menting the park force would be extremely helpful and could accomplish much in developing present park acreage. A 400-acre tract now under acquisition will need considerable manpower for development before it can be used by the public. Work would consist generally of park development but we have a great deal of reforestation and forest improvement work in our present 4,700-acre holdings. We believe 50 to 75 men can be used advantageously for at least 2 or 3 years. This would help us to give more and better service to our 14 million annual park visitors. Sincerely yours, J. MAX SHEPHERST, Director-Secretary. Mr. GAYLORD NELSON, U.S. Senator, Washington, D.C. CLEVELAND METROPOLITAN PARK DISTRICT, DEAR SENATOR NELSON: We are herewith acknowledging receipt of your letter addressed to Harold W. Groth, director of the Cleveland Metropolitan Park District, requesting information as to the park district's interest in your proposed legislation to provide funds to Federal, State, county, and municipal agencies to utilize unemployed workers on conservation projects such as park development, etc. Mr. Groth is away from the office at the present time recuperating from an illness, but I contacted him regarding your request, and he wishes me to inform you that the Cleveland Metropolitan Park District is interested in the work that would be proposed, such as the development of our park roads, shelter buildings, picnic areas, etc. Mr. Groth's estimate of the number of man-years of work in the immediate future is approximately 100. Hoping the above will be of some help to you, we remain, Very truly yours, GAYLORD NELSON, U.S. Senate, Washington, D.C. H. W. GROTH, Director (Per Teresa C. Corrigan, Secretary to Mr. Groth). CITY OF CINCINNATI, DEAR SIR: We are pleased to provide information requested in your letter of June 12, relative to utilization of unemployed workers. The Cincinnati park system comprises 3,870 acres consisting of 84 separate units. We now are utilizing unemployed workers in a local arrangement, but this program could be expanded if Federal funds were available. The principal types of work which we have in mind under such a program of Federal assistance would be clearing and improving wooded areas, trimming trees, and general work in undeveloped park areas. It has been our general policy not to utilize public welfare labor for work which normally is performed by regular city employees. It is very difficult to estimate how many men could be used, but as a very rough guess we might employ 100 to 200 men on a year-round basis. Very truly yours, L. L. CAMP, Superintendent. Piqua, Ohio, June 19, 1964. Hon. GAYLORD NELSON, Washington, D.C. SIR: I have your letter of June 12, requesting information on the use of Federal funds for park development. The city of Piqua is in the process of converting a housing development into a park. It is possible that we could use 10 man-years in 1965 and 1966 on this project. However, our need would be mostly skilled and semiskilled labor. We have used relief labor for tree removal and general maintenance over the years. This type of help is very inferior because they generally are not suitably clothed and rarely skilled even for ordinary laboring jobs. I presume you have written to the city of Dayton. I understand they have plans for considerable park expansion. I suggest you write to the Miami Conservancy District, 38 East Monument Avenue, Dayton, Ohio, and the Ohio State Archeological and Historical Society, State Street, Columbus, Ohio. There is a possibility that each of them will have major projects in the Piqua-Dayton area. Would it be possible to develop, with your program, a training school for present use and for the retraining of the unemployed for their own future use? Our present crop of young unemployed seem to have nothing but factory skills of a very limited nature. There is no question that this segment of society is going to get larger. Some method must be found to train, or retrain them to be productive. Would it be possible to create labor pools where small projects, or cities, could draw a limited number of men for various lengths of time, acompanied by a labor foreman, or general supervisor? The factor of transportation control and recordkeeping could be coordinated under this arrangement. Even though this takes on characteristics of CCC and WPA, it could be of considerable aid on small projects. Additional information would be appreciated. Very truly yours, RICHARD M. HAIR, Park and Recreation Director. CITY OF PAINESVILLE, Painesville, Ohio, June 24, 1964. Senator GAYLORD NELSON, Washington, D.C. DEAR SENATOR NELSON: I am most happy to answer your questions concerning use of unemployed workers on conservation projects. Painesville is a small city of some 18,000 population with an ongoing program of parks and recreation. We expect to double our parkland acreage in the next year, adding much in the way of natural areas. We are currently using men on the county welfare rolls mostly during the winter months when they are available. We could use many more during the warm weather when planting is possible. The following is an estimate of various projects that men could