H.R. 14753 ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY EDUCATION ACT The rampant and unconcerned destruction of the environment by man should be the concern of all citizens. The forces brought to bear on the fragile balance found in nature must be blunted. This can be done only if the citizen is aware of the environmental crisis and of the possible solutions to the problems involved. This can best be done through an educational program such as proposed in H.R. 14753. The greatest need at this time is to create in the general population an awareness of the environmental problems confronting man. Informing prospective school teachers and the general citizen is essential and can best be done in the colleges and universities. The production of educational films for the public schools and the general public is another avenue by which to disseminate the information. The professional expertise found in the universities can be most helpful in this matter. Seminars and workshops directed by professionals in sociology, government, biology, etc. are also necessary. H.R. 14753 can be instrumental in funding such programs and in the development of new college currricula which will emphasize environmental problems. ALLAN D. LINDER, PH. D., LINDE-HUBBARD ASSOCIATES, INC. ARCHITECTS, COMMITTEE MEMBERS OF THE SELECT SUBCOMMITTEE ON EDUCATION, GENTLEMEN: I have been requested by Representative John Brademas to elaborate on a suggestion I briefly out-lined to him on a proposed "Jury" suggestion to govern the selection of Federally supported projects in the hope of improving our physical environment. It must be obvious to the most indifferent observer that our physical environment-our man-made structures are sadly lacking in quality. Since your hearings on the Environmental Quality Education Act are concerned with the problem of educating our citizens to an awareness of their surroundings, it is perhaps appropriate to submit my proposal for your consideration. Winston Churchill is attributed with saying that 85 per cent of human behaviour is dictated by the space one occupies. In other words, man can shape his buildings, but the building shapes the man. This might be a partial explanation why we, as architects, have such a difficult time dealing with those who spend their working hours in government mausoleums. Our consensus is, I assume, to take steps to improve the understanding and appreciation of the need for a quality environment. This, your committee is attempting to do by beginning with the young. This is a long overdue and necessary step. I cannot imagine anyone opposing these goals. But my contention is that we already have the talent if it can be properly harnessed, to make a substantial impact on improving the quality of our physical environment now. On a modest scale, my firm has dealt with various governmental agencies such as GSD, HEW, HUD, FHA, etc. Some are worse than others, but in no case have we dealt with people of power who have the training, background, experience or education to make, in our opinion, the basic judgment decisions which will initiate a building or structure of quality. Where a quality project has been built, it has been a fortuitous accident rather than the result of policy. The Federal government already wields an enormous influence on the quality of our physical environment. The problem is, how can one improve the understanding of those who wield the levers of power within the various governmental agencies. In my opinion, based on our experience, it is impossible to do so under the present system. Should the proposed Environmental Quality Act be passed and adequately funded, it would be an ice age before these children could make a substantial impact upon the quality of their environment. At the rate we are presently going the legacy we bequeath will be a staggering task to clean up. 47-238-70—54 My suggestion to resolve the dilemma is this: Recognized architects of proven ability should be selected to serve on a jury which would have authority to evaluate all projects which involve Federal financing and public use. All drawings of proposed projects would be judged under rules similar to those which control an authorized architectural competition. Assuming that no extraordinary delays would be encountered, this system should not alarm a competent architect. În fact, such a system might actually speed up the present system of approval. The current governmental system of approval moves with glacial speed. Such a jury system would have an immediate impact upon the quality of our physical environment. Such a jury system would tap the substantial talents of our profession. It would remove design quality control from the hands of mediocre bureaucrats and presumably, raise the quality of our physical environment. In addition to the architects, additional "experts" might also be appointed to serve. I doubt if the public or the politicians would swallow an all architectural jury, in fact, additional qualified men would serve a very useful function. The jury should serve at regular intervals of short duration, be rotated and be adequately compensated. Most architectural schools operate on a jury system so this suggestion should not seem innovative to bonafide architects. We all went through it once. A competent jury would go through many projects within a day. I can imagine the hurrah of dissent this proposal would arouse within an organized bureaucracy, and