Ask the Scholar
Document scope · 1 page
Scholar
Ask about this object, its catalog metadata, its source description, or the page inventory.
For page-specific OCR and visual context, open one of the page chats.
Scholar Source Context
Document identity
localId
118564950
label
[Ecology] - Review of the California Ecology Corps (hearing before Committee on Efficiency and Cost Control, June 1972) (2 of 3)
core
doc
dtoType
document
citationUrl
pageCount
1
Source metadata
id
118564950
contentType
document
title
[Ecology] - Review of the California Ecology Corps (hearing before Committee on Efficiency and Cost Control, June 1972) (2 of 3)
citationUrl
identifierLocal
840
collections
Ronald Reagan's Governor's Papers of the Press Unit
Reports
thumbnailUrl
largeImageUrl
imageCount
1
hasImages
yes
source
import
hasTranscription
no
Source extras
naId
118564950
coverageEndDate
logicalDate
1975-12-31
year
1975
coverageStartDate
logicalDate
1967-01-01
year
1967
levelOfDescription
fileUnit
recordType
description
ocrSource
nara-archive
Single page context
seq
1
pageIndex
0
type
document
mediaId
954aaf90f48b125a
ocrText
Ronald Reagan Presidential Library
Digital Library Collections
This is a PDF of a folder from our textual collections.
Collection: Reagan, Ronald: Gubernatorial Papers,
1966-74: Press Unit
Folder Title: [Ecology] - Review of the California
Ecology Corps (hearing before Committee on
Efficiency and Cost Control, June 1972) (2 of 3)
Box: P34
To see more digitized collections visit:
https://reaganlibrary.gov/archives/digital-library
To see all Ronald Reagan Presidential Library inventories visit:
https://reaganlibrary.gov/document-collection
Contact a reference archivist at: [email protected]
Citation Guidelines: https://reaganlibrary.gov/citing
National Archives Catalogue: https://catalog.archives.gov/
When I was talking with committee staff this morning and
was asked a question that, at that time I didn't have the answer
to it and the question was, you know, why all the gripes? You
know, if people don't like a regular employee, if he doesn't like
that job situation, you know, he simply, you know, he either just
leaves. And so I'd address myself just to this point. I wrote
up a statement over noon and I don't have copies. I'll try to get
copies to you. (Appendix E)
CHAIRMAN CULLEN: We'd like to hear it. Proceed with your
first statement.
MR. WHITE: As Mr. Stearns pointed out, a major function
of the Corps is to create a force of trained wildland fire
fighters to replace the dwindling supply of inmates in the conser-
vation camp program, I think is clearly understood. In order to
justify this investment in training volunteers as fire fighters,
the Corps' administrators have also asked volunteers to commit
themselves for a six month period in the Corps. And forestry
personnel have talked - that I have talked with, have observed
it took even a longer time. It takes a full fire season at least
to properly train a fire fighter and that only after two sea-
sons, does one really become a proficient fire fighter. I
think that was the statement on the conservation camp program that
the people in that are one of the best fire fighting forces in the
country because they are well trained and they have been in the
program for a while.
If allowed to go on it would seem highly advantageous to
offer corpsmen a program sufficiently attractive to encourage re-
-64-
enlistment after the six months, if not at least to insure
volunteers will stay in the Corps for the initial six month period.
Volunteers, speaking both for C.O.'s and the regular volunteers,
right now a majority of C.O.'s as well as some volunteers have
given up all hope of any corrective change occurring in the Corps
and are almost ready to abandon the thing. I don't know whether
.
this is true or not. Sometimes I have feelings like everyone
is ready to abandon the Corps and other times I see a ray of hope.
And, you know, the Corps is very definitely worth preserving and,
you know, we should, you know, work to make the changes.
And, the question, you know, back to the question and that's
I don't think that the corpsmen are asking, you know, these problems
be handled by their taking control of the administrative aspects
of the program. And I think that's unrealistic and I don't think
they are asking that.
I think what they are asking is they be given an opportunity
to express their viewpoints and to make positive suggestions like
we have tried to make in the petition to the Corps administrator
so that they can work together. We can work for responsible change
in the program. I think all of us want to see the Corps work,
the administrator and the corpsmen.
And now back to the question that I talked with committee staff
about and that is normally there are two avenues through which an
employee can protest unsatisfactory working conditions. They
can either talk to their people above them and express their dis-
satisfaction with the problems, about the problems, and hope that
a solution can be reached. And if that doesn't accomplish anything,
--65-
then they can leave. They have the option of leaving us and
finding a better job. And I don't think at the present time that
either of these avenues are really available to corpsmen and, I
think, this is why there is frustration in the situation.
I think, you know, this is what they are. I would ask for
at least a chance and what I'm asking for is that avenues be made
available to them.
As I said, most of the frustration felt by corpsmen is
because of lack of contact and lack of response from administrators
in the Corps. Primarily lack of contact where contact has been
made in grievances expressed to top administrators, there has
been some, you know, hope of change. I think primarily when you
are out - I know I speak from personal experience. When you
are out in the field, the policy decisions that are made in Sacramento
are a long way away from, you know, you and you have no real access
to them.
I personally came down twice last summer on my days off to
talk about change and I was very - I talked to Mr. Stearns and
Jerry Newton and, you know, I was --- felt like there was a chance.
One of the things we talked about was getting together corps-wide
meetings to discuss some of the problems and I felt that was a
very positive thing. Those meetings, by the way, have not been
instituted. And after the last hearing, the Senate Finance Committee
hearing, Mr. Griggs said that they would not be instituted; that
there would no longer be any.
I was very disappointed in that when he made that statement.
So that, you know, there hasn't been the ability or availability
-66-
of - for corpsmen to reach and talk to the top administrators,
the ones that can change the program unless they are at least
there.
There hasn't been a recognized program. A few individuals
have gone and talked to them, but not any organized program as
such.
And the second option that most of them have, that of
quitting the jobs, you know, that if conditions are intolerable,
isn't available really on a realistic basis to most of the --
either the corpsmen or the volunteers at the present time. The
volunteers that are coming into the program until - well, in
the past they were in the past largely C.O.'s and while they had
the option in one sense of not going in, they had to find some
sort of alternate service employment and I think many of them
did go into the Corps. I know myself personally I went in with
the hopes if it wasn't an Ecology Corps, that it would become an
Ecology Corps and the work would be a vital contribution. The
conservation work is a valid contribution.
But once in the Corps, in order to leave the Corps you have
to petition or ask for permission to leave the Corps and as Mr.
Stearns said, this is being granted, you know, where there are
extenuating circumstances. But it isn't granted across the board.
I have a personal friend at Calaveras that found another
job in Oakland working with a -- driving a truck for a breakfast
program down there that was approved by the State Selective
Service Director. The director of C.O. work, Paul - Mr. McCann,
and he said it was approved on the basis that you get a release from -
-67-
he was at the Calaveras Camp and he went back, did talk to Mr.
