as essential to the recovery of spotted owls.
  The PlumCreek lands to be traded also provide outstanding 
recreational opportunities for the growing Puget Sound metropolitan 
community. The lands poised for exchange are located just south of the 
Alpine Lakes Wilderness Area. The space these lands provide will 
relieve pressure on Alpine Lakes where overuse might limit future 
access. And buffers obtained in the exchange will protect the 
wilderness and pressure scenic vistas.
  I pledge to work with PlumCreek and the Forest Service as they try to 
find lands to exchange. This will be a difficult and controversial 
process. And I must admit to having concerns about one part of the 
State gaining superb lands, while others are asked to sacrifice their 
nearby public lands. I am also sensitive to the concerns of National 
Forest dependent timber producers who fear that they will lose their 
dwindling land base to PlumCreek, while not receiving lands suitable 
for timber harvest. Finally, I acknowledge the fear that Kittitas 
County officials have about losing private, taxable lands in exchange 
for more Federal lands.
  Nevertheless, I strongly support this joint Federal-private effort. I 
look forward to working both with PlumCreek and the Forest Service to 
facilitate this exchange based on a principal of equity of all 
interested parties.
  Again, Mr. President, I offer my heartfelt congratulates to PlumCreek 
Timber Co. and the Clinton administration for the great strides they 
have made for environmental protection and economic stability.
  I ask to include this June 25 editorial from the Seattle Times in the 
Record.
  The editorial follows:

                [From the Seattle Times, June 25, 1996]

               A Sensible Forest Plan for Snoqualmie Pass

       For most of a century, Snoqualmie Pass has been both a 
     spectacular gateway to Puget Sound and an environmental 
     battleground. Its proud stands of Douglas fir, cedar and pine 
     have been scattered in a checkerboard pattern of ownership, 
     crisscrossed by railroads and highways, battered by ski areas 
     and some of the ugliest clear-cuts the region has seen.
       Now, Plum Creek Timber and the federal government, who own 
     most of the land in the pass, have crafted a landmark land-
     use plan that promises to integrate environmental and 
     economic common sense.
       The ``habitat conservation plan,'' which will be formally 
     endorsed by the Clinton administration this week, is the 
     result of two years of work by scientists and land managers 
     who studied 418,000 acres of public and private forest and 
     285 species of wildlife ranging from salamanders to grizzly 
     bear.
       Their long-term plan moves beyond species-by-species 
     devices such as ``owl circles,'' which obstruct private 
     landowners while producing dubious public benefits. Instead, 
     scientists have crafted a plan that would protect wildlife 
     habitat in some areas while allowing sensible timber harvests 
     in others.
       Already, that plan has been a target for criticism from 
     environmentalists, who point out that logging will be allowed 
     in certain spotted owl habitat. Critics prefer major land 
     exchanges, assembling large parcels of critical forest under 
     public ownership, then shutting them down.
       Plum Creek and the government may negotiate such exchanges, 
     but that could take years. Snoqualmie Pass is home to some of 
     the most valuable timber in the nation, making exchanges 
     difficult and costly.
       The status quo hasn't worked. Since the turn of the 
     century, timber managers have followed the same strategy--
     sustained yield, which calls for cutting trees at the same 
     pace that they grow back. That strategy ignored wildlife 
     habitat and led to overcutting of both private and public 
     forest lands.
       Nobody knows for sure what will work better. Forest Service 
     Chief Jack Ward Thomas wants to experiment with a variety of 
     strategies, monitoring the effects over decades to come.
       The opportunity to try something new explains why the 
     Snoqualmie Pass plan has earned support from key forestry 
     experts and selected environmentalists as well as Interior 
     Secretary Bruce Babbit and the timber industry itself. They 
     see a potential model for resolving resource conflicts 
     without turning biological questions over to federal judges. 
     The breadth of their coalition does not prove the habitat 
     strategy will work, only that it's well worth a try.

                          ____________________