Page images
PDF
EPUB

Unfortunately the form of our society is such that it hinders people from doing their best in their best interests until they are forced to, either by mandates of law or mandates of the economy.

Mr. SCHEUER. If they had your kind of a voice on the board of directors, maybe they would see the economics more clearly.

Senator PATERSON. I think the students are going to make sure they see that.

I think even President Hester is aware of the pressure he is going to receive, because there are people that are going to determine to make those changes even if we don't get legislation.

Maybe you can't mandate love, but you can certainly mandate against hate, and you can certainly mandate against the crime we are committing against ourselves in environmental pollution. Mr. SCHEUER. I couldn't agree with you more.

Now why couldn't President Hester, assuming NYU owned a substantial amount of stock in the Metropolitan Life Insurance Co., have joined a public member of the board to the Met who could have expressed this kind of point of view on their rental policy?

Perhaps if we had had that 15 years ago, Ecker wouldn't have been making the kind of statement that flew in the face of our historic and political beliefs as well as the crass economic interests of the Met.

I suggest there is enough history to prove that business doesn't know what's good for it; that business traditionally has an instinctive Pavlovian reaction against constructive social legislation that ultimately helps them; that just from the point of view of economics, their own economic best interests, they could use a voice representing the public conscience on their board.

We have spent enough time on that. Let me ask you as a legislator who is obviously keenly involved, deeply concerned, two questions.

I am very conscious of the criticism that interest in the environment is a cop-out from the problems of race and degrading housing and disfunctional school systems, ineffective health systems and so forth; it is a cop-out from facing up to the problems of our urban society, a society involved in an immoral and wasteful war, a society that is bigoted.

No. 1, how do we make it clear to the poor and to the minorities that we are not copping out?

Basically the problem of the environment is largely a central city problem, the problem of the downtown hard cores, where there are specific and identifiable concentrations of poor blacks, Mexican-Americans, and Puerto Rican-Americans.

Second, how do you as a politician feel that we can continue to build the momentum that we built 2 days ago on Earth Day into specific action programs and how we can prevent that great day from being just a one-shot exercise in empty rhetoric?

Senator PATERSON. Let me take them in inverse order.

Mr. SCHEUER. Right.

Senator PATERSON. First of all, we know the problem of Earth Day being hopefully not just a one-day shot, and I was struck by the group in charge of Earth Day changing their title, reincorporating; instead of being an Earth Day group they are going to be an action group.

One of the problems is to challenge our major industries. No question that the major pollutant of the atmosphere is the automobile industry.

But we know the amount of money spent not just by the car manufacturers but also those who produce the steel and the oil and those who produce right down the line. I am suggesting maybe one of the ways to keep as much interest as possible would be the bill you have suggested, a continued educational program.

Another might be that somebody might take on General Motors head on-I use General Motors merely as symbolic of the whole industry-that we say there has to be a deadline when the internal combustion engine is either going to be considered no longer lawful to produce, or that they will have regulated it in such a fashion as to prevent the emission of the vaport they set off.

When I took a light plane upstate a week ago, a person pointed out something to me and said that was pollution, and I had never seen that the way you see it from the earth starting up.

I know the powers of General Motors, Ford, Chrysler. I know the power they have.

But somebody has to stand up and challenge them.

When you get to the other question, the question of how you get people to believe, in my community, for example, that it is not a copout, I think one of the answers is very simple, that we attack the problems that can be immediately attacked, the battle of the legislator to remove cars that are abandoned in the streets, the buildings that are abandoned as unsound structures, that are sitting there, used by junkies—there's no gas, no utilities they set fires and they become a menace to people who reside in the adjoining buildings, and they become trash heaps because rats are running out of those buildings because janitors in the adjoining buildings are throwing their junk in those buildings.

They should see to getting those torn down, again not having to get a politician's influence to do something that should have been done. I think we can prove it is not a cop-out by hitting the problems we are immediately concerned with.

Mr. SCHEUER. By hitting the problems we are immediately concerned with?

