[House Report 107-434]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]



107th Congress                                                   Report
                        HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
 2d Session                                                     107-434

======================================================================



 
                HUNA TOTEM CORPORATION LAND EXCHANGE ACT

                                _______
                                

  May 3, 2002.--Committed to the Committee of the Whole House on the 
              State of the Union and ordered to be printed

                                _______
                                

  Mr. Hansen, from the Committee on Resources, submitted the following

                              R E P O R T

                             together with

                            DISSENTING VIEWS

                         [To accompany S. 506]

      [Including cost estimate of the Congressional Budget Office]

    The Committee on Resources, to whom was referred the bill 
(S. 506) to amend the Alaska Native Claims Settlement Act, to 
provide for a land exchange between the Secretary of 
Agriculture and the Huna Totem Corporation, and for other 
purposes, having considered the same, report favorably thereon 
without amendment and recommend that the bill do pass.

                          Purpose of the Bill

    The purpose of S. 506 is to amend the Alaska Native Claims 
Settlement Act to provide for a land exchange between the 
Secretary of Agriculture and the Huna Totem Corporation, and 
for other purposes.

                  Background and Need for Legislation

    S. 506 directs the Secretary of Agriculture to enter into 
an equal value land exchange with the Huna Totem Corporation 
and Sealaska Corporation.
    The Huna Totem Corporation was formed to manage the lands 
and interests of Tlingit Indians from the City of Hoonah, 
Alaska. With a population of 860, Hoonah is located within the 
Tongass National Forest on Chichagof Island, 40 miles west of 
Juneau.
    Under the terms of the Alaska Native Claims Settlement Act 
of 1971 (ANCSA), Huna Totem was awarded 23,040 acres of land 
from the Tongass National Forest. The Regional Corporation for 
Southeast Alaska, Sealaska, was awarded the subsurface estate 
to these lands.
    Village Corporations were generally required to select 
lands within or adjacent to the core township enclosing the 
Native Villages they represent. This forced Huna Totem to 
select 2,000 acres of land containing valuable timber situated 
on steep hillsides, cliffs, and a watershed immediately within 
view of the city. The Corporation directors and residents of 
Hoonah do not believe these lands are conducive to logging 
because of their undesirable topography, watershed 
characteristics, and close proximity to the City of Hoonah.
    Huna Totem seeks to exchange these 2,000 acres of land for 
other land of equal value located in an area where logging or 
other development does not present a special concern. 
Accordingly, S. 506 provides for such a land exchange.
    Under S. 506, Huna Totem Corporation may convey the 2,000-
acre tract to the U.S. Forest Service, and in exchange it will 
receive rights to select and acquire readily accessible lands 
of equal value from within an area of the Tongass as described 
in the bill. Lands that Huna Totem may acquire may not be in a 
wilderness or LUD II area. Sealaska's subsurface ownership 
follows the surface estate to Huna Totem's lands under this 
exchange. S. 506 further prohibits the export of unprocessed 
logs from lands Huna Totem acquires through the exchange.
    S. 506 is identical to a bill (S. 426) sponsored by Senator 
Frank Murkowski and approved by the House Committee on 
Resources in the 106th Congress. Similar legislation was also 
approved by the Committee on Resources in the 105th Congress.

                            Committee Action

    S. 506 was introduced on March 9, 2001, by Senator Frank 
Murkowski (R-AK). On August 3, 2001, the bill passed the Senate 
without amendment by unanimous consent. S. 506 was received by 
the House of Representatives and referred to the Committee on 
Resources. On April 24, 2002, the Full Resources Committee met 
to consider the bill. No amendments were ordered and the bill 
was then ordered favorably reported to the House of 
Representatives by voice vote.

            Committee Oversight Findings and Recommendations

    Regarding clause 2(b)(1) of rule X and clause 3(c)(1) of 
rule XIII of the Rules of the House of Representatives, the 
Committee on Resources' oversight findings and recommendations 
are reflected in the body of this report.

                   Constitutional Authority Statement

    Article I, section 8 of the Constitution of the United 
States grants Congress the authority to enact this bill.

