[Congressional Record Volume 152, Number 50 (Tuesday, May 2, 2006)]
[Senate]
[Page S3858]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
TIMBER
Mr. SMITH. Mr. President, I intended to speak in reference to an
amendment I was to call up for the supplemental, but because we are in
morning business I will speak in morning business.
My amendment would be objected to as out of order, as being
inconsistent with the supplemental emergency bill. However, I am here
to talk about an emergency in rural Oregon in timber-dependent
communities.
For 100 years, there has been a relationship between the Federal
Government and rural communities that has been absolutely indispensable
to our country and to those communities. The deal was this: In those
States where the Federal Government owns much of the land--in my State
it owns more than half of the State of Oregon--there would be multiple
uses of public lands. They would be managed as to their resources
consistent with environmental law.
In the case of the State of Oregon, there would be the result of
timber products, wood products, to build countless millions of homes.
There would be jobs for people and there would be the types of jobs
that would create tax revenues that would allow local communities to
have services.
In addition to that, there is what are called timber receipts. Local
communities would get 25 percent of the timber receipts from the
harvest of public timber. This has been absolutely indispensable to the
life of these rural communities.
That deal changed in the 1990s. To show you how devastating this
change was to my State, we had the listing of the spotted owl. We had
the Endangered Species Act go into effect. President Clinton and Vice
President Gore pursued a forest policy that took a harvest of roughly 8
billion board feet a year down to less than 1 percent of that in many
national forests. As a consequence, by the end of the 1990s, our
schools were closing. They operated 4 days a week. Counties had no
money because many of them have lost up to 60 percent of their
operating budgets.
At the end of the Clinton administration, the Congress, with
President Clinton, recognized the damage, the devastation, being done
to these communities, so we passed, in 2000, the Secure Rural Schools
Act to bridge the gap between what had been, the gridlock that existed,
and the hope for a brighter day when there would be a predictable,
sustainable level of forestry.
President Bush and the Congress pursued the Healthy Forests
Initiative and this President has fully funded the Northwest Forest
Plan that was the product of President Clinton but never delivered on
the timber that it promised in the hopes of bridging the gap for these
communities.
But still, after all of that effort, 6 years later, we find that only
a small percent of what was done 20 years ago is available to these
communities in terms of timber harvest. As a consequence, this secure
rural schools fund is about to expire.
I suggest this is a very real, present danger, even an emergency,
that is appropriate to this supplemental. We ought to include it. These
are Federal decisions that have been made. They have been made by an
administration in the 1990s. They have been made by Federal law, the
law that passed by this Congress. They have been made by courts that
have enforced that law and have locked up our forests and now have us
in a bind that is truly an emergency.
This is a Federal obligation. I need to use every tool as a Senator
that I have available to me to try to remind this Senate, this
Congress, of the obligation it has. We cannot abandon these
communities. We cannot abandon these people. We have to find a way to
continue to get back to a management level that is consistent with
environmental law, that allows for multiple uses of the land, the
harvest of timber, the employment of our people, the production of wood
products, the receipt of timber taxes, so that schools can remain open,
streets can remain paved, counties can be safe because they have police
protection.
This is not inexpensive. The annual cost of what we did to bridge
this gap was $500 million a year. Oregon is responsible for 20 percent
of the merchantable timber in this country. We are not alone in terms
of the benefit that came from this secure rural schools fund.
California received $380 million over the last 6 years; Montana, $63
million; Mississippi received $38.8 million to keep their rural timber-
dependent communities together body and soul.
We cannot walk away from this until we find a day where we can get
back to a deal that is sustainable in terms of environmental policy,
timber production, and the employment of our people. Heaven knows we
need the timber. We are now a net importer of timber in this country.
Yet what do we do with our own timber? Our policies are in gridlock and
our forests are burning.
Three years ago, there were 500,000 acres burned in southern Oregon,
larger than the State, I am told, of Rhode Island. Yet that timber
still stands rotting, a moonscape that, frankly, ought to be allowed to
at least be salvaged in some degree.
Until we come to a day where we have a policy that we in the Federal
Government agree upon, we cannot abandon these rural communities.
I will at the appropriate time propose my amendment and hope it is
not ruled out of order.
I yield the floor.
Mr. COCHRAN. Mr. President, I commend the distinguished Senator from
Oregon for his comments and his leadership on these issues that are so
important to our forestry owners and people throughout the States who
depend on incomes from those jobs.
I ask unanimous consent I be permitted to call up amendments at this
point.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
____________________