Senator PELL. The first witness today is Senator Nelsor who is a member of the full Labor and Public Welfare Committee. I hope that he will participate in these subcommittee hearings. I will ask him to open as he sees fit.

STATEMENT OF HON. GAYLORD NELSON, A U.S. SENATOR FROM THE STATE OF WISCONSIN

Senator NELSON. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman.

I wish to comment on two acts that are before your subcommittee. They are S. 3151, the Environmental Quality Education Act, as amended by yourself, Mr. Chairman, and others, and S. 3809, the Environmental Careers Fellowship Act. If both were enacted, they would provide the Office of Education with a firm mandate for a new thrust in the national education field.

The objective of the Enviroinmental Quality Education Act is to establish an education program that will develop an awareness and understanding that man is very much a part of the world in which he lives and that if he degrades, diminishes, wastes or misuses the earth's vital resources he threatens his survival and that of all living things. The issue is not only one of survival but the quality of the environment in which we do survive.

The quality of that survival is inextricably bound to the science of ecology which is concerned with all the ramifications of all the relationships of all living things to each other and their environment.

It is a concern with the total ecosystem not just of how we dispose of tin cans, bottles, and garbage. It is concerned with the habitat of marine creatures, animals, birds, and man. Our goal is not just the environment of clean air and water and scenic beauty while forgetting about the Appalachias and the ghettos where our citizens live in America's worst environment.

Our goal must be an environment of decency, quality, and mutual respect for all living creatures.

It will not, however, be possible to understand much less develop these broad national environmental policies until the relationship between man, nature, and the artificial world are totally reexamined. Our attitudes, values, and modes of behavior need to be modified but that cannot be accomplished until we face the new realities of a society in danger from its own environmental destruction.

The educational process is the only way to develop that understanding and commitment. The world is no longer a limitless frontier and man no longer has the luxury of stripping one site of its resources to move on to the next virgin territory.

Unfortunately that has been man's way for too long and it comes most naturally to him. To change his attitudes and develop a conscious ethic which says man must not destroy and despoil his environment because he is only a part of the delicate balance will require a major educational effort.

Mr. Chairman, I would like to ask that the full statement be printed in the record and that I may just read some excerpts from it. I also request that responses to questioning on environmental education submitted to me be printed in the hearing record.

Senator PELL. It will be printed in the record.

(The statements referred to follow the testimony; the responses to the questionnaire will be found at the end of the hearing record:)

PREPARED STATEMENT BY HON. GAYLORD NELSON, A U.S. SENATOR FROM THE STATE OF WISCONSIN

Mr. Chairman, it is a pleasure to appear before the Subcommittee on Education and testify on the subject of environmental education. The two bills which I have introduced, S. 3151, the Environmental Quality Education Act, as amended by yourself and others and, S. 3809, the Environmental Careers Fellowship Act, would, if enacted, provide the Office of Education with a firm mandate for a new thrust in national education. At present this agency does not have any congressional recognition in the field of environmental studieswithout such a commitment the intentions of today could fade tomorrow.

The objective of the environmental education act is to establish an education program that will develop an awareness and understanding that man is very much a part of the world in which he lives and that if he degrades, diminishes, wastes, or misuses the earth's vital resources he threatens his survival and that of all living things. The issue is not only one of survival but the quality of the environment in which we survive.

And the quality of that survival is inextricably bound to the science of ecology which is concerned with all the ramifications of all the relationships of all living things to each other and their environment. It is concerned with the total ecosystem, not just how we dispose of our tin cans, bottles, and sewage. It is concerned with the habitat of marine creatures, animals, birds and man. And our goal is not just an environment of clean air and water and scenic beauty, while forgetting the Appalachians and the ghettoes where our citizens live in America's worst environment.

Our goal must be an environment of decency, quality, and mutual respect for all living creatures.

It will not, however, be possible to understand, much less develop these broad national environmental policies until the relationships between man, nature, and the artificial world are totally reexamined. Our attitudes, values, and modes of behavior will need to be modified, but that cannot be accomplished until we face the new realities of a society in danger from its own environmental destruction. The educational process is the only way to develop that understanding and commitment.

The world is no longer a limitless frontier and man no longer has the luxury of stripping one site of its resources, to move on the next virgin territory. Unfortunately, that has been man's way for too long and it comes most naturally to him. To change his attitudes and to develop a conscious ethic that says man must not destroy and despoil his environment because he is only a part of the delicate balance, will require a major educational effort.

The beginning of such an educational effort started in April. Last September, I proposed that April 22 be set aside as a day for a national educational effort called Earth Day. The idea of Earth Day was to make the question of the environmental crisis-the pollution of the air and water, the wasting of the natural resources and the ugliness of waste and unplanning-an educational experience for Americans.