Peterson. Mr. Peterson wouldn't grant him a release and so he
debated what he should do. And finally ended up quitting, taking
the chance of being prosecuted, and went into the other job. As
it turned out, there was no prosecution. They have approved
the other job. But, you know, he was forced, you know, to take
that chance and the jail threat that hung over him.
With corpsmen there is a problem and I think it does
prevent most corpsmen from just going out and finding a better job.
Still, at the same time, many of them are doing exactly this,
taking a chance and finding other jobs. In some cases I think
some of the administrators are very freely letting corpsmen leave
if they find a job and I think that's good.
In a personal case again, my present roommate was on special
assignment down to the Department of Conservation also working with
the administrative aid. Since that type of position he found
another job with HRD that p d $700 a month that was approved by
the Selective Service and they released him and let him go into
the program, which I think should be the case with all C.O.'s if
they would allow them to be released, assuming that they are
going into other alternate service. And that should be a question
not dealt with by the -- with the department or the Ecology Corps
administration, but should be left up to the Selective Service.
If Selective Service -- if this is agreeable to them, then I think
that should be turned over to them.
The other volunteers that are now in the program, most of
them are being recruited from the unemployed young men and they don't
-68-
have a real option either, I don't think, because many of them
don't have a real option either, I don't think, because many of
them don't have skills. The present job situation keeps them
from going out and finding a -- without skills, finding a job
readily and so they don't have a real option.
They either have the option of welfare or the Corps and
one corpsman, I don't have his name, but I talked to at Humboldt,
you know, said he was getting fat on welfare so he thought he would
try the Corps for a bit. And I think that's admirable because he's
going to lower pay.
CHAIRMAN CULLEN: Mr. Carlson will probably request a
hundred copies of that statement.
MR. WHITE: Another thing, and I don't know what the case
is, and I think that this - but I know of -- of one case at the
Tehama Ecology Center that I interviewed and I have heard of several
other cases at the Inyo Ecology Center, of a person, young man
that was on -- was given the option of - he was up in - one was
at Tehama and he was up for a sentence, criminal offense for
evasion of driving tickets and he was given the option of either
being put on probation or going into the Corps, and evidently this
is being done in a number of cases more than I had expected, because
I found - I heard about this also at Inyo.
CHAIRMAN CULLEN: I'm going to have to pick up the pace
before I start losing a couple of members. If you will conclude.
MR. WHITE: So, they don't have a real option. And another
thing I discovered, a friend of mine, his brother applied for the
work as a summer fire fighter and was told there are not many
-69-
jobs available and was directed to join the Ecology Corps. So --
and they don't have a real choice if they were to join the Corps
for the summer. And problems came up and they couldn't leave,
they wouldn't have the real choice of leaving the job to find
other work because the jobs would already be taken. So that I
think that, you know, we need to change the conditions in the Corps
so that these two options that most other employees have are
available.
CHAIRMAN CULLEN: All right. You made your point there
clear. Is that about it?
MR. WHITE: That's about the sum of it.
ASSEMBLYMAN SEELEY: Just one question. What is your position?
MR. WHITE: My position, I'm an ecology corpsman and I'm on
special assignment as an assistant, a special assistant to the
Information Officer, Jerry Newton, to the Department of Conservation.
And the work involves - has involved going out to the centers
some, going out to the centers, photographing the photographs that
are on the attached sheets are one set I have taken, and going to
the centers photographing, doing the lay out on the news letter
and other design jobs and some writing.
ASSEMBLYMAN SEELEY: Are you on the $40 a month salary?
MR. WHITE: I'm on the $40 a month salary. Because I'm on
special assignment, we are given $5 per day per diem to take care
of living expenses down here in Sacramento.
ASSEMBLYMAN SEELEY: You ought to be in the Legislature. We
get $30.
CHAIRMAN CULLEN: Do you know whether there are any other $40-
-70-
a-month men in Sacramento?
MR. WHITE: There was this other one, my roommate, and he's
no longer - he's got this other job.
CHAIRMAN CULLEN: Are there any other witnesses that have
anything to say?
ASSEMBLYMAN WILSON: Can I ask a question?
CHAIRMAN CULLEN: Excuse me. Just a minute. Mr. Wilson.
ASSEMBLYMAN WILSON: Yes. You indicated that people become
more proficient at fire fighting in their second year?
MR. WHITE: This is what I was told when I was talking to
some of the forest fighters, forestry personnel.
ASSEMBLYMAN WILSON: Excuse me. Are the wages scaled up so
that a person would have an incentive to stay so that you would
have people coming into their second year? What I'm saying, do
the wages go up if you are there? The first year you get $40.
If you are there the second year, you get more, so they can retain
people, more skilled?
MR. WHITE: As far as general policy, no. There is one
opportunity and that is there is a pay difference between the Corps
leaders. They have a position of Corps leader and Corps assistant
leader, which an assistant leader gets $45 and a Corps leader gets
$40 and -
CHAIRMAN CULLEN: No. You mean $50? Forty-five dollars and
$50?
MR. WHITE: Forty-five dollars and $50.
ASSEMBLYMAN WILSON: So then there is no increase in wages
and, therefore, no incentive unless you go to a Corps leader.
-71-
If you remain a corpsman and not a Corps leader, you would re-
ceive no wages, no increase in wages?
MR. WHITE: None that I know of.
CHAIRMAN CULLEN: Young man, you may identify yourself.
APPEARANCE OF MR. RICHARD HANSON, CORPSMAN, INYO ECOLOGY
CENTER.
MR. RICHARD HANSON: My Name is Richard Hanson, Inyo Ecology
Center. I'm from Glenwood, Minesota. I was ordered here.
CHAIRMAN CULLEN: Excuse me. I want to interrupt. I
think we are finished with you three gentlemen, right? Okay. Would
you give up your seats and could I ask Major McCann, Mr. Griggs
and Mr. Stearns to join us at the witness table.
APPEARANCE OF MAJOR WILLIAM D. McCANN, CHIEF, ALTERNATE SERVICE
PROGRAM, CALIFORNIA HEADQUARTERS, SELECTIVE SERVICE SYSTEM, ACCOMPANIED
BY MR. JAMES STEARNS, DIRECTOR, DEPARTMENT OF CONSERVATION, AND MR.
JOE GRIGGS, ADMINISTRATOR OF THE CALIFORNIA ECOLOGY CORPS.
All right. I intend to explore these men that have come in
from out-of-state and, Major McCann, you are probably the best
source of authority as to the Selective Service Act.
Do you recall what the food allowance is at any base or on
board any ship?
MAJOR McCANN: I think the compensation given is $40, $45
per month.
CHAIRMAN CULLEN: Well, I'm talking about the commissary
stewards who expect to feed 150 men.
MAJOR McCANN: I have never been in the Navy. I don't know
CHAIRMAN CULLEN: I thought maybe in the Army -
MAJOR McCANN: I'm in the Air Force. I'm in the Air Force
and I can't answer that.