even from many within our profession, particularly from those whose designs might be rejected. But, the government and the citizens should be entitled to a better physical environment, and if the government does not have the talent (and, to me, this is an indisputable fact) how can we raise the quality so desperately needed? I suggest that juries be created on both regional and hieratical basis, with, if this is deemed necessary, a review board system. Regional for the practical consideration of availability and knowledge of local problems; and, hieratical both for review, but, more important, certain projects might require specialized or exceptionally highly qualified experts and architects-power plants for instance, or Federal projects of exceptional importance. The delineation of jury responsibility might be restricted to the size of the project. Our man made institutions are never perfect, but our legal system as imperfect as it is, does mete out a degree of justice. The same cannot be said for our huge bureaucracies which control so much of our physical environment. This bureaueracy is judge and jury, and controls the financing as well. This omnipotent power is formidable. Unless a drastic change in our evaluation system of design control is created, it will be an ice age before our physical environment is upgraded. Even if we could educate a generation of children to a higher degree of awareness of our physical environment, the task of removing our physical pollution will be horrendous by the time they come of age. If my suggestion of a jury system seems too revolutionary to apply on a National scale, why not try it on a regional basis as an experiment? I would suggest using the New England region, for here there is a wealth of architectural talent and à reservoir of intellectual interest where such an experiment might receive considerable support. I suggest that this is a favorable time to propose a system of upgrading our physical environment. Everyone is talking environment. Last weekend Vermonters, went out in force and voluntarily picked up the trash, the beer cans, the "non-returnables", the accumulated junk along our highways. This was an excellent on-the-job training on environmental pollution. People of all ages are troubled about the mess growing up around us, but few are better equipped to do something about it than our talented architects. Our profession, and justly so, can be accused of abdicating its responsibility. We have little lobbying leverage. political power, and too many mediocre people who kow-tow to the existing order, who too often willingly contribute to shlock solutions for the all mighty buck. I maintain that should you, our political representatives demand, and you have the right to demand, quality in our physical environment, we have the means and talents now to accomplish this end. To speak from a biased point of view, I suggest that power must be put in the hands of those best trained to wield it. The American Institute of Architects are soon having their annual convention in Boston. Perhaps this is the time to spring such a proposal as I have suggested upon Mr. Rex Allen, the President of the AIA, for ultimately our Society w have to be involved. Hoping I may have been of help to your Select Committee, I remain, Sincerely yours, CHARLES J. HUBBARD. TESTIMONY BY MRS. BETTY Little, BaskING RIDGE, N.J. I am a conservationist and an economist and I am making this statement in support of the Environmental Quality Education Act because my experience leads me to believe that this is the quickest and most important way in which to meet the environmental crisis. I have twenty years experience in the field of finance and economists, have spent the last seven years teaching finance at Fairleigh Dickinson University, Madison, N.J. and am currently Co-ordinator for Citizens for ConservationBernards Township. The environmental crisis is most acute in New Jersey. We are already the most densely populated state in the nation and 12,000 persons a year are being added to our population. We are highly industrialized and lying between two large metropolitan areas, we can only expect that our problems will become more complex. Some of our communities are already closed for lack of adequate sewerage, power failure and dimouts are frequent, air pollution alarms soon will be commonplace and large stretches of our rivers are open sewers. Our roads are jammed with cars, our railroads in decay, our governments state and local bankrupt. There are riots in our cities and drugs in our suburbs, we are indeed a state in environmental crisis. There is a need here, as in the nation, for a vast reordering of human concepts and resetting of human priorities in terms of ecology and environment. In a determination to do what we could under the circumstances and with whatever talent we could find, Citizens for Conservation-Bernards Township established in March a speakers bureau (see Exhibit #1 program sheet). We feel strongly that in a democracy the necessary changes will take place only when the people are educated to make responsible choices. I have come here to report to you about our activities, about conclusions which we have reached from our experience, and about our investigation of possible locations for programs such as ours. First, our speakers bureau which originally numbered six was expanded to fourteen to meet the demands of the community. In three months of