                    Compliance With House Rule XIII

    1. Cost of Legislation. Clause 3(d)(2) of rule XIII of the 
Rules of the House of Representatives requires an estimate and 
a comparison by the Committee of the costs which would be 
incurred in carrying out this bill. However, clause 3(d)(3)(B) 
of that rule provides that this requirement does not apply when 
the Committee has included in its report a timely submitted 
cost estimate of the bill prepared by the Director of the 
Congressional Budget Office under section 402 of the 
Congressional Budget Act of 1974.
    2. Congressional Budget Act. As required by clause 3(c)(2) 
of rule XIII of the Rules of the House of Representatives and 
section 308(a) of the Congressional Budget Act of 1974, this 
bill does not contain any new budget authority, spending 
authority, credit authority, or an increase or decrease in tax 
expenditures. According to the Congressional Budget Office, 
enactment of this bill could affect direct spending (including 
offsetting receipts), but any such amount would be less than 
$500,000 over the 2002-2012 time period.
    3. General Performance Goals and Objectives. This bill does 
not authorize funding and therefore, clause 3(c)(4) of rule 
XIII of the Rules of the House of Representatives does not 
apply.
    4. Congressional Budget Office Cost Estimate. Under clause 
3(c)(3) of rule XIII of the Rules of the House of 
Representatives and section 403 of the Congressional Budget Act 
of 1974, the Committee has received the following cost estimate 
for this bill from the Director of the Congressional Budget 
Office:

                                     U.S. Congress,
                               Congressional Budget Office,
                                    Washington, DC, April 30, 2002.
Hon. James V. Hansen,
Chairman Committee on Resources,
House of Representatives, Washington, DC.
    Dear Mr. Chairman: The Congressional Budget Office has 
prepared the enclosed cost estimate for S. 506, the Huna Totem 
Corporation Land Exchange Act.
    If you wish further details on this estimate, we will be 
pleased to provide them. The CBO staff contact is Megan 
Carroll.
            Sincerely,
                                          Barry B. Anderson
                                    (For Dan L. Crippen, Director).
    Enclosure.

S. 506--Huna Totem Corporation Land Exchange Act

    CBO estimates that enacting S. 506 would have no 
significant impact on the federal budget. Because the 
legislation could affect direct spending (including offsetting 
receipts), pay-as-you-go procedures would apply, but we 
estimate that any such impacts would be less than $500,000 a 
year. S. 506 contains no intergovernmental or private-sector 
mandates as defined in the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act and 
would impose no significant costs on state, local, or tribal 
governments.
    S. 506 would direct the Secretary of Agriculture to convey 
the surface estate of certain federal lands in the Tongass 
National Forest to the Huna Totem Corporation, and also convey 
the subsurface estate of those lands to the Sealaska 
Corporation. The lands to be conveyed would be selected by the 
two corporations from federal lands depicted on a map specified 
in the legislation. In exchange, the corporations would convey 
to the United States approximately 2,000 acres of surface and 
subsurface estate.
    S. 506 does not specify the federal lands to be conveyed to 
the corporations, but it provides that the exchange be on the 
basis of equal value. Enacting S. 506 could affect offsetting 
receipts if the lands to be exchanged would generate income 
from activities such as timber harvesting. According to the 
Forest Service, the agency would generally consider the area 
acquired from the corporation to be unsuitable for timber 
harvesting because it lies within the watershed and viewshed of 
the village of Hoonah.
    According to the agency, some of the federal lands that 
could be conveyed to the corporations might be harvested under 
current law. Another portion of the federal lands that could be 
conveyed to the corporations currently are not being harvested 
because they have been set aside as part of a conservation 
reserve under the Tongass National Forest management plan. If 
the corporations harvested those areas following the exchange, 
then the agency would be obligated under the forest management 
plan to reserve for conservation another area of federal land 
within the Tongass National Forest that otherwise would be 
harvested under current law. Hence, we expect that conveying 
any of these lands to the corporations would result in forgone 
offsetting receipts from timber harvests. Based on information 
from the agency, however, we estimate that any such losses 
would be less than $500,000 a year over the 2002-2012 period.
    On May 18, 2001, CBO transmitted a cost estimate for S. 506 
as ordered reported by the Senate Committee on Energy and 
Natural Resources. The two versions of the legislation are 
identical, and our cost estimates are the same.
    The CBO staff contact for this estimate is Megan Carroll. 
This estimate was approved by Peter H. Fontaine, Deputy 
Assistant Director for Budget Analysis.

                    Compliance With Public Law 104-4

    This bill contains no unfunded mandates.

                Preemption of State, Local or Tribal law

    This bill is not intended to preempt any State, local or 
tribal law.

         Changes in Existing Law Made by the Bill, as Reported

  In compliance with clause 3(e) of rule XIII of the Rules of 
the House of Representatives, changes in existing law made by 
the bill, as reported, are shown as follows (new matter is 
printed in italic, and existing law in which no change is 
proposed is shown in roman):

ALASKA NATIVE CLAIMS SETTLEMENT ACT

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *



SEC. ____. HUNA TOTEM CORPORATION LAND EXCHANGE.