-72-
CHAIRMAN CULLEN: All right, sir, from Minnesota. Could
you tell us in some detail how the California Ecology Corps came
to your attention and what alternatives were presented to you and
by whom?
MR. HANSON: As it worked out, after I finished my two years
at a vocational school, I graduated from Alexander in Minnesota.
I applied for my conscientious objector status and received it in
September, the middle of September, 1971. And then at that time I
was told that I would be given 30 days to find alternate service
and present it to the local board, which they would decide whether
it was appropriate or not.
Well, I worked quite extensively trying to find a job. I
went to the state hospitals and they were telling me that funds
were being cut short and they were actually having to lay people
off. I tried many different areas and was unable to come up
with a job.
So then I left it to them to find me a job, which was only -
the only alternative I had. And they came, I believe, it was in
December and told me that the only opening that they had in the
State for a conscientious objector was in -- was the Ecology Corps
in California. And they said that -- well, I asked them if there
was anything else. They said no. This is the place we have got and
we are sending all of the C.O.'s there.
And this was the only option I was given. It was said
that I was supposed to be given three options. I was not. They
told me that the only thing that -- they said I had a choice.
CHAIRMAN CULLEN: When you say they, will you tell us who?
-73-
MR. HANSON: The local draft board. My papers, which were
orders, the information was okayed by the State Selective Service.
CHAIRMAN CULLEN: Were you talking to the secretary at the
front desk or to the chairman of the Board, or to whom?
MR. HANSON: To the Selective Service secretary in our
county and she told me that I - either I could either volunteer
or I would be ordered. You know. That was my choice. I had to
either volunteer or they'd order me here.
So that was the situation. It was cut and dired that I
would be going and that was the only alternative I had was to do
that. Otherwise if I refused to do it, then it would be like re-
fusing an order to go into the military and I would be under the
same circumstances as that.
CHAIRMAN CULLEN: Who paid you passage?
MR. HANSON: Being that I couldn't personally afford that,
I was given a bus ticket and food tickets and I came out here on
the bus.
CHAIRMAN CULLEN: Who's going to pay your way back?
MR. HANSON: I don't believe that there is any provisions for
paying.
MAJOR McCANN: There is.
MR. HANSON: There may be. I haven't been notified of it,
anyway.
CHAIRMAN CULLEN: That is very interesting.
MR. HANSON: All I wanted to re-emphasize is my support
for the petition and the feeling that it's unanimous at our camp
that these things must be resolved if the Corps is going to continue
-74-
as a satisfactory program. And if it was mentioned today that
the minimum wage, they, you know, feel that we should have the
minimum wage, then I feel they should work for it and see that
we get it because the food -- if we got more money we could
supplement the extra food if we can't increase the food budget.
And I think the pay and the overall thing would keep a better morale
and conditions at the center.
And the thing is, I feel real bad, there's people that
have been there from the beginning of it that have just - I mean,
they are just leaving, just steadily every week. There's more
and more that are just leaving there trying to find other jobs
to out of there. There is very few that feel any hope that they'll
finish all their time there. They just - you know, it's not
something that they can really take pride in and enjoy and say
they are proud of it.
So, some of these things that we've mentioned, if they can
be brought about, I feel would make the program quite a successful
thing and I personally feel that until these things come about
to expand it and start more ecology centers and everything would
just be wrong and the directors of the things can, you know, come
up and make statements and everything and say that everything is
all right. But we live there everyday and we know what it's like
and these things are just coming to the point of just frustration
and intolerability.
CHAIRMAN CULLEN: All right, sir. We'll accept your endorse-
ment of the petition. I want to get back to Minnesota, the earlier
witness. Do you have a question, Mr. Wilson?
-75-
ASSEMBLYMAN WILSON: I have been assuming throughout that your
net pay is $40 per month. Is that correct, or do you have things
taken out of that?
MR. HANSON: No. It is just one flat check with no deductions
taken out of it.
CHAIRMAN CULLEN: What is your colleague's name? What is
your name again?
MR. BONANDER: Mark.
CHAIRMAN CULLEN: Would you run over again the conversation
you had with your draft board. Was it with the secretary or a
member of the Board?
MR. BONANDER: Well, it was with, I don't know. The assistant
to the State Director, I guess.
CHAIRMAN CULLEN: And -
MR. BONANDER: I asked him for job opportunities and, well,
he sent me, I don't know, a stack of things.
CHAIRMAN CULLEN: What do you mean by stack?
MR. BONANDER: Pages.
CHAIRMAN CULLEN: Pages of available jobs in Minnesota or
throughout the nation?
MR. BONANDER: In Minnesota. I also contacted other states.
CHAIRMAN CULLEN: When did the idea of California Ecology
Corps come to your attention?
MR. BONANDER: Well, they sent me a pamphlet and told me --
CHAIRMAN CULLEN: Who's they?
MR. BONANDER: Well, the assistant to the State Director of -
CHAIRMAN CULLEN: All right.
-76-
MR. BONANDER: Selective Service. And they told me, well,
this would probably be the best thing. Well, I looked and looked
for a job and found nothing. So, I went back and talked to them
and he said, well, California Ecology Corps would be the best
place.
CHAIRMAN CULLEN: I see.
MR. BONANDER: Well, see, I had a time limit, too. I,
you know, they give you, you know, they are kind of, well, how
would you say, strict, I guess. They want you to perform your
duty or your alternate service as quick as possible.
CHAIRMAN CULLEN: But you weren't told in so many words
like your colleague that you either volunteered or they would
order you regardless?
MR. BONANDER: Well, I -
CHAIRMAN CULLEN: Explicitly. Were you told as he was that
we could either volunteer or they'd order him?
MR. BONANDER: No. I wasn't told that either I join or I'd
have to be ordered here.
CHAIRMAN CULLEN: All right. Now, you were in the - near
the capitol. You were talking to the Minnesota State Director?
MR. BONANDER: Mainly the assistant.
CHAIRMAN CULLEN: Whereas your colleague was talking to the
local draft board?
MR. BONANDER: Yes.
CHAIRMAN CULLEN: All right. Let's turn to Major McCann.
As you presume, Major, it has come to the attention of the Legislature
apparently for the first time that the California Ecology Corps has
-77-
a number of corpsmen from out of state and I'll find out how
many later, but what are the applicable federal laws with respect
to cutting orders, sending a man from one state to another such as
California in order to fulfill his federal obligation?
MAJOR McCANN: There's no restriction in the Selective
Service law to restrict a man to perform his alternate service in
the state where he is from anymore than there is a law in the
Selective Service law that says a person who's going to serve in
the armed forces must serve in his home state.
At the present time in California we have approximately
1,000 out-of-state conscientious objectors performing their al-
ternate service in this state, which we are responsible for their
two years of service. Conversely to that, we have a number of
California boys who are serving their alternate service in other
states.