be used on and the number of man-hours envolved. Park tree planting. Beach sand erosion control__ Street tree planting 500 1,000 500 Bank erosion projects Tree removal and brush clearing---- 4, 000 5,000 For a city of our size it is difficult to do more than the day-to-day park maintenance jobs and we must depend on others to do tree planting, etc., and so financial assistance would be a big help in conserving our parks. Sincerely, JAMES E. FEARON, Director, Parks and Recreation. CITY OF WOOSTER, DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION, Wooster, Ohio, June 24, 1964. Hon. GAYLORD NELSON, MY DEAR SENATOR NELSON: What park department couldn't use additional maintenance labor? In our case we are faced with a 300-percent increase in park area and development without a foreseeable means of increasing our maintenance force. Any student of park history and development will advise you that the greatest boon to the park development in this country was during the WPA and CCC days (and I'm a good Republican). 37-181-64--17 I would suggest that the bill include provision to acquire additional equipment and tools. Men cannot be expected to do anything other than "busy work" without proper equipment. Specifically, we could use help developing roads, hiking trails, bridle paths, shelter construction, skiing facilities, amphitheaters, rest stops, camping facilities, and a number of other items that do not require extensive engineering, study, and supervision. In our case, 25 men working full time over a 5-year period would be "utopia" to us. Good luck with your legislation. Respectfully, Hon. GAYLORD NELSON, U.S. Senate, Washington, D.C. RAYMOND G. MCCARTNEY, Superintendent. CITY OF CINCINNATI, DEAR SENATOR: Mayor Bachrach has asked me to reply to your letter of July 1 concerning legislation which you recently introduced to provide funds for cities to utilize unemployed workers on conservation projects. The city of Cincinnati has benefited by comparable projects during the depression, and undoubtedly could do so again under legislation such as you have introduced. Without having seen the specific legislation, I cannot give you a definite answer to your questions. However, it is safe to say that we could easily use up to 200 persons in the development of already owned park and recreation properties for a period of at least 2 years. For many years, we have used, and are still using, relief clients on work relief projects. We are handicapped in these projects by our limited ability to finance supervision of these workers. Your bill probably would help us overcome this problem. If so, it would be a genuine asset to the city of Cincinnati. Sincerely, Hon. GAYLORD NELSON, U.S. Senator, Washington, D.C. A. D. BIRD (For W. C. Wichman, City manager). CITY OF CLEVELAND, DEAR SENATOR NELSON: I have your letter of recent date in regard to a program you are attempting to develop in Congress, which, to me, seems to be forthright and excellent. I'd like to suggest that this program be geared somewhat like the CCC camps, but with less regimentation and more practical work done by the youth involved in the program. For example, they could improve our present National parks, State parks, city parks, and metropolitan park systems with work camps in same for juveniles who have run afoul of the law and/or juveniles who are in danger of dropping out of school because of lack of funds or because of lack of funds with which to buy clothes to return to school. But, to indiscriminately hire youth without regard to need, financial or otherwise, would serve no good purpose. I can give you an example of the type of work we could use for a few groups in the city of Cleveland. We have 211 city owned and operated playgrounds; we have 20 playfields; we will have 36 outdoor swimming pools next year; we have 16 municipal parks, and 4 18-hole golf courses. The work projects could probably improve on additional fencing, leveling off of playgrounds, playfields, parking areas, and grooming of the swimming pools and skating rinks. Since these areas, all except skating rinks, are summer projects, we could set up projects ourselves for skating areas and skiing areas in the Metropolitan Cleveland area. If you are interested in this brief sketch of my ideas, please feel free to write me again for clarification or amplification of them. Sincerely yours, JOHN S. NAGY, Commissioner, Division of Recreation. Hon. GAYLORD NELSON, OKLAHOMA RESPONSES OKLAHOMA PLANNING AND RESOURCES BOARD, U.S. Senator, Washington, D.C. DEAR SENATOR NELSON: Reference is made to your letter of May 29, 1964, and the program such as you are drafting would give all conservation programs a big boost. In the last several years all park programs have been behind the actual usage. Lack of areas, lack of funds, and lack of advance planning have all been a part of this lag. Presently, the division of State Parks in Oklahoma have ample lands available, but lack of funds for basic park improvements and landscaping have hindered our advance. We could immediately begin projects on landscaping, planting of trees, and planting of grasses. With an allotment of money for some materials, we could