on conservation projects. For your information, we are presenting salient data reflecting fisheries projects which would be of direct value here in the sandhills region of Nebraska. (a) Stream improvement (fisheries habitat improvement). (b) Harvest of commercial fish and nongame fish_ (c) Development of access roads, recreational facilities at major fishing sites___. Manyears 20 12 25 If funds were available, we could utilize approximately 50 workers in developing sport fishery potential within the sandhills area (20,000 square miles). I would suggest that you contact Mr. Jack Strain, Chief, Division of State Parks, Statehouse, Lincoln 9, Nebr., for his suggestions concerning utilization of workers for park development and roadside improvement throughout the State. Sincerely yours, D. B. MCCARRAHER, Senior Area Fisheries Manager, District II. CITY OF OMAha, Nebr., PARKS, RECREATION, AND PUBLIC PROPERTY DEPARTMENT, Senator GAYLORD NELSON, Washington, D.C. July 20, 1964. DEAR SIR: Your letter to the mayor concerning funds that could be utilized by municipalities for unemployed workers has reached our department. Our work in this department covers parks, recreation, and forestry. In order to do the work as outlined in our park development program, we could use 100 men for as long as your program would be in duration. In other words, 100 man-years per year. This work should include skilled, semiskilled, and labor classifications. Since our department is also responsible for a recreation program, we could use in connection with the recreation facilities we have, such as swimming pools, golf courses, tennis courts, playgrounds, etc., 100 persons per year in addition to what we now have. These people would be in the leadership classification, as persons running handcraft programs, gymnasium programs, athletic programs, music programs, dramatics, etc. In other words, we could use 100 man-years, per year, as long as the program existed. Our The trees in the city of Omaha for many years have been neglected. forestry department is not large enough to handle the care of the street trees in th city. It is the responsibility of each property owner to look after his own trees, at the present time. This is entirely due to the fact that the city forestry department does not have the manpower to look after this work. We, in the city administration, feel very strongly that the responsibility for the management and care of these trees should be in our hands. This has been impossible on the basis of budget allowed. We now have 15 men well trained in the fundamentals of tree care who could serve a capacity of directing work crews and training them in arboriculture. Such training should enable trainees to enter into a rapidly expanding field when their tour of duty is completed. We could easily use 65 to 75 men per year, for the duration of said program. If there is anything else that we can do, that would be helpful to you, please call upon us. Sincerely, R. B. MCCLINTOCK, General Superintendent, Parks and Recreation Division. CITY OF LINCOLN, NEBR., PARKS, SAFETY, AND PUBLIC PROPERTY, DIVISION, DEAR SIR: Mr. Emmett Junge, director of the Lincoln Park and Recreation Department has referred your letter of June 15 to me regarding the possibility of utilizing unemployed workers on conservation projects such as park development, etc. In answer to your question, "If funds were available, could you utilize substantial numbers of workers in your own programs?" I would like to say that I am sure we could. It is a little difficult to give a positive answer, not knowing the details of such a project and which would of course, create some questions of my own. Some of these questions might be : Could these men be used for routine park maintenance? Would they be available for supervisory personnel in the case of construction projects? Would there be money available to put competent instructors on the job in the various phases of construction, in order to train these men? Would any funds be available for construction other than for labor? The above and many other questions would actually determine the number of man-years that we would be able to effectively utilize. Our current capital improvement program runs about $200,000 per year with most of it being on a contract basis. If competent manpower were available, with proper supervision, most of this money could go for materials and we could do the work ourselves, and greatly expand the number of improvements that we could make. From a strictly improvement program, the type of projects vary tremendously in a park department. We construct new buildings such as restrooms, shelters, etc.; build fence; maintain a nursery and ball and transplant trees. We build sidewalks, roads and parking lots. Also grade, seed and landscape, as well as construct ball diamonds, etc. If some of this manpower could be channeled into maintenance work, I would think that the Lincoln park department could utilize a minimum of 100 manyears. I am sure I have been very, very general in my answer, but without knowing more of the details of this proposal, I do not feel I could get any more specific. I would like to close by saying that with the ever-increasing amount of leisure time and the tremendous load that is being