The men who come to California to serve their alternate
service, of course, come here under an order. In the Selective
Service law, Congress stipulated that there really are two types
of service that young men can perform. He can either perform
military service or alternate service. Both types of service
are parallel except that the man who is classified as a conscientious
objector can perform this work in some kind of a non-profit tax-
exempt organization, either governmental or private.
The conscientious objector is given an opportunity to find
his own work that he would prefer to perform. Now, he is given a
certain amount of time to do this. Now, in this state we are quite
liberal in this aspect. We give them as much time as we can to
-78-
place them in work that they feel they could perform to the best
advantage. After a certain period of time, however, it becomes
necessary, the state director has the obligation to assign that
man to an alternate service job. He must do this. If the man
himself either doesn't choose to find his own work or cannot, he
must be then assigned.
CHAIRMAN CULLEN: And may he be assigned anywhere in the
nation?
MAJOR McCANN: He may with concurrence of the state director
of that particular state. Now, we have a policy that we must
make sure it's an acceptable organization.
CHAIRMAN CULLEN: Do you keep records on those approximate
1,000 C.O.'s, approximately, assigned to alternate jobs in
California?
MAJOR McCANN: Yes, I do.
CHAIRMAN CULLEN: Do you know how many are assigned to
California Ecology Corps?
MAJOR McCANN: And I'm guessing becuase I didn't check
before I came over here. I'd say between 40 and 50 C.O.'s. Now,
that's a question on my part.
CHAIRMAN CULLEN: Do you keep any statistics as to compen-
sation afforded these C.O.'s in these various jobs?
MAJOR McCANN: Yes. The compensation spreads over a tremendous
range.
CHAIRMAN CULLEN: Are there many as low as 25 cents?
MAJOR McCANN: There's some as low as zero on strictly
volunteer-type jobs. Actually, in California, we have approximately
-79-
1800 agencies that employ conscientious objectors.
CHAIRMAN CULLEN: Would you order a conscientious objector
to an agency or an association where the compensation was zero?
MAJOR McCANN: No.
CHAIRMAN CULLEN: Would you order them to one where the
compensation was 10 cents an hour?
MAJOR McCANN: I would like to state that where there are
the essentials available for that man to receive food, lodging,
medical care, and a certain amount of compensation, those are
essential. We have, for example, ordered people to Goodwill Industries,
where the compensation may be as low as $60 a week. Now, this --
let's take for an example this man working in the Bay Area for that
amount of money. He may be making more in the pocket than a young
man in the California Ecology Corps, but he really is not receiving
a comparable amount of compensation when you figure he has to
provide for his lodging, his food, et cetera.
CHAIRMAN CULLEN: Mr. Wilson.
ASSEMBLYMAN WILSON: Yes. I'm sorry. It was stated by one
of the witnesses that the quarters were worth about a dollar a day.
MAJOR McCANN: I'm sorry. What was that?
ASSEMBLYMAN WILSON: That the quarters were worth about a
dollar a day.
MAJOR McCANN: Well, let's put it this way. Before we
approve an organization to be a participating employer in the al-
ternate service program, we conduct an investigation of it to make
sure it meets the criteria established under the law and regulations.
Before we assign a conscientious objector to the California Ecology
-80-
Corps I personally visited the ecology centers. In addition to
this, I asked Dr. Curtis Tarr, Director of the Selective Services,
to come out and also take a look at the ecology centers.
ASSEMBLYMAN WILSON: What value per day would you place on
the quarters?
MAJOR McCANN: I would say that it's certainly better than
a dollar a day or a dollar a month. What was it?
ASSEMBLYMAN WILSON: It's not like a Motel Six?
MAJOR McCANN: Most certainly would not be. But it's cer-
tainly as good as I had in the Air Force when I first went into the
Air Force.
CHAIRMAN CULLEN: Was it like a ski lodge at Lake Tahoe?
MAJOR McCANN: I'd say it's like a ski lodge, as good as
a ski lodge at Lake Tahoe. I'd classify them as fairly deluxe
facilities as far as living accomodations go.
ASSEMBLYMAN WILSON: What you are saying, the way I under-
stand it, is that a person in San Francisco, say, making $500
a month, he's really not getting as much money as a person that
is getting $40 a month?
CHAIRMAN CULLEN: Excuse me, Mr. Wilson, he said $60 a
week in San Francisco and not $500 a month.
ASSEMBLYMAN WILSON: I see. Because there was someone that
got $700 a month along the way.
MAJOR McCANN: That's right. I say there's a considerable
range in compensation in this program. I'm taking a man who has
been -- could be ordered to a job that paid as low as $60 a week
in Palo Alto, let's say. His living accomodations, I would assume,
-81-
would not be as high as a man who's in the Ecology Corps.
ASSEMBLYMAN WILSON: I wanted to ask you a couple of
questions. The way I understand the draft law is that if a
person is classified as a C.O. and then his number does not come
up in the year in which he's eligible, then that person is not
required to do alternate service. Is that correct?
MAJOR McCANN: That's correct. He's treated exactly as
a man treated in Class 1-A and would be eligible for military
service.
ASSEMBLYMAN WILSON: If a person had a number of 301 and
95 was the highest number reached, then that person with the 301
number would never be required to have alternate service?
MAJOR McCANN: That's correct-
ASSEMBLYMAN WILSON: So that in most respects, people who
are C.O.'s are treated the same as people who would go into the
active military except when they are to be paid. Is that correct?
MAJOR McCANN: That's not exactly correct either. The
Selective Service law states that there should be an effort made
to - now, this is the new regulations. This is not the law.
This is the Selective Service regulations.
ASSEMBLYMAN WILSON: Is this local board memorandums?
MAJOR McCANN: No. This regulations is a Selective Service
regulations that there should be an effort made to provide a
conscientious objector with as closely as possible a comparable
standard of living that an entering man would have going into the
armed forces. This is a waiverable provision, however, by the
state director mainly because it's absolutely impossible to create
-82-
an exactly parallel situation for alternate service with that of
a man in the armed services.
ASSEMBLYMAN WILSON: I understand that, but since the
military pay raise and since the rates for military have gone up
considerably, are you now looking for different alternate service
which will reflect the degree to which the military pay went up?
MAJOR McCANN: No.
ASSEMBLYMAN WILSON: So then you are not carrying out
what the regulation says?
MAJOR McCANN: And I said we are. It's as near as possible
a parallel standard of living. However, this is a waiverable
position by the state director of Selective Services. If he feels
that a particular job is in the national interest or it's - he's
required to place conscientious objectors in alternate service.
ASSEMBLYMAN WILSON: Let me ask you this. A person in the
military, an E-5, after two years, how much would that person be
making?
MAJOR McCANN: Sorry. I don't have the pay scales for an
E-5. I can't answer that.
The beginning, the entering private, is approximately $288
a month.
ASSEMBLYMAN WILSON: That's $288?
MAJOR McCANN: Yes.
ASSEMBLYMAN WILSON: And then he would get in addition to the
$288, I assume, this same type of accommodation, the same type of
food these people get?