  (a) General.--In exchange for lands and interests therein 
described in subsection (b), the Secretary of Agriculture 
shall, subject to valid existing rights, convey to the Huna 
Totem Corporation the surface estate and to Sealaska 
Corporation the subsurface estate of the Federal lands 
identified by Huna Totem Corporation pursuant to subsection 
(c). The values of the lands and interests therein exchanged 
pursuant to this section shall be equal.
  (b) The surface estate to be conveyed by Huna Totem 
Corporation and the subsurface estate to be conveyed by 
Sealaska Corporation to the Secretary of Agriculture are the 
municipal watershed lands as shown on the map dated September 
1, 1997, and labeled attachment A, and are further described as 
follows:
MUNICIPAL WATERSHED AND GREENBELT BUFFER
T43S, R61E, C.R.M.

Portion of Section                                     Approximate Acres
    16............................................................    2 
    21............................................................  610 
    22............................................................  227 
    23............................................................   35 
    26............................................................  447 
    27............................................................  400 
    33............................................................  202 
    34............................................................   76 
    Approximate total.............................................1,999.

  (c) Within ninety (90) days of the receipt by the United 
States of the conveyances of the surface estate and subsurface 
estate described in subsection (b), Huna Totem Corporation 
shall be entitled to identify lands readily accessible to the 
Village of Hoonah and, where possible, located on the road 
system to the Village of Hoonah, as depicted on the map dated 
September 1, 1997, and labeled Attachment B. Huna Totem 
Corporation shall notify the Secretary of Agriculture in 
writing which lands Huna Totem Corporation has identified.
  (d) Timing of Conveyance and Valuation.--The conveyance 
mandated by subsection (a) by the Secretary of Agriculture 
shall occur within ninety (90) days after the list of 
identified lands is submitted by Huna Totem Corporation 
pursuant to subsection (c).
  (e) Timber Manufacturing; Export Restriction.--
Notwithstanding any other provision of law, timber harvested 
from land conveyed to Huna Totem Corporation under this section 
shall not be exported as unprocessed logs from Alaska, nor may 
Huna Totem Corporation sell, trade, exchange, substitute, or 
otherwise convey that timber to any person for the purpose of 
exporting that timber from the State of Alaska.
  (f) Relation to Other Requirements.--The land conveyed to 
Huna Totem Corporation and Sealaska Corporation under this 
section shall be considered, for all purposes, land conveyed 
under the Alaska Native Claims Settlement Act.
  (g) Maps.--The maps referred to in this section shall be 
maintained on file in the Office of the Chief, United States 
Forest Service, and in the Office of the Secretary of the 
Interior, Washington, D.C. The acreage cited in this section is 
approximate, and if there is any discrepancy between cited 
acreage and the land depicted on the specified maps, the maps 
shall control. The maps do not constitute an attempt by the 
United States to convey State or private land.

