Robert Smith: “Mr. Chairman, we have listened to arguments against this bill which are really arguments against the so-called ``salvage…”

“Mr. Chairman, we have listened to arguments against this bill which are really arguments against the so-called ``salvage rider'' bill of 2 or 3 years ago. Those arguments simply fall on deaf ears if we carefully read this bill because, very frankly, let me take my colleagues through it one more time so that they understand how different this is from anything Members have seen before. We recognize that there are those who do not trust the Forest Service, and we recognize that there are those people who do not trust environmentalists, and we realize that there are people who do not trust foresters. So in order to place someone in the context of the analysis, we chose to place 11 scientists. No one has identified who they are, but we have identified their character and we have identified where they should come from and their expertise. We have suggested that four of them be appointed by the National Academy of Sciences. We suggested three of them be appointed by the Secretary of Agriculture and two by the House and two by the Senate, agriculture and resources respectively. In that manner, we think we have provided a broad base of selection process that will give comfort to any of those who see emotionally this issue running one way or running another.”