begin road improvements, basic improvements in public use areas such as restrooms, picnic tables, picnic shelters, water systems, boat-unloading ramps, several basic youth camps could be constructed, and I am sure other items could be added. It would be extremely hard to estimate the number of man-years without knowing what material funds would be available, or if matching funds were being considered. However, we would have no problem of expending 400 man-years on basic conservation. DEAR SIR: Reference your May 29 letter concerning our use of unemployed workers. As I understand present thinking, these persons would have to be employed on lands under our jurisdiction. If this is true this division could not participate as we do not manage any State-owned lands. If these workers could be used on private lands we could possibly use 200 men continually for a number of years. Very truly yours, DONALD E. STAUFFER, Director. Hon. GAYLORD NELSON, U.S. Senate, Washington, D.C. OKLAHOMA HISTORICAL SOCIETY, DEAR SENATOR NELSON: Should legislation of the type you wrote to me about be inaugurated, we could use several workers on the historic sites owned by the Oklahoma Historical Society. It would take considerable research to tell you how many man-years this would entail. Very truly yours, Hon. GAYLORD NELSON, U.S. Senate, Washington, D.C. ELMER L. FRAKER, Administrative Secretary. THE CITY OF OKLAHOMA CITY, DEAR SENATOR NELSON: We extend our apologies for being late in answering your letter of June 12, 1964. We hope that we may be of service to you in sup plying information that will be useful in drafting a proper bill to provide unemployed workers for conservation projects. I have been with the park service nearly 30 years. I was with the system in the early employment of the Civilian Conservation Corps and the National Park Service. I can truthfully state that certain portions of the work projects of the early days were good, as long as they were directed in the line of conservation. Also, during the early part of 1950 and again in 1956 Oklahoma City and the Army Engineers were in a development program of the North Canadian River. This was a beautiful piece of work when completed in 1956, then due to lack of funds the local municipality has not been able to maintain this property which consists of 5,000 acres and is 5 miles in length. No funds were appropriated for the park department to work in the field of conservation. I use the word conservation in broad terms. This would be reforestation, developing park roads, restoring eroded areas to river banks, creeks, or water sheds. This would be property which would be prepared and ready for introduction without extensive preparation. Let's take the park system as an example as it stands today. Oklahoma City is 624 square miles of which approximately 6,000 acres is undeveloped. We plan to purchase in the next 2 or 3 years approximately 1,000 more acres and this is in addition to land that has been acquired in the Elm Creek Reservoir which is held for recreation as well as city water purposes. During the 1961-62 bond issue of Oklahoma City, we have secured large park areas that could benefit from such a program. We have approximately $2 or $3 million in funds from the 1961 and 1962 bond issue. If there could be a supplement through a grant to the city for projects to work the unemployed, then I would suggest the following categories for the laborers. 1. Unemployed fathers of large families. 2. Unemployed young men that have not been able to secure jobs after honorable discharge from the military service. 3. Draft rejects through failure to meet health requirements. 4. College students who need at least 50 to 75 percent of their expense money in order to continue with their education. 5. Women employees to assist in the office work and as leaders at the playgrounds for sports, crafts, drama, and in other areas of the recreation program which needs college-trained assistants. The laborers could be used in the fall on reforestation programs, landscaping, and beautifying parkways and roads. In the spring, they could work on soil conservation, planting turf areas, laying waterlines, building bridges, walks, etc. One vital fact that I wish you Senators would not overlook in drafting this bill. Please do not bog it down. Make it easy to work under. A district office could be set up in the State or region where the municipality could work directly through to receive its grant or aid in the project. I know that you have to have an agency to work through. Let's use some of the Federal agencies such as the National Park Service or the Department of Reclamation. If you create too many agencies in between the top agency and the one that performs the work, then efficiency bogs down. Oklahoma City has from 5 to 10 man-years of work. If we have been too general in our comments, please do not hesitate to call on us to be more explicit. We want you to know that we are ready to help you in all ways possible. U.S. Senator, Washington, D.C. DEAR SENATOR NELSON: Mr. Allen of the committee on natural resources has referred to us your letter of May 29, 1964. We are most enthusiastic about your |