                            DISSENTING VIEWS

    Mr. Chairman, with this bill, the third time is not a 
charm. The same legislation that has come before the committee 
in the 105th and 106th Congresses and failed to pass the House 
is back again. Unfortunately, the bill has not changed or 
improved with age.
    The Huna Corporation keeps knocking on Congress' door 
because they contend they cannot negotiate a fair land exchange 
with the U.S. Forest Service. The motivation for Huna is that 
they have already logged the vast majority of their lands and 
have only about 2,000 acres remaining uncut out of the original 
23,000 acres that they received under the Alaska Native Claims 
Settlement Act. But most of the residents of the village of 
Hoonah do not want any more logging [See attached letter and 
resolution]. So the solution set forth in this bill is to 
dispose of unwanted corporation lands near the Native village 
on the federal government and then freely expand the 
corporation land base by obtaining old-growth forest lands out 
of the Tongass National Forest.
    Even though this bill was first introduced in 1997, the 
Huna Corporation has failed to provide specific map or precise 
acre description of the national forest lands that the 
corporation desires to obtain and log. Thus, Members do not 
even know what or how many acres of national forest lands that 
we are being asked to convey out of public ownership. The bill 
does not require that the selected lands must be in a 
contiguous block, so the corporation may opt to cherry-pick 
various parcels of national forest lands. The corporation may 
even argue that it is entitled to more than 2,000 acres of 
Tongass lands because the bill's restrictions on unprocessed 
log exports from the newly acquired lands means that they need 
to log more trees to equalize the valuations.
    Put another way, this is not a mutually negotiated exchange 
between land owners. I can not recall that this committee has 
ever before approved such a unnegotiated and ill-defined land 
exchange. Under the Clinton Administration, both the 
Secretaries of Agriculture and Interior were strongly opposed 
and issued veto threats on the prior bills [See attachment].
    The Hoonah Indian Association, which is the local tribal 
entity, and the Southeast Alaska Conservation Council have 
opposed this legislation. While the Bush Administration may 
have a different perspective about the values of public lands, 
I once again urge Members to consider the interest of the 
taxpayer and vote against this bill.
    In closing, let me assure my colleagues and in particular, 
the gentleman from Alaska, that my opposition to this bill is 
solely based on its lack of merit and does not reflect on our 
willingness to work with the gentleman on other Alaska matters 
or other tribal issues. Last Congress, as just one example, we 
resolved some complex issues in the Kake Tribal Corporation 
Land Exchange Act, sending that bill with amendments back to 
the Senate and on to the President where it was signed into 
Public Law 106-283. I look forward to working with him on other 
such matters in the future.
                                                     George Miller.
    Enclosures.
                                 Hoonah Indian Association,
                                    Hoonah, AK, September 25, 2001.
George Miller,
Minority of the House Resources Committee,
House of Representatives.
    Dear Representative Miller: Please find enclosed a courtesy 
copy of recent correspondence with Congressman Hansen of the 
House Resource Committee regarding House Bill S. 506.
    The Hoonah Indian Association continues to be strongly 
opposed to the Huna Totem Corporation's proposed Land Exchange 
with the U.S. Forest Service. This letter expresses our 
feelings and rationale on this matter.
    Thank you for any support you can offer in this regard.
            Sincerely,
                                           David M. Belton,
                                         Hoonah Indian Association.
    The Hoonah Indian Association is a federally recognized 
Tribe in accordance with and by the authority of Congress of 
June 18, 1934 (48 Stat. 984) and May 1, 1936 (49 Stat. 1250).
                                ------                                