MAJOR McCANN: That's correct.
-83-
ASSEMBLYMAN WILSON: So that person in the military is
getting approximately $250 a month more?
MAJOR McCANN: Yes. But he may be in combat also.
CHAIRMAN CULLEN: How much more does he get if he is in
combat, major?
MAJOR McCANN: About $50 a month.
ASSEMBLYMAN WILSON: I think then here the risk to a person's
well being might be greater in a fire fighting situation than it
may be, say, stationed in Saigon, for example.
CHAIRMAN CULLEN: You don't have to respond to that. That's
not a question.
Anymore questions?
ASSEMBLYMAN WILSON: Yes. I wanted to ask one more thing.
It was brought out earlier that the regulation calls for no
national camp for C.O.'s?
MAJOR McCANN: That's incorrect.
ASSEMBLYMAN WILSON: That's incorrect?
MAJOR McCANN: Yes, it is. You will not find that in the
Selective Service laws or regulations or any directives.
CHAIRMAN CULLEN: Major, would you be willing to provide a
copy of the regulations applicable to alternate service.
MAJOR McCANN: I'd be happy to.
CHAIRMAN CULLEN: We'll probably incorporate it into the
record. (Appendix F)
ASSEMBLYMAN WILSON: Are you saying there's no limitations
where a person can be sent if he is classified as a C.O.?
MAJOR McCANN: Yes, there is a -- C.O.'s cannot work for
-84-
a profit-making organization. The organization must contribute
in some way to the national health, safety, or interest.
ASSEMBLYMAN WILSON: Now --
MAJOR McCANN: We wouldn't assign a C.O. to a subversive
organization or a profit-making organization.
ASSEMBLYMAN WILSON: Is there any provision whereby the
federal government reimburses different agencies where these people
are sent to work?
MAJOR McCANN: No. No, sir. There's no provision for
reimbursement. In other words, the employment arrangement is
directly between the conscientious objectors who perform the work
and the employer. It's very closely an employee-employer relation-
ship that would fit the situation.
ASSEMBLYMAN WILSON: So then you have a situation where
if the federal government inducts a man into the military service,
the federal government pays for it?
MAJOR McCANN: That's correct.
ASSEMBLYMAN WILSON: If a man is a C.O., then the State of
California pays for that man. Is that correct?
MAJOR McCANN: That's correct. If he's assigned to the
California Ecology Corps. If he's assigned to one of the other
organizations, that organization will compensate him.
ASSEMBLYMAN WILSON: Now, does the State of California make
reports to the Selective Service System as to the progress that
the person is making?
MAJOR McCANN: We periodically request that the organization
that employs the C.O. tell us how he's doing and whether his work
-85-
is satisfactory and whether he will remain with the organization.
ASSEMBLYMAN WILSON: Now, does the State of California pay
for the preparation of these reports?
MAJOR McCANN: The report consists of a form letter that
we mail that requires a check mark, so, I don't think the cost
would be very great.
ASSEMBLYMAN WILSON: But the answer is no?
MAJOR McCANN: Correct.
ASSEMBLYMAN WILSON: How long are these people - if a person
is ordered to the Ecology Corps in California, I assume he has
orders and he stays there a definite period of time. Is that
correct?
MAJOR McCANN: The period of alternate service is 24 months,
the same as the requirement for a man to serve in the armed forces.
When a man is assigned to a job, we assume he will stay there for
24 months. This doesn't -- isn't always the case because a great
many fellows are transferred from one particular job to another.
ASSEMBLYMAN WILSON: Now, did the Selective Service play
any role in establishing the wage at $40 an hour in California?
MAJOR McCANN: No.
ASSEMBLYMAN WILSON: Now, when these people come into the
draft board and they are contemplating becoming a conscientious
objector, are the wages that C.O.'s are paid, is that used as
a tool to discourage people from becoming conscientious objectors
and joining the military where their pay would be seven or eight
times higher?
MAJOR McCANN: Absolutely not.
-86-
ASSEMBLYMAN WILSON: So they find out about the rate after
they become a C.O. Is that correct?
MAJOR McCANN: That's not exactly true. I'm sure there's
no requirement. The board will not hold back any information.
As a matter of fact, there are conscientious objectors in this
state that are making considerably more than a man would in the
armed forces. It depends on the job.
ASSEMBLYMAN WILSON: Do you know what the average C.O.
is paid?
MAJOR McCANN: I think the average would run probably about
$300 a month.
ASSEMBLYMAN WILSON: So people like Goodwill and the Ecology
Corps are not the average thing?
MAJOR McCANN: As I said, some organizations pay nothing.
It's strictly a voluntary job.
ASSEMBLYMAN WILSON: But those people, the way I understand
your testimony, are not required to take a job that pays nothing?
MAJOR McCANN: If they select the job themselves, they
are -- can be assigned if they can prove to me that they have
a means to provide for their livelihood.
ASSEMBLYMAN WILSON: Well, what is the lowest amount of pay
that a person is required to accept?
MAJOR McCANN: Well, I don't understand your question.
ASSEMBLYMAN WILSON: Well, I'm asking you what is the lowest
amount of pay that a person is required to accept? In other words,
you order some people to take certain types of jobs?
MAJOR McCANN: Every man in the alternate service program is
-87-
under an order. He's ordered just the same as the man given an
induction order to go into military service. So, every man is
ordered.
Conscientious objectors are given an opportunity to select
the work that they would prefer to perform. They are given a
period of time to do this. If they - they find a job and they come
to me and say I would like to do this, this is what I want to do,
the local board will then issue an order assigning him to that
work.
ASSEMBLYMAN WILSON: Well, what happens if a person goes
out and he can't find any jobs that pay more than, say, $40 a
month and he has three of those. Then is he ordered to choose
from among the three?
MAJOR McCANN: If he says, "I would like to perform that,"
I'll assign him to the one that he requests if it meets all the
criteria under the law.
ASSEMBLYMAN WILSON: If you take a pragmatic approach,
let's say, a person cannot go out and find any jobs that would
pay anymore than, let's say, $40 a month, he would like to make
more, obviously?
MAJOR McCANN: Are you talking about $40 a month straight
across the board with no room and board, medical care, and the
other necessities?
ASSEMBLYMAN WILSON: Let me be more specific.
MAJOR McCANN: What are you talking about?
ASSEMBLYMAN WILSON: I'm talking about a program analogous
to you.
-88-
MAJOR McCANN: Now, wait. What I'm saying, the person
goes out. He can find three programs like this. He could not
find a program that would pay more. In other words, he is re-
stricted to these, not because he wants these, but because of
necessity and that's the situation. Then you order from among the
three? Is that correct?
MAJOR McCANN: Let me tell you how the Selective Service
regulation works at this time. A man is issued an order to al-
ternate service. He is given a period of 60 days to locate a job
that he would want to perform. If he has something that looks -
that he's working on, he'll get extra time.
