[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 146 (2000), Part 12]
[House]
[Pages 17288-17289]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]



                       TOPICS OF NATIONAL CONCERN

  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Under a previous order of the House, the 
gentleman from Tennessee (Mr. Duncan) is recognized for 5 minutes.
  Mr. DUNCAN. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to speak on a couple of 
unrelated topics of national concern, related in some ways, unrelated 
in others, but nonetheless very, very important topics.
  The first of these pertains to the millions of acres of which have 
burned and are burning at the present time in our western States. This 
is something that the Subcommittee on Forests and Forest Health of the 
Committee on Resources, which is one of the subcommittees on which I 
serve, heard about in one of the first hearings held in this Congress 
early in 1999, early last year.
  The hearing that we held was based on a 1998 GAO report that I do 
understand and have read that we were having warnings as early as 1993 
about the potential effects of this problem. But in this hearing in 
1999, we were told that there were some 40 million acres in our western 
States that were in immediate danger of catastrophic forest fire.
  We now have estimates, based on these latest fires, that over $10 
billion worth of economic damage has been done thus far and that the 
costs to the Federal Government are going to exceed at least $1 billion 
and that if these fires keep burning and expanding, the costs may 
become even greater.
  The sad thing is that this is a problem that we not only knew about 
but that we could have easily done something about.
  In the mid-1980s, I am told that the Congress passed what was then 
held as a great environmental law that we would not cut more than 80 
percent of the new growth in our national forests; and that was praised 
as a great environmental law at that time. And yet, today we are 
cutting less than one-seventh of the new growth in our national 
forests.
  The Subcommittee on Forests and Forest Health staff has told me that 
we have over 23 billion board feet of new growth in our national 
forests each and every year, yet we are cutting less than 3 billion 
board feet. Less than one-seventh of the new growth in our national 
forests is what we are cutting today. And they tell me that there is 
over twice that amount, or some 6 billion board feet, of dead and dying 
timber each year. And yet environmental extremists will not let us go 
in and remove even the dead and dying trees, and that this causes fuel 
buildup on the floor of these forests, which has been the main cause of 
all of these catastrophic forest fires.
  Yet, if I went to any school in Knoxville, Tennessee, or in my 
district and told the school children in that district that I was 
opposed to cutting any tree in the national forests, they would 
probably cheer because there has been such a brainwashing effort about 
things of this nature in schools in this country for the last several 
years.
  Forest experts tell us repeatedly that we have to cut some trees to 
have healthy forests. Yet there are some people that do not want us to 
cut a single tree in our national forests. But people who do support 
that or do not want any logging done whatsoever should stop and think 
of all the products that are made with wood. Everything from books to 
newspapers, furniture, houses, toilet paper, all kinds of things, 
everything that we use in our daily lives or many, many things go back 
to wood and wood products. And yet there are some of these wealthy 
extremists who, for some reason, do not want us to cut even a single 
tree.
  Yet, this is a very shortsighted and very harmful position to take. 
And it is

[[Page 17289]]

especially harmful to the poor and the working people in the middle-
income field because it destroys jobs and drives up prices for 
everything. So that is a problem that we really need to do something 
about.
  The second thing I want to mention is something that I mentioned in 
the 1-minutes this morning, but I would like to expand on just a little 
bit.
  The top headline in the Washington Post says today that oil prices 
have hit a 10-year high. This is something else that we could easily do 
something about, and yet we have these environmental extremists who not 
only do they not want us to cut any trees, they do not want us to drill 
for any oil.

                              {time}  1730

  The U.S. Geologic Survey tells us that in one tiny part of the Arctic 
National Wildlife Refuge, which is 19.8 million acres, 19.8 million 
acres, the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge is that big, the Great Smoky 
Mountains National Park which is the most heavily visited national 
park, a large portion of which is in my district, is less than 600,000 
acres, so we are talking about an area 33 times the size of the Great 
Smoky Mountains National Park, in only two or 3,000 acres on the 
coastal plain of Alaska, the U.S. Geologic Survey tells us there is 
some 16 billion barrels of oil. This is equivalent to 30 years of Saudi 
oil. There are billions more barrels offshore from this country. Yet 
the administration, the President signed an executive order putting 80 
percent of the Outer Continental Shelf off-limits for oil production. 
He also vetoed legislation which would have allowed us to produce this 
oil in Alaska.
  So if people like high gas prices, they should write the White House 
and these environmental groups and tell them thank you for the high gas 
prices that we have in this country today.

                          ____________________