                                 Hoonah Indian Association,
                                    Hoonah, AK, September 25, 2001.
Congressman James V. Hansen,
Chairman of the House Resource Committee.
    Dear Mr. Chairman: On behalf of the Board of Directors, the 
membership of the Hoonah Indian Association, and the Tribal 
Administrator, I am directed to voice our strong opposition to 
the Huna Totem Land Exchange with the U.S. Forest Service 
identified as House Bill S. 506.
    As a Tlingit village with a proud history and heritage we 
feel that our long-term cultural and economic survival depends 
on the health and beauty of our traditional lands. When the 
lands around Hoonah were originally selected as part of the 
ANCSA settlement, the Tribe believed that it was the intent of 
Congress for the Huna people to possess land that was 
historically and culturally significant as well as potentially 
profitable.
    The attempt to exchange lands (House Bill S. 506) solely 
for maximizing corporate timber profits is alarming. Historic 
and Traditional Tribal lands will be lost and newly selected 
parcels that will become available for immediate harvest will 
interfere with the Tongass Land Management Plan. Subsistence 
opportunity and management will be seriously and negatively 
confused and impacted.
    The exchange involves less than 2,000 of the 23,000 acres 
originally granted. This land surrounds the original village 
site and community that is now Hoonah. As the land of our 
ancestors, this area is in many ways our very cultural and 
spiritual identity. It is the contiguous land that provided 
protection from outside groups that at times had other than the 
best of intentions for our well-being. It yielded the food and 
forest resources that allowed our people to survive for many 
generations.
    The very land being considered for exchange is spoken of in 
our oral traditions as the place where ``Cheet'', a warrior and 
hero of the Chookaneidi clan, ascended the cliffs to light four 
fires that warned the Huna People in Glacier Bay of the 
approach of Wrangell warriors from the south. This story is 
remembered in song and art that pay tribute to our history and 
heritage.
    Most significantly, this is indeed sacred land as it is 
literally the final resting place of some of our healers and 
shamanic spiritual leaders that are well documented to have 
been buried in the caves on the hillsides and cliffs that 
surround Hoonah. Prior to the coming of missionaries our 
deceased ancestors were customarily cremated but Shamen were 
buried along with a variety of spiritually potent objects that 
were traditionally manipulated at both private healing 
ceremonies and public displays to heal the sick, control the 
weather and ward off malevolent spirits thus assuring the 
survival of the group.
    The area continues to be regarded as very special and is 
well known to be more culturally significant than other areas 
under Huna Totem management. To exchange this land for economic 
opportunity by putting it in public hands would not only be 
shameful but a sacrilege. Unfortunately, in the not so distant 
past, these graves have been desecrated and looted by artifact 
hunters for the funerary that they contain.
    For more than two decades Sealaska, Huna Totem and the U.S. 
Forest Service have engaged in clear-cutting many acres in the 
Hoonah area leaving whole watersheds stripped of their best 
timber, prime wildlife habitat and scenic beauty. We fell this 
is a shortsighted policy that will lead to a greatly diminished 
opportunity for economic diversification and customary and 
traditional use in the long term. Again, we do not feel 
extractive development was the only intent for the selection 
and use of lands by Congress or by the people for which they 
were intended.
    Please be reminded of the voice of the federally recognized 
Tribal Government in accordance with and by the authority of 
the Acts of Congress of June 18, 1934 (48 Stat. 984) and May 1, 
1936 (49 Stat. 1250); Hoonah Indian Association Resolution #98-
14 adopted and certified April 22, 1998, at which a quorum was 
present, with a vote of 5 for, 0 against, and 0 abstentions 
when it was resolved that: ``* * * the Board of Directors of 
the Hoonah Indian Association strongly opposes the proposed 
Huna Totem Corporation Land Exchange with the United States 
Forest Service.'' This view has not changed! (Resolution 
attached)
    Mr. Murkowski and the Huna Totem Corporation would have you 
believe that an exchange would resolve a ``problem'' regarding 
the land selection of 1975. They suggest that there are 
``complications'' which are created by the difficult terrain 
characterized by steep hillsides and cliffs and that the 
``unsuitable'' terrain has kept Hoonah from achieving the goal 
of developing the land for profit which was ``one'' of the main 
purposes of the settlement act. Please, keep in mind that 
developing the land for profit was only one of the purposes of 
the settlement act. Those that support the exchange seem to 
suggest that somehow a mistake was made in the selection of 
land that needs to be fixed. This is not the case. There was no 
mistake made when this area was selected to belong to the Huna 
People.
    The particular land at issue was selected primarily for its 
historic, cultural and traditional value and it is very 
important to those Tribal members who continue to live in the 
village and others, to maintain ownership of this very special 
area. We certainly do not suggest that it should be condemned 
to the chainsaw nor do we feel that it would be appropriate to 
transfer it to the control of the U.S. Forest Service. We do 
not feel that the intentions of the Huna Totem Corporation 
represent the view of the majority of the Hoonah Indian 
Association members, also Huna Totem Shareholders. Regarding 
the destiny of this culturally and traditionally significant 
land please, do not be deceived by those who have only monetary 
profit as their primary objective. We feel that the wishes of 
the majority of the Huna People are being misrepresented in 
this effort.
    Each day we here in the village look across our beloved 
Port Frederick with a certain sadness and regret. The vast 
tracks of clear-cut land are daily reminders of what has been 
sacrificed already for timber profits and we disagree that the 
removal of trees on tribal lands is necessarily the best or 
only value that the land offers. We feel that the ancestors and 
those involved in the original selections would not have been 
approved of this wholesale onslaught. We are all too aware of 
the tremendous amount of forest that has been and continues to 
be sacrificed for the meeting of corporate goals.
    There is a song entitled Xuna Kahwoo (Huna People) that was 
written some years ago and tells the tale of the Huna People 
and how they crossed icy waters from Glacier Bay in canoes 
carved by hand. It speaks of how the glacier had come down upon 
them and how the sea had rise up to stop them as they sought to 
claim a new land. It continues * * *
    ``From salmon deep in salty waters * * * From deer and bear 
in forest glade Came food for life and clothes for body * * * 
The land was good and the people stayed. And at their back 
there stands a forest * * * At their feet the restless sea All 
around the mountains guard them * * * As cloudy skies watch 
silently.''
    The forest referred to in this song, as being at the backs 
of the Huna People, is literally the land proposed for the Huna 
Totem Land exchange. Obviously this is an issue that must be 
addressed and settled within the Tribe and amongst the 
shareholders. In the mean time we ask that the exchange not be 
allowed. We believe that it would not have been acceptable to 
the Ancestors nor do we believe that it has the blessing of the 
Elders. We continue to be in strong opposition to this effort.
    Respectfully on behalf of the Board of Directors, the 
Tribal Administrator, Johanna Dybdahl and the membership of the 
Hoonah Indian Association, thank you for considering this plea.
                                           David M. Belton,
                        Director of Natural and Cultural Resources.
                                ------                                