The Selective Service is required from the date that that
order is issued, they are required to have him assigned within
330 days. So, we can give him so much time, but after - when we
finally get down to the wire, we have to order him somewhere. We'll
order him to a job if we are - if it is necessary, that is avail-
able, and that meets their criteria that he will have the necessities
of life provided to him. In other words, that he's going to have
a roof over his head and he's going to have plenty to eat and a
certain amount of compensation.
ASSEMBLYMAN WILSON: But California, the way I understand
it then, is in a position knowing full well that it is difficult
for C.O.'s to get jobs that pay very much to set their standards or
their wage low because these people, once the alternatives are set,
then they will be ordered.
MAJOR McCANN: Let's put it this way. There's 4,100 con-
scientious objectors working in the state of California right now.
-89-
The C.O.'s are finding jobs. It doesn't mean that the California
Ecology Corps is the only place that these fellows can go. The
California Ecology Corps is only one employer in approximately
1800 in the state where C.O.'s are working.
ASSEMBLYMAN WILSON: Well, let me interject - can -
MR. McCANN: This isn't the only last ditch available
for every conscientious objector.
ASSEMBLYMAN WILSON: No.
MAJOR McCANN: Most of the conscientious objectors selected
the Ecology Corps.
ASSEMBLYMAN WILSON: But what I'm saying is that it seems
to me that the wages are inordinately low and it seems to me that
the reason that they are is because the people really don't have
much of an available alternative of where they go. Therefore, the
State of California is in a position where they can set the wages
such as they have here at $40 a month.
MAJOR McCANN: That's not really true.
CHAIRMAN CULLEN: Wait a minute, Major. The Chair rules
that's not within the competence of the witness. The witness
has just testified that the only criteria of the Selective Service
is that the C.O. have a means of livelihood afforded by these
jobs. Now, as to whether or not the State of California is
arbitrarily setting the wages higher or low is really not the
major's responsibility. You need not answer, Major.
Go on, Mr. Wilson.
ASSEMBLYMAN WILSON: Well, it appears that I can't get my
question answered, so I'll withdraw it.
-90-
MAJOR McCANN: I'll explain it.
CHAIRMAN CULLEN: No. I don't think we're going to because
Mr. Wilson apparently has his view as to the State of California
and you are not a member of the government of the State of California.
Mr. Seeley.
ASSEMBLYMAN SEELEY: This is not a question either and I
don't expect any answer. I sat here this afternoon listening to
the hearing and Mr. Wilson is getting off on something I think is
entirely away from the case here. Now, there's been no indi-
cation to me that any of these people are even earning their board
and room or said how much work they are doing or if they are good
workers or anything. I think if we are going to argue about how
much they are getting paid, we should make some determination whether
they are worth anything or not. I'd be hesitant to say they are.
What are they getting?
CHAIRMAN CULLEN: One minute. Mr. Billett has a question of
the Major.
MR. BILLETT: Major, I'd like to ask a couple of questions
about the Ecology Corps. Do I understand any alternative service
including the California Ecology Corps requires the approval of
the California Selective Service System before it can become an
alternatate service?
MAJOR McCANN: A participating employer, is that what you
are saying?
MR. BILLETT: What I'm saying is an alternate service cannot
be open to C.O.'s until it has the approval of the Selective
Service Board of the State of California?
-91-
MAJOR McCANN: In the state of California, yes.
MR. BILLETT: Okay. How does the director of the Selective
Service in the state of California obtain his position?
MAJOR McCANN: He was - he is appointed by the President
with the recommendation of the Governor.
MR. BILLETT: And how do the members of the local boards in
the state of California obtain their positions?
MAJOR McCANN: They are selected by the superior court
judges and their names are presented to the President and they
are appointed.
MR. BILLETT: With respect to local board members, is
anyone else's approval required?
MAJOR McCANN: I think you are getting beyond my expertise
since my area is not selecting local board members.
MR. BILLETT: I'll withdraw that, sir.
MAJOR McCANN: All right.
MR. BILLETT: But the members of the local boards are appointed
by the President and the director of the Selective Service in
California is appointed by the President. Now, when the decision -
apparently you are in charge of the conscientious objectors?
MAJOR McCANN: That's the alternate service program, yes.
MR. BILLETT: How were you appointed to your position, Major?
MAJOR McCANN: I was recalled to active duty from a Selective
Service unit, the Sacramento Reserve Unit, which is an organization
of a few officers who are maintained on a standby basis for augmenting
the Selective Service System. I'm an active duty member of the
United States Air Force.
-92-
MR. BILLETT: You were recalled to active duty from retire-
ment?
MAJOR McCANN: That's correct.
MR. BILLETT: Not at your request?
MAJOR McCANN: That's right.
MR. BILLETT: And by the Sacramento Local Board?
MAJOR McCANN: No, not by the Sacramento Board. This was by
the Director of the Selective Service.
MR. BILLETT: In Washington?
MAJOR McCANN: Yes.
MR. BILLETT: Director Tarr?
MAJOR McCANN: General Hershey at that time.
MR. BILLETT: And did you have any choice in your assign-
ment?
MAJOR McCANN: Yes.
MR. BILLETT: I have no further questions.
CHAIRMAN CULLEN: All right. Thank you very much, Major.
We'll excuse you and the two corpsmen at the table. And, now,
Mr. Griggs and Mr. Stearns have been anxious to respond. I thought
you might prefer to, after you heard the others testify. It
gives you an idea of the particular interest of the members of the
committee. At this point it occurs that the committee might ask
you or might ask the State Personnel Board to perhaps formulate
a structure, a pay structure that might be more in conformity
with prevailing conditions in California. Whether those conditions
prevail among welfare recipients or the PEP Program or what-have-
you, I don't know; or what your attitude will be, although Mr. Griggs
-93-
is the most qualified man in the room today who has been quoted
as leaning toward a minimum wage for these corpsmen.
I also would like to make the observation that virtually
all the testimony by corpsmen have been laudatory of the ob-
jectives of the program. Most of it has concluded by urging that
the program be expanded and, I think, this is surprising to
Mr. Seeley and me. I think we were expecting people to come in and
say it ought to be eliminated and destroyed as not being beneficial
to California. But that hasn't been the case at all.
Now, who wants to lead off? Mr. Stearns, you have opened.
Do you want Mr. Griggs to get his licks in?
MR. STEARNS: Well, there are relatively general suggestions,
so let me begin to respond.
CHAIRMAN CULLEN: All right.
MR. STEARNS: Our initial thoughts we have in this way, we
have made some progress in the nine months on the basis of the dollars
that were available to us on a relatively broad basis. The funds
of the State of California supports the wildland fire fighting
efforts all over the state with about $43 million. In addition to
that, we have some reimbursement. Although the total bill is big,
we have tried, as other departments have tried, to buy the most
with those available dollars that we possibly could.
Initially when the camps were empty we had available to us
at that time the fire crew foremen that are the real key to leading
men safely in dangerous situations. The point was made that two
years training would be better. This is true, but the real fire
expertise and safety leading the crews are the fire crew foremen that
-94-
have worked for the state for many years.
We funded it within our means, within the dollar ceiling
that we had, and the goal we set ourselves, which was, if at
all possible, to develop a program that would sit as well within
the historic funding pattern that we have had as possible and
to the greatest extent would be possible during -- outside of
the fire missions to generate enough reimbursement to the maximum
possible extent to fund itself. We've moved toward that goal to a
degree.
In 1970-71, the pay was $40 a month. We did apply to the
Department of Finance and got permission to use the emergency
funds for the emergency overtime as of February 1. The budget we
have under consideration for 1972-73 would raise the pay to $100.
We are making some progress there.
I think the - as a rough figure out of this budget a total
compensation or the total cost of support of individual corpsmen
will be someplace in the neighborhood of $200 or $250 a month. We
are making some progress. Mr. Griggs has said, and I'll say again,
that ultimately the goal should be a free labor force of all
volunteers, acceptable human beings, you know, at least a minimum
wage.
I have not chosen to make a dollar request of the Legislature
that would fund that at this time. We are moving steadily in that
direction.
We have found that the answer to Mr. Seeley's question, that
the work produced by these crews has been superior in respect to
any other crews that the state has ever furnished or the federal
agencies using them have had available to them. The representatives
-95-
of the federal agencies have some prepared statements. If your
time doesn't allow it, I would ask they be made a part of the record
as though testified to. (Appendices G,H,I)
CHAIRMAN CULLEN: We'd appreciate it.
MR. STEARNS: The work produced per man day has been between
one and a half and two times what you would ordinarily expect
from a hand crew. So, there has been a tremendous amount of
dedication of interest on the part of these men and it's hard
work. There's no question but what it's hard work. So, I would
say that my department goal is to reach that.
I think we are moving toward it; that we have done quite
a bit toward achieving it in a very short period of time. We are
accommodating a change now where initially we thought we were going
to be able to supply the Corps through conscientious objectors in
our initial concept just a year ago and our picture has changed very
radically. We have every indication that at the $100 a month we're
going to have a lot of young men who are going to want to do this.
In the area of welfare recipients, we are going to have to
make deals with the separate counties because this deals with un-
married young men and with the exception of those 18, 19, 20 year
olds who are still going to college and are welfare recipients
under the Aid to Dependent Children Program, there really aren't
all that many who are actually state welfare people as individual
unemployed males.
CHAIRMAN CULLEN: What about the food allotment when there's
inflation?
MR. STEARNS: The food?
-96-
CHAIRMAN CULLEN: Over a period the price of food goes up.
MR. GRIGGS: Well, we don't stick -
CHAIRMAN CULLEN: Mr. Griggs.
MR. GRIGGS: We don't stick to a regular meal cost. We've
been in this business a long time. We know that food is important,
good substantial food, and we serve it in all the centers regard-
less of the cost.
ASSEMBLYMAN WILSON: Well, how much is the cost?
MR. GRIGGS: About 66 cents per meal average.
CHAIRMAN CULLEN: Mr. Wilson.
ASSEMBLYMAN WILSON: Yes. Mr. Stearns, how was the $40 a
month figure derived?
MR. STEARNS: It was arrived at from the dollars we had
available to us from the work projects we had under contract in addi-
tion to the dollars available to the department for our basic fire
crew leading mission, which did not -- does not anticipate any pay-
ment of wages because it has been state inmates. And in the budget
breakdown we have here the dollars that I must be responsible for,
general fund dollars to provide hand crews and fire emergency fighters
and to construct and maintain the fuel breaks that are a part of
that system, the water tanks and the access roads are all part of
the state fire defense system and are $814,000. The cost for 1972- 73
will be $1.2 million. Now the difference in reimbursement we
anticipate from our contracts of $408,000 is the slack we have for
the amount of wages we can pay.
I mentioned once before that on August 1st we will have
enough work to do and anticipate having enough people available
-97-
to us that we'll be able to offer a health insurance program
including a life insurance benefit.
ASSEMBLYMAN WILSON: Just one other question. I got the
inference earlier that a person can come and apply to work for the
State of California as a fire fighter?
MR. STEARNS: Yes.
ASSEMBLYMAN WILSON: And he would receive, let's just say
hypothetically, $350 a month.
MR. STEARNS: That would be about right, yes.
ASSEMBLYMAN WILSON: Now, that person can be told there
are no jobs available and that the Corps is available. And it
seems to me that eventually the state would be getting fire fighters
for a heck of a lot less than when there's a job available and they
go ahead and take it.
MR. STEARNS: We are budgeted for exactly the same number
of men for the seasonal fire fighters that we always have been
and these are the jobs that you are mentioning. There are about
1800 positions of those a year that require from two to four to six
or seven months depending on the part of the state where the fire
season is. Typically they are boys that are over 17, 17 or
more, who go to work in a fire station when their school is out and
return when the school term begins. So, we have a very high peak
of the number of people available.
This has been over the years. It has been established good
business to automatically return a boy to his job the next year if
he has done satisfactorily in one year SO as a matter of practice
most of the seasonal fire fighters are returnees from the year before.
-98-
They keep these for the three or four years they go to college,
so of the 1800 positions we have some 400 or 500 new seasonal positions
available to us each year. Of that number, we set aside 200
for disadvantaged unemployed boys who are selected for us by the
employment office up and down the state. So, we now have maybe
300 available openings each -- the beginning of each fire season.
We have many thousands of applications.
Summer jobs for boys are very hard to find. So, the reason
that we offered that was we said we don't have this job available
for you, you know. You have 10 or 20 apply for each one, but
you can, if you are not planning to return to school on the 15th
of September, take this as an alternative if you want some kind
of a job.
Now, on a net basis with, you know, where the board and
room are furnished, they could save part of the $100 depending
on things. It's just in lieu of sending them a letter and saying,
"We don't have any job for you.
MR. GRIGGS: Mr. Wilson, it is an entirely different
situation between the ecology corpsmen and the fire fighters. A
fire fighter is initially attached to a station and mans a fire
truck. These are not hand crews. The ecology corpsmen are trained
15 man hand crews with no fire fighting equipment other than tools.
We have 276 fire stations to man in the state.
CHAIRMAN CULLEN: Okay. Mr. Billett.
MR. BILLETT: Mr. Stearns, who has the day-to-day super-
vision of the program? I'm asking that question assuming that
it's Mr. Griggs, but I want to be clear.
-99-
MR. STEARNS: That is correct, yes.
MR. BILLETT: Mr. Griggs, I'd like to ask some questions
then about our visits to Tehama Camp and to the Humboldt Camp.
MR. GRIGGS: All right.
MR. BILLETT: What procedure do you have to determine
whether there is an equity in terms of food, living conditions,
and enforcement of regulations between the camps? How is that
supervised?