Senator PATERSON. Yes, I think it is a problem.

When you say it is a big city problem, it is, and yet I look at Lake Erie, a dead body of water now, and I wonder how many people realize the size of this lake.

It is the distance from New York City to Boston. New York to New Haven would be about 50 miles, so that's the breadth. A huge body of water.

They dare not walk in the water.

Senator PATERSON. That's right. Even Lake Superior is threatened, the largest body of water in the entire world, the second largest inland body of water.

We have a river in Cleveland, the Cuyahoga, that's almost officially classified as a fire hazard, a river is a fire hazard, because of the pollutants and junk thrown into it.

We have another one in Buffalo at the same stage.

I think we get people to believe we mean something when we attack the problems not only on a grand scale but in our own areas.

Con Edison is still polluting. You drive up early some morning you will see what they are spewing into the atmosphere.

Who is enforcing the law? I think if we enforce the law and take some political chances that you won't get the political contributions you are expecting-of course I don't have to say this to you, Congressman, because I know how you feel about that-but unfortunately many of the people elected and in public life are always balancing the scale, "If I say that, I am not going to get the campaign

contributions."

We have to start taking the chances that maybe we can educate business that it is in their best interest, not only in the long run but also immediately.

Mr. SCHEUER. Thank you very much, Senator, for your provocative and thoughtful testimony.

Senator PATERSON. Thank you very much, Congressman.

Mr. SCHEUER. And now, Mr. Madigan and your associates, would you step up?

Incidentally, if you gentlemen want to wait until Mr. Madigan and his associates are finished, I would be glad for you to come up en banc and give us your views on the problems of the environment.

Mr. MADIGAN. These are Peter Pelikan and Michael Silfen, who have participated with us in programs at Wave Hill during the year.

Mr. SCHEUER. Let me congratulate you for that tremendous program you had yesterday. I understand there were representatives from private schools, public schools, and parochial schools from all over the Bronx.

There were perhaps more than a thousand young people who were reacting expressing themselves in a way that was moving and beautiful, and it was just a tremendous occasion.

I want to thank you and your two colleagues for your great leadership in pulling it off.

Mr. MADIGAN. Well, we are indebted to you for your effort to be with us that day also.

Mr. SCHEUER. I was honored being there.

STATEMENT OF RICHARD A. MADIGAN, EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR OF THE WAVE HILL CENTER FOR ENVIRONMENTAL STUDIES

Mr. MADIGAN. Wave Hill Center for Environmental Studies is a cultural institution of the city of New York devoted to public understanding of man's environment. Since Wave Hill was given to the city in 1960 by the Perkins and Freeman families the programs have explored the relationship of man and his environment.

In recent years. Wave Hill has developed specific programs dealing with the urban environment of New York City. With funds provided by the Ford Foundation and the Old Dominion Foundation, Wave Hill has greatly increased its efforts in recent months to develop relevant education concepts using the resources of the environment. All aspects of the environment-biological, physical and cultural-are components in the Wave Hill programs. The impact of the programs is being felt as increasing numbers of students and faculty are influenced by new methods of instruction.

This initial phase in any educational program is creating a sense of awareness. By early 1970 it is virtually impossible not to hear or read about the environment. The public has, at long last, begun to be aware

of the environment and the degradation caused by man. This awareness must now be channeled into concern and action.

To realize that thousands of streams are polluted, that air is frequently foul and that noise decibels are intolerable in many areas is only part of the picture. Man must be concerned about what has happened; he must be motivated enough to bring about change.

On April 23, 1970, Wave Hill sponsored Earth Day in the Bronx, and over 800 students representing every public, private, and parochial school in attendance.

Following an address by Congressman James Scheuer, the students participated in three of 21 seminars on various aspects of the environment. It may have been the only environmental teach-in in the New York City area to provide students with relevant information concerning the environment, and suggest viable followup programs.

This day long event, sponsored by Fabergé Inc., was one more example of Wave Hill's programs to develop educational models which may be used elsewhere.