thrown onto our park systems at all levels of government, such a program could be an extremely important one for the future of this Nation. DEAR SENATOR NELSON: This is in reply to your letter of the 29th pertaining to certain legislation that you are drafting to provide funds for Federal-Statecounty and other agencies to utilize unemployed workers on conservation proj ects. You inquire as to the extent that such labor could be used in Nevada. On June 3 the division of State forestry replied to your letter and this letter I think fairly well sets forth my thoughts as well as those of the division of parks, which is also a division under my department. I would, however, like to have a copy of your proposed legislation which would better enable us to determine as to the extent that we could use labor and other facilities offered by your program. As you know, this is a very large State with a great deal of open spaces and the work would be fairly well scattered throughout the State. I want to commend you for your desire to utilize unemployed workers on conservation projects. Sincerely yours, DEAR SENATOR NELSON: In reply to your letter of May 29, inquiring about our possible use of unemployed workers on conservation projects, may we submit the following: If funds were available, we could utilize substantial numbers of workers in our programs under certain conditions. We would need housing, work equipment, and operating money for the whole program because it would be over and above what we are doing now. We would require funds and authorization for additional supervisory personnel at the rate of about 1 to 6 new workers. There would have to be enough flexibility in the program so that crews and camps could be varied in size and moved between areas where work is to be done. Since Nevada has very little State-owned land, most work would have to be done on cooperative projects, which might include forest pest control, timber stand improvement and recreational development. I could not estimate accurately the man-years work that could be usefully undertaken without knowledge of the legislature and regulatory program restrictions. However, I cannot visualize programs using more than 100 to 200 people over an extended period of time. We appreciate the opportunity to provide this information to you. If we can be of further help, do not hesitate to call on us again. Very truly yours, GEORGE ZAPPETTINI, State Forester. STATE OF NEVADA, June 16, 1964. Hon. GAYLORD NELSON, Washington, D.C. MY DEAR SENATOR NELSON: In reply to your letter of June 3, 1964, in which you inquired about the use of workers in our program of conservation, I submit the following: Quite a number of possibilities for the use of unskilled labor exist in our particular field of conservation work, i.e., fish and game management. Some of these projects are stream improvement for trout fisheries, deer winter range improvement by seeding of browse species, pruning of highlined browse species, building of hunting access roads. It is more difficult to estimate the number of man-years we could efficiently use at the present time. However, I'm reasonably sure that in this particular district, we could keep 25 men busy from April 1 through October 31 on needed jobs. If we can furnish additional information, please feel free to write. Sincerely, LEONARD W. HOSKINS. CITY OF NORTH LAS VEGAS, North Las Vegas, Nev., June 24, 1964. Hon. GAYLORD NELSON, U.S. Senate, Washington, D.C. DEAR MR. NELSON: The legislation you describe in your letter of June 15, 1964, interests me a great deal. I am not sure what you would consider a substantial number of workers but let me answer your questions in this way. We presently have 11 parks under construction and 4 more proposed for construction. Our program as presently outlined will span a period of 5 years. If funds were available this program could be accelerated and we could employ between 15 and 25 unemployed workers on this type of project. I am sure that the street department as well as our utilities department could also make use of a similar number. The type of projects would be the propogation and forestation of trees suitable to our area, establishing of green belts on perpetually deeded drainage easements and general labor on our new park development as well as some basic maintenance work if this were allowed. Since we do not have timber stands but do wish to develop windbreaks as a soil conservation program, we would undoubtedly be able to utilize the greatest number of people in this capacity. We have one park site, 1,080 acres in size, which is at this time little more than desert and will require considerable development and I am in the process of applying under the Recreation and Public Purpose Act for another 640 acres which will also need extensive forestation for park purposes. I wish you luck and success with your program. Very truly yours, Hon. GAYLORD NELSON, U.S. Senator from Wisconsin. R. O. FORSON, Director of Recreation and Parks. CITY OF RENO, RECREATION DEPARTMENT, Reno, Nev., June 24, 1964. HON. GAYLORD NELSON: I appreciate very much your letter dated June 15, 1964, in which you state that you are drafting legislation to provide funds to municipal agencies to utilize unemployed workers on conservation