operation we have participated in programs given in four counties, covering six school systems and many private organizations. We have reached over 3,000 persons ranging from three to eighty plus in age. The programs were primarily presented to small groups on a personal basis. We have also undertaken two pilot programs one for a fourth grade and another currently underway for a fifth grade which include a series of class sessions, a project and a field trip to the management area of the Great Swamp. The fourth grade group studied the need for taking an inventory of our environment and of using our resources wisely, the fifth grade is experimenting with soil problems. Second, from our experience we have drawn a number of conclusions which will be of interest to you in considering this bill. a. We have gained a great deal of experience in how to teach various groups and age levels, how to involve class teachers, how to use one class to teach another, how to develop classroom materials and where to look for materials and assistance. b. In doing these programs we have learned more about our environment and have found ways to solve some local problems. The material is dynamic and the longer we have studied it, the more possible it seems to solve the problems. c. We have recognized a need for environmental centers outside existing school systems. Such centers could provide education for people regardless of education and background. Programs could be flexible and creative and there could be in such centers an opportunity for all segments of the population to make contributions towards the development and running of the center. The success of such a program will depend on the ability of the Center to reach all segments of the population in a meaningful way. It must be a personal education for individual commitment. d. We feel there is a need for leadership on a national level to channel experience and material and to provide funds for the building of environmental centers or for the restoration or revitalizing of existing centers which could provide environmental education. There are three centers in Northern New Jersey, for example, which with the proper guidance and teaching materials could act as centers and put in motion program far more extensive and advanced than ours. We have visited with our children: Morristown Museum, Trailside Museum in Summit and the State Museum in Trenton. Very little in the way of environmental education appears available and yet the basic materials are there. There must be hundreds of such potential centers throughout the United States. I urge you to pass the Environmental Quality Education Act of 1970 as swiftly as possible so that next year we can begin the long but critical job of re-education for survival on a national basis. EXHIBIT No. 1 PROGRAMS SPONSORED BY CITIZENS FOR CONSERVATION-BERNARDS tion. TOWNSHIP "Environmental Brainstorming," all ages, 30-60 minutes, audience participa"Native Animals and Flowers," slide presentation, all ages, 15-45 minutes depending on age level. "The Meaning of the Food Chain," discussion with visual aids, 15-30 minutes, all ages. "What is Conservation?" experiments and games, 15 minutes, kindergarten to 5th grade. "Restoring your Environment," 30 min., adult. "Chalk Talk on Conservation," 45 minutes, all levels. (P) "Life Cycle of the Gypsy Moth," 30-45 minutes, visual display including specimens; all ages. "Environmental Education," 45 minutes. (P) "County Parks are for People," How parks can play a role to preserve the quality of our environment. 45 minutes. (P) "Random Reflections-Philosophy and Spirit of the Outdoors," 20 minutes, 6th grade and up. (P) "Our National EQ" (environmental quality), 30 minutes, adult. "The Passaic River and Its Problems," 30 minutes, adult. "Population Problems," Alice Day, Smith College, 1 hour edited tape and discussions, adult and high school level. "Environmental Crisis," Barry Commoner, 1 hour tape and discussion sessions, adult and high school level. Speakers Bureau include: Mrs. Elfreda Finch, Mrs. Florence Cox, Mrs. Betty Little, Mrs. Ella Filippone, Mrs. K. Von der Heiden, and Mr. Walter Jones, Somerset County Naturalist. Material for these programs was prepared with the assistance of Rutgers University College of Agriculture and Environmental Sciences, Somerset County Park Commission, N.J. Department of Agriculture, Somerset County Extension Service, North Jersey Conservation Foundation, and the National Wildlife Federation. These programs are sponsored by Citizens for Conservation-Bernards Township. Arrangements for them may be made by writing to Box 232, Baking Ridge, New Jersey 07920 or by telephoning 766-5516. (P) These programs may be arranged by calling Mr. Walter Jones directly at 766-2489. STATEMENT OF OLGA MADAR This statement is being presented on behalf of Olga M. Madar, Executive Board Member of the United Auto Workers Union, whose headquarters are located at 8000 East Jefferson, Detroit, Michigan. We are happy for the opportunity to present our thoughts on H.R. 14753. As stated in the findings and purpose of this Act, there is a great need to educate all citizens about environmental quality and ecological balance. We also have to educate them to the fact that we will not tolerate a contaminated environment any longer. The people understand that materials inside of a factory are the assets of that plant and when unused or unburned portions of these assets are put into the air or water, they still belong to that company and should not be taken care of at public expense. Also, there is a great need to educate our elected and appointed officials who often add insult to injury by their public utterances and actions. For instance, when a Congressman says "if the people of this country are going to have their demands for power met, they are going to have to accommodate themselves to placing into the atmosphere the BTU's that you can't turn into electricity and they are going to shut up about ecological conditions." People who contend pollution is inevitable are talking about money-not technology or ecology. Also, such remarks indicate that we must effectuate a change in our value systems. The Federal Government utilizes eminent domain to secure lands for projects in the public interest. What is more in the public interest than the air we breathe or the water we drink to sustain life? Our hope now, as it always has been, is that effective action will be taken to sharpen the techniques and tools of education to make available educational opportunity to all, to allow Americans to share in shaping their destiny and determining the quality of their environment. We feel the present acts dealing with the environment are designed to monitor and to produce an official acceptable level of pollution, not to stop it. There are important decisions to make which will shape our future and these decisions cannot be made without all of the knowledge and facts correctly gathered and interpreted by not only those people who are decision makers but also by making sure that we involve the average citizen in effectuating the necessary changes leading to the solution of our natural resource problems. As an example, in the view of this average citizen, union and non-union related, the major resources of the contemplated programs should be channelled into the central cities of urban areas, where the problems are most critical and environmental pollution the greatest. Union-affiliated blacks, other ethnic groups, and the deprived are trapped in the ghettos of cities where they have to accept as a way of life, the municipal and industrial pollution surrounding them. Their entrapment, especially our union members, is built not so much on economic deprivation but the subtle housing gentlemen agreements which severely limit their choice of housing and neighborhood. As a natural consequence, they are most accutely aware of the impact on their lives, of the lack of understanding and knowledge about man's interdependence on man. Again, from their perspective there are natural resources and land use, peculiar to the urban environment, which can expand the purity and enjoyment of the environment by which they are daily confronted. Therefore, under Section 2, Paragraph B, we would like the Act to specify labor unions as well as the others mentioned. Labor unions should also be included in Section 3, not only for the purpose of receiving grants, but also for developing the curriculums. We would like to see a project instituted in areas where people will participate, such as their church halls, neighborhood centers, local union buildings, etc. Any program to improve man's awareness of his relationship to the total environment must be cognizant of this lack and be geared to positive programs and accomplishments in the areas where those who are deprived live and work. The UAW in its policies, programs and activities has recognized historically that service to its members requires not only progress in the area of collective bargaining but also progress within the community to build a better life for all citizens. Our members and their families are directly affected by the environment around them, whether inside or outside the plant. The pollution of the air and of the water, the unwise waste of our natural resources are of concern to all of us. Several years ago, in light of these needs, the International Executive Board, by unanimous action, approved the establishment of the UAW Department of Conservation and Resource Development, whose goals are to encourage, educate and mobilize our members, as responsible citizens, to take a more active role in our natural resource problems. Funds should be allocated for programs and facilities, parks, schools, camps, work projects and training for park jobs. Above all, action programs should be instituted which involve youth and their parents in implementing the democratic legislative process, to stop the forces and change the practices which have made environmental pollution the critical problem of our day and the most glaring example of man's inhumanity to man. To realize these goals, our Department has a staff throughout the country that devotes its full time to studying and programs at seminars, workshops, summer schools and leadership training institutes. The amendment to H.B. 14753, that we request would greatly expedite the realization of these goals. Hon. CARL D. PERKINS, MISSION AVENUE PARENT TEACHER ASSOCIATION, Chairman, House Committee on Education and Labor, House Office Building, Washington, D.C. DEAR MR. PERKINS: The following resolution in support of the Environmental Quality Education Act (H.R. 14753) was adopted at the February 10, 1970, unit meeting of the Mission Avenue Parent Teacher Association. Whereas the California Education Code requires instruction about man in relation to his human and natural environment. |