Wave Hill works closely with Bronx districts of the board of education and with secondary schools. In conjunction with Herbert Lehman College a preservice and inservice teacher training program was developed; the program is being revised and will operate in the future in cooperation with Fordham University.

Only by training teachers can environmental education programs develop significant multiplier effects. We seek to train teachers in environmental education in order that they may train students.

The proposed environmental quality education bill (H.R. 14753) contains provisions which will greatly expand educational efforts in this area and encourage new ones. Those of us in environmental agencies realize that legislation alone will not do the job. To make mandatory stiff penalties for environmental destruction is essential; to provide funds for technological advances to improve the quality of air, water, and land is vital. Needed as this legislation may be it is only through education that the public will come to understand the necessity of improvement. Every individual must be made to realize that it is his responsibility for improving the environment.

Environmental legislation is needed-long overdue-but needed. The Environmental Quality Education bill is a great step in the right direction.

Wave Hill seeks to use the educational methods called for in H.R. 14753 to bring about a "wave" of concern-a wave that will result in positive change-improving the quality of our environment and the quality of our life.

I am completely convinced that environmental education is going to be measured in terms of its ability to change the behavior of society. The two students with me have participated in a program concerning a pollutant, a single pollutant, ozone, at Wave Hill, and students with many other schools to try to provide the kind of educational experiences not now obtainable in most of our public and private schools. Mr. SCHEUER. I want to ask you a question on your last sentence in which you say we have to change the behavior of society.

What are the implications of that and how can it be done? Is the change agent going to be public decisionmaking or private decisionmaking, legislation, attitude changes or what?

Before that, may I hear from your two colleagues?

Mr. MADIGAN. Please do.

Mr. SCHEUER. Please identify yourselves for the record.
Mr. PELIKAN. My name is Peter Pelikan.

Mr. SCHEUER. Identify your school.

Mr. PELIKAN. Bronx High School of Science.

Mr. SCHEUER. Yes. You are both from Bronx High School of Science; right?

Mr. PELIKAN. At my school which is predominantly a science school, science oriented, each student has to study chemistry, biology and physics.

However, the course is set up as an introductory course to the subject and specific problems and ecology and environment are in a sense beyond the scope of the chemistry course which only spends a month studying organic chemistry.

The biology course maybe spends 2 weeks studying ecology.

Now in my school there are available in the senior year two electives. However, there is no program available to study as yet, to study the environment, and I think the program that my friend and I have studied at Wave Hill is applicable to a school situation and it was of great benefit to me and I think it would be to my fellow students.

Mr. SCHEUER. So you are telling me that as a Congressman I had better build a few fires in the Bronx in order to make some curriculum changes in the Bronx High School of Science? Is that the message? Mr. PELIKAN. Yes.

Mr. SCHEUER. I think it is a very good message.

Mr. SILFEN. My name is Michael Silfen. It shouldn't only be in the Bronx High School of Science but in every school.

They have a few problems with our ozone chamber in the fact that there are only six students working with it and at times even six was too much.

The chamber is small. It is just physical things that have to be worked out.

You know, you have a class of 35 students in a public school and how are you going to get 35 students all to be in close contact with plants, observing what's going on?

And that just works out to one big mess in the long run. So, you know, there are problems you have to work out in that. Maybe you have lab periods. These are educational problems but what I want to talk about is that, I was down on 14th Street yesterday or 2 days ago. Mr. SCHEUER. Were you one of the fellows that left all those paper plates and cups there?

Mr. SILFEN. No.

Mr. SCHEUER. I am glad to hear it. A lot of those demonstrators were environmental polluters in their own right.

Mr. SILFEN. Well, some group of people walked on Fifth Avenue and dumped garbage right in the middle of it.

I got the impression that everybody seems to be aware of the problem but nobody knows what to do about it.

You sit and you talk with the president of a university or another Senator and everybody has their own ideas.

The problem is so new and so recent that there is no precedent for us to follow. There's no examples that we can use in our reasoning to get at it, you know.

« PreviousContinue »