                          Resolution No. 98-14

    Whereas; the Hoonah Indian Association is a federally 
recognized tribe in accordance with and by the authority of the 
Acts of Congress of June 18, 1934 (48 Stat. 984) and May 1, 
1936 (49 Stat. 1250); and
    Whereas; the majority of Huna Totem Corporation's 
shareholders are enrolled members of the Hoonah Indian 
Association or descendants of the 1939 roll; and
    Whereas; the proposed Huna Totem Corporation Land Exchange 
with the U.S. Forest Service has a direct affect on those 
shareholders who live in Hoonah and are enrolled members of the 
association.
    NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED that the Board of the Hoonah 
Indian Association strongly opposes the proposed Huna Totem 
Corporation Land Exchange with the U.S. Forest Service numbered 
in the Senate, S. 1158 and in the House, H.E. 3088 which 
directly affects our membership (also shareholders of HTC).
    BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that this resolution be sent to the 
Congressional Delegation in Washington, D.C., Honorable Frank 
Murkowski, Ted Stevens, and Donald Young.

                             certification

    As President of the Hoonah Indian Association, I hereby 
certify that the above resolution was duly adopted at a regular 
meeting of the association on this 22nd day of April 1998, at 
which a quorum was present, with a vote of 5 for, 0 against, 0 
abstentions.

                                   Ms. Mary Rudolph,
                                           President.
    Attest:
                                   Frank Wright, Jr.,
                                           Tribal Secretary.
                                ------                                 

                         Department of Agriculture,
                                   Office of the Secretary,
                                Washington, DC, September 28, 2000.
Hon. Don Young,
Chairman, Committee on Resources, U.S. Senate,
Russell Senate Office Building, Washington, DC.
    Dear Mr. Chairman: I want to express the Administration's 
strong opposition to S. 426, the Huna Totem Corporation Public 
Interest Land Exchange Act, as reported out of the House 
Resources Committee on September 26th. The bill would direct 
the Secretary of Agriculture to enter into a land exchange with 
Huna Totem Corporation, which owns the surface estate, and 
Sealaska Corporation, which owns the subsurface estate to 
certain lands near the village of Hoonah in Southeast Alaska.
    The Administration communicated its strong opposition to 
the bill during its consideration in the Senate and during 
consideration of an identical bill (S. 1158) in the 105th 
Congress. Because the bill would set an unacceptable precedent 
by reopening native entitlements under the Alaska Native Claims 
Settlement Act (ANCSA), the Secretary of the Interior and I 
would recommend that the President veto this legislation.
    ANCSA granted more than 200 village corporations the right 
to select public lands in Alaska for a variety of uses. Each 
corporation was required to select the public lands within the 
township in which it was located. ANCSA was a final settlement 
and, as such, represented many trade-offs and compromises by 
all parties.
    If S. 426 were enacted, all of Alaska's village 
corporations could argue that they too were entitled to 
exchange land selected under ANCSA for land that is more 
desirable. This precedent would threaten to unravel ANCSA's 
historic settlement through piece-meal amendments. In turn, 
Federal land management throughout Alaska would be severely 
disrupted with significant costs and consequences for all 
taxpayers.
    Beyond the question of precedent, the land exchanges 
proposed by this bill would not be in the public interest. The 
primary reason the U.S. Forest Service pursues land exchanges 
is to provide more efficient land management through 
consolidation of existing Federal ownership and to dispose of 
isolated parcels that are uneconomical to manage. S. 426 
directly conflicts with these goals.
    This bill is based on the premise that because some of the 
land that Huna Totem Corporation received within its township 
under ANCSA is municipal watershed land not subject to 
development, the United States should provide the corporations 
with replacement land elsewhere. ANCSA, however, contemplated 
that villages would obtain all land within their ``core'' 
townships regardless of its development potential.
    The Federal Government should not administer municipal 
watershed lands in Alaska, as would be required by S. 426. 
Rather, such lands should be managed by those communities that 
derive benefit from the land. Federal ownership of municipal 
watersheds is inconsistent with the ownership patterns 
envisioned by ANCSA, whereby native corporations had to select 
lands within their core townships.
    The Office of Management and Budget advises that there is 
no objection to the presentation of this report from the 
standpoint of the Administration's program.
            Sincerely,
                                              Dan Glickman,
                                                         Secretary.

                                