projects such as park development. If funds such as you mention were made available, we certainly could utilize substantial numbers of qualified workers in our park development programs. We are in the process of developing three major parks in the city of Reno, and as you probably know, there is always a lack of funds that will stop the progress of the development of parks. I feel that this would be not only a godsend to unemployed workers, but also to the field of recreation. At the moment, it is impossible for me to estimate the number of man-years of work which might be undertaken, but it is certainly a substantial figure. Please feel free to call upon me at any time for any help that you may wish from this particular department. Sincerely, Rocco L. SPINA, Director of Recreation. CITY OF LAS VEGAS, NEV., Hon. GAYLORD NELSON, U.S. Senate, Washington, D.O. DEAR SENATOR NELSON: In reply to your letter of inquiry concerning the providing of Federal funds for various municipal conservation projects, I trust the information herein will be of value. Because of the phenomenally rapid growth of Las Vegas in recent years, with the attendant problems of providing essential services, it has been necessary to minimize the development of park and roadside areas to a greater extent than we would have desired. Another factor which has proven a serious deterrent to roadside landscaping is the area in which Las Vegas is located, making the cost of water as well as installing extensive sprinkler systems prohibitive. However, a project of some extensity in which relatively unskilled labor could be utilized is the proposed construction of flood control channels, dikes, and water storage basins to be situated on the western outskirts of Las Vegas. Estimates of cost are not available since the project is still in the preliminary planning stage. From the information contained in your letter it would appear that primarily salary funds only would be available, but as far as Las Vegas is concerned, entire cost moneys are more urgently required for the acquisition of right-of-way, land purchase, equipment, and general implementation of the programs. Very truly yours, ORAN K. GRAGSON, Mayor. Director of Public Works. DEAR SENATOR NELSON: Please pardon the delay in response to your letter of May 29 in which you invite comment concerning the utilization of unemployed workers on conservation projects, park development, timber stand improvement and related programs. Your letter happened to coincide with the vacation periods of our State forester and director of parks to whom the letter was referred. I am glad to have this opportunity to comment on the very worthwhile legislation you propose, as this department has had 2 years of experience with a similar program in which unemployed workers, college students, and unemployed high school dropouts have been employed. During the past 2 years, the State of New Hampshire has expended a legislative appropriation of $9 million for the expansion of its State parks system. Through the utilization of our park expansion program (PEP) crews, substantial economics have been effected in initial land preparation prior to the letting of construction contracts. The crews have been very useful in working with the department's landscape architect and park engineers in swamping out access roads, brush clearance, land grading, and similar aspects of a project where limited skills will suffice. The crews are made up of eight men broken down in the following categories: Four adult unemployed heads of families, two college students, and two high school dropouts who have no particular vocational training. Crews are recruited and supervised by our district foresters. Enactment of the legislation which you propose would permit a sizable expansion of this program, would result in wider assistance to college students in obtaining funds for further education and hopefully provide some start toward forestry or related careers for youngsters who have not completed their high school education. As 85 percent of the area of the State of New Hampshire is covered by forest lands, much of it is mountain country, expansion of our program under your proposal would permit a greatly improved program in the area of fire prevention. This department currently maintains 31 mountain towers for fire watchmen which require a substantial amount of annual maintenance, both to structures and to access roads. I would hope that your legislation would encompass either funds for the acquisition of hand tools and equipment or would provide a means for setting up priorities for the transfer of Government surplus equipment that might be related to such a program. In addition to the usual hand tools related to forest work, this department presently uses busses for transportation of the crews from pickup points to the work site, small bulldozers, wood chippers, and other types of vehicular equipment. Our initial thinking when the PEP program was inaugurated envisioned setting up construction camps not unlike the old CCC camps of the early 1930's. This approach was abandoned in view of the logistic problems involved, plus the fact that in all but the remotest areas of the State, bus pickup service has been feasible. So far, work has been limited to the |