There was a tremendous response to Earth Day. Millions of people on and off the college campuses began expressing their concern in a multitude of ways. In New York City, for example, Mayor Lindsay ordered motorized traffic from the streets along a section of Fifth Avenue, and thousands promenaded in a happy, festive air. Parades and demonstrations were held and a few State legislatures began working on important environmental legislation. In all, it was estimated that more than 2,000 colleges, 10,000 high schools and uncounted thousands of community organizations participated in the new educational process with plans to continue and learn more to become active participants in restoring and saving the environment. The turnout was a clear mandate for Congress, the administration, and the country that the staggering challenge of environmental reform and protection was a goal for which people of vastly differing viewpoints, philosophies and ideas were ready to join in fighting.

On November 19 of last year, I introduced the Environmental Quality Education Act. The measure, which now has 24 cosponsors, was drafted and first introduced in the Congress by Congressman John Brademas. As chairman of the House Select Subcommittee on Education, Mr. Brademas has held extensive hearings

on the bill during March, April, and May. If enacted, the proposal would be a first step toward making every day a national environmental teach-in day. In general the act authorizes the Commissioner of Education to establish educational programs to encourage understanding of policies and support of activities designed to enhance environmental quality and maintain ecological balance. Congress recognizes, of course, that the great dirge about the deteriorating environment stands in sharp contrast to the lack of understanding and the inadequate resources-both human and physical-for educating citizens in this area. The purpose of the Environmental Quality Act is to offer programs from the preschool to senior citizen level available to all social and economic classes along with training programs for teachers, and other personnel in the public and private sectors.

Specifically, the Commissioner can fund proposals from institutions of higher learning and other public or private agencies for the development of environmental curricula for elementary, secondary, university, and adult and community education programs. These curricula will necessarily deal with the important relationships between man, nature and the manmade world. They will use the environment more as a teaching resource than it generally has been used in the past.

Curricula demonstration, evaluation and dissemination of materials and other information fill out the role of the Office of Education in this area. Obviously any effective curricula, regardless of where it was designed or developed should be made available by the Office of Education to other sections of the country. Preservice and inservice teacher training programs come under the authority of the act in a variety of ways, summer workshops, new courses of study, symposiums, seminars and conferences. Without adequate teacher training the best curriculum will never be used. The act would be particularly helpful to the Office of Education since it has virtually no authority to prepare undergraduate teachers.. The mass media aso has a role. Materials such as video tapes, films, and related teaching guides can, through TV, for example, get the message across in imaginative and useful ways.

The Environmental Quality Education Act would also create an Advisory Committee on Environmental Education, composed of 21 distinguished persons who are familiar with education, information media, and the problems of environment and ecological balance. The Committee would advise on the administration of the program, make recommendations on the allocation of funds, review applications and evaluate programs and projects carried out under the act.

On May 6, the same day, Mr. Chairman, that you offered your amendment to S. 3151, I introduced S. 3809, the Environment Careers Fellowship Act. If enacted, the Commissioner is authorized to award fellowships for professional study for persons who plan to pursue environmental careers. Such new fields as urban ecology and environmental law are within the scope of this legislation as are the more traditional disciplines of hydrology, chemistry, biology and the science of ecology. In order for students to obtain a fellowship they must be entering a program that has the depth and the quality that will produce a polished, sophisticated professional.

In addition the Office of Education can pay part of the cost of developing or strengthening programs of graduate study. These developmental grants would increase the number of institutions in the Nation that would qualify under the provisions of the act and, therefore, achieve a more appropriate geographical distribution of high quality programs. The measure calls for authorizations, beginning with fiscal year 1971 of $50 million, $100 million, $150 million and $200 million for each succeeding year.

A survey published in the May 1967 issue of Occupational Outlook Quarterly projected an increase in just state and local requirements for sanitation engineers, hydrologists, chemists and biologists from 172,000 in 1964 to 320,000 in 1975. This is a single indication of the great need for more professional environmentalists to serve in universities, public agencies and with private industry. The groundswell of concern in the deteriorating environment can subside if adequate manpower resources are available.

In response to a questionnaire on environmental education, which was submitted to individuals and organizations, many brief but incisive replies have been received. They include examples of many promising projects underway, that could be duplicated in other places. I request that these replies be made a part of the hearing record.

Environmental education is viewed from many perspectives in these replies. Overall there is a common concern shared by all; environmental education is not an isolated discipline. The primary bill before the committee, S. 3151, is designed to draw together existing knowledge to form a new foundation for education. Again and again in discussions and correspondence with experts in the field, I have found an emphasis on the need for not merely new knowledge, but for new attitudes and outlooks which will integrate existing knowledge across conventional disciplinary lines to focus on the many facets of specific environmental problems. New attitudes toward the very purposes of man on this planet will be required.

Environmental education, if it is to be fully effective, cannot be limited to the traditional study of nature and natural resources, but must also concern itself with the manmade environment and the balance between the two. The problems of our cities and rural area are intimately intertwined, as is the relationship of human endeavors to the natural environment.

Rachel Carson's theme of "reverence for life" is becoming less mystical and of more substance as our eyes are opened to havoc we have wrought under the guise of progress. A strong congressional commitment to an all-embracing program of environmental education will help us to find the new working definition of progress that is a prerequisite to the continued presence of life on this planet. Senator NELSON. On November 19, S. 3151 was introduced. This measure now has 24 cosponsors. It was drafted and first introduced in Congress by Congressman John Brademas. As chairman of the House Select Committee on Education, Mr. Brademas has held extensive hearings on the bill during March and April and May. If enacted the proposal would be a first step toward making every day a national environmental teach-in day. In general the act authorizes the Commissioner of Education to establish educational programs to encourage understanding of policies and support of activities designed to enhance environmental quality and maintain ecological balance.

Congress recognizes, of course, that the great surge about the deteriorating environment stands in sharp contrast to the lack of understanding and the inadequate resources, both human and physical, for educating citizens in this area.

The purpose of the Environmental Quality Education Act is to offer programs from the preschool to the senior citizen level available to all social and economic groups along with training programs for teachers and other personnel in private sectors.

Specifically, the Commissioner can fund proposals from institutions of higher learning and other public or private agencies for the development of environmental curricula for elementary and secondary, university, and adult community education programs.

These curriculums will necessarily deal with the important relationships between man, nature, and the man-made world. They will use the environment more as a teaching resource than it generally has been used in the past.

Preservice and inservice teacher training programs come under the authority of the act in a variety of ways: summer workshops, new courses of study, symposiums, seminars and conferences. I might say, Mr. Chairman, I would call to your attention-I have discussed it with the Commissioner of Education, who will be testifying in a few minutes that under subsection 3 at the bottom of page 3 the bill reads:

Making grants to institutions of higher education, local educational agencies, and other public and private organizations to provide presservice and inservice training programs on environmental quality and ecology—including courses of study, symposiums, and workshops, institutes, seminars, conferences for teach

ers, other educational personnel, public service personnel and community, business and industrial leaders and employees and governmental employees at State, Federal and local levels.

I believe very strongly, and I believe the Commissioner agrees with me, that it should be clear in here that this would authorize the Commissioner to give grants, stipends, tuition payments to grade school and high school teachers so that they may attend, for example, summer courses of say 3 months at an institution of higher learning to broaden their understanding of environmental education.

I think that is the intent of Congressman Brademas, I think that is the intent of the bill. But I am not sure that it is spelled out clearly enough. The Commissioner told me he would comment on it also when he testified.

If not, I would hope perhaps we could work out a perfecting amendment and submit it so that we are sure that a grade-school teacher can get an opportunity for some financial support for summer studies at institutions of higher education. I would consider that to be a very important objective in any environmental education act.

Senator PELL. When the amendment is submitted we will consider it, both in these hearings and in the executive session.

Senator NELSON. I would be glad to submit one or maybe the Commissioner would like to submit a clarification.

This act will also create an Advisory Committee on Environmental Education composed of 21 distinguished persons who are familiar with education, information media, and the problems of the environment. On May 6, I introduced S. 3809, the Environmental Careers Fellowship Act. The objective of that is to grant fellowships to students in various scientific disciplines who are attending or who are committed to attend and will attend institutions that have broad environmental educational programs with the objective of training these students for environmental careers. Mr. Chairman, that concludes my remarks on the two bills.

Senator PELL. I thank you very much. I am particularly glad that these hearings are being held because Senator Nelson has long taken the lead in environmental problems long before it became synonomous with "Apple Pie" and "Motherhood."

He is to be congratulated by the whole community of our country as the drafter of this bill and as the organizer of Earth Day.

At this point in the record we will receive the statement of the junior Senator from Oregon, Mr. Packwood.

STATEMENT OF HON. ROBERT W. PACKWOOD, A U.S. SENATOR FROM THE STATE OF OREGON

Senator PACKWOOD. Mr. Chairman, we are considering here legislation that is absolutely essential if we are to squarely face the challenge of environmental deterioration. As you know, I cosponsored S. 3237, the bill introduced by Senator Goodell, the Environmental Reclamation Education Act of 1969.

It is significant that we have two proposals before this committee that reach to the very core of the problem facing us-education of a Nation about how to meet and conquer the enemies of pollution. The question is, "What is the best approach?"