99–006

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

2

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 compariVerDate 11-MAY-2000 21:26 May 04, 2002 Jkt 099006 PO 00000 Frm 00002 Fmt 6659 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\HR434.XXX pfrm01 PsN: HR434
3

son 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,

4

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. ll. 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

5

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.

(6)

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,

7

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

8

is the contiguous land that provided protection from outside groups

that at times had other than the best of intentions for our wellbeing. 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

9

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.

10

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),

11

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 piecemeal 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.

Æ