MR. GRIGGS: That is supervised partly by me and partly
by the Division of Forestry Conservation Camp Coordinator in the
five divisions of forestry districts, and, of course, the center
directors.
MR. BILLETT: Well, you mentioned a few moments ago in
your testimony that the food budget really is now up to 66 cents
per man, per meal?
MR. GRIGGS: That's an average of what we are spending.
MR. BILLETT: That is per meal?
MR. GRIGGS: That is the average of what we are spending.
We don't have any firm budget.
MR. BILLETT: Well, now the gentleman -- the corpsman who
appeared here from the Inyo Center testifed that it's running
somewhere around 53.6 cents.
MR. GRIGGS: That's entirely possible that that center main-
tains its average at 56 cents there.
MR. BILLETT: Let me then ask you this question. I'm going
to draw some comparisons that I witnessed myself.
At the Tehama Center, the director of the camp, Mr. Cartwright,
-100-
told us that he is spending in fact about 55 and a half cents
per meal per day. They were not permitted to have fresh milk
in the quantity they wanted. They were not supplied fresh fruit.
Their meals, we ate lunch and dinner, consisted primarily of potatoes,
noodles. They were good. They were well prepared, but they were
starch-base meals. There was a restriction in terms of the quantity
of food that a corpsman was provided.
Now, compare that to Humboldt. At the Humboldt Center
again we were there for two meals. They had milk, three meals a
day, in whatever quantity they wished to consume. They had granola
for which they are spending $65 a hundred pounds to provide for
breakfast. They had special vegetarian meals prepared in a wok
with brown rice and fresh vegetables. When they were ready to go
out on the grade in the morning they had an opportunity to make as
many sandwiches as they wished to carry with as many kinds of
meats as you and I could ever wish to have at any lunch we con-
sumed.
The fresh fruit included bananas, and pineapples, and
oranges, and grapefruit. I looked at receipts from a local dairy,
$220 a week. That included whole milk, skim milk, yogurt.
The gentleman from Inyo indicated that he is purchasing
vitamin supplements. The camp director at Tehama said vitamin
supplements could not be provided, but at Humboldt they are, par-
ticularly an unlimited quantity of Vitamin C tablets which many
of the corpsmen wish to have.
At the Tehama Camp the sideburns could not be longer than
-101-
your lobe of your ear. Your hair could not be longer than your
collar as per Division of Forestry. At Humboldt not only the
corpsmen, but the Division of Forestry employees themselves were
permitted to wear hair in excess of those regulations.
At Tehama the men had no means of their own to spend spare
time in the city of Red Bluff. There was no transportation, no
means for transportation. At Humboldt, though, they were per-
mitted to use State vehicles to travel to Eureka for spare time.
I think I recounted to you the incident at Humboldt where
the - at the evening meal not only did they serve a meal with the
brown rice and vegetables and roast beef and homemade cake and,
you know, more food than you and I could afford to have on our own
tables, probably; but, in addition, a group of corpsmen whom we
visited were presented with macaroni salad, potato salad, and
hamburgers and they went and had a very nice picnic, a very nice
social event.
My question, in light of all this, where is the standardization
of regulations? Even the living conditions were different at
Humboldt Camp. They had divided cubicles with standing foot lockers.
At Tehama they were specifically prohibited from dividing and they
didn't have standing foot lockers at all. They had lockers,
the four foot standing locker.
CHAIRMAN CULLEN: Let me change the question. It's not
where are the regulations. Are there uniform regulations?
MR. GRIGGS: There are in the center.
CHAIRMAN CULLEN: And are they uniform for each center?
MR. GRIGGS: Yes.
-102-
CHAIRMAN CULLEN: What's the name of the agency that runs
the Tehama Center?
MR. GRIGGS: I think Mr. Billett went to both places at
the wrong times.
MR. BILLETT: I went unannounced.
MR. GRIGGS: You weren't unannounced at Humboldt. You
thought you were.
CHAIRMAN CULLEN: I don't know whether there is a center
there or not.
MR. STEARNS: This matter of standardization is a difficult
one, really, to administer. You have the option or I do as the
department director to decree every last little tiny thing in
writing out to everybody where things have to be met or you give
your center directors just as much opportunity they have. After
all, they are the ones that are responsible to run a happy camp
and to get the work done and so forth.
The things that Mr. Billett has mentioned indicate some
need for some standardization, yes, but in large organizations I
think that you could find in almost any part of the state of
government where the same kind of variation might apply.
CHAIRMAN CULLEN: Well, he was suggesting the overall
contrast. We are not about to suggest here cutting regulations,
sterner or tightening up a little bit in terms, or loosening
up. I don't know what we are about to suggest.
You have given testimony that these young men are perhaps
one and a half to two times as efficient as your regular crews. I
do have this spot. We'd like to get a report onto the free con-
-103-
ference budget committee by May 15th. You've expressed a de-
sire to bring this 340 man Corps up to its optimum. I would
very much appreciate it in the next couple of weeks if you could
confer with the State Personnel Board and let me know what the
annual budget would be were it at optimum even though in your
mind it may take two or three or five years on today's dollar.
What are you talking about? What kind of medical benefits or
workmen's compensation or fringe benefits?
The State Personnel Board is used to this. They work it
out every time they - someone suggests a new governmental
department. Well, let's look at this as a governmental department
which is extensive, which has not reached the optimum because of
perhaps the inadequate funds.
Could you do that within the next couple of weeks?
MR. STEARNS: Oh, yes.
CHAIRMAN CULLEN: I know it's a burden. The conference
committee is going to meet in the next month. We'd like to have
it in the report. (Appendix J)
I still haven't found too much criticism of the objectives
of the Corps. Mr. Seeley, have you detected any criticism of the
mission?
ASSEMBLYMAN SEELEY: No. I was surprised to hear that the
men were doing a good job and that makes me feel better. And I
would support a request for an increase to pay them more. I was
in hopes of a statement like that. It remained for you to make that
statement, but I'm glad it came forth.
MR. STEARNS: I think it's simply a matter we're not looking
-104-
at yesterday as much as we are looking at tomorrow and going like
this. We can anticipate that the state is going to have more
and more of these million-dollar camp facilities available to
us. They have been built and paid for. They are situated where
we need them for our fire missions. All these other kinds of
things and we anticipate in the years ahead that we are going
to have to depend largely on free people to make up these crews to
do the year-around work for other agencies, and to be ready and
available and well trained for when we need them for fires. I
think it's unrealistic to weigh the future plans or anything else
on anything less than a minimum wage. This would be the minimum
wage, less subsistence, you know.
CHAIRMAN CULLEN: Well, let's find --- let's find out what
the State Personnel Board could come up with. You give us those
figures.
MR. STEARNS: We can give it to you much quicker. They
have all these figures available to them at all times.
CHAIRMAN CULLEN: I'd like to wind up by 5:15, which is
seven minutes and I would appreciate that the contract people
submit their testimony and not present it here orally, and I do be-
lieve there are more witnesses, I trust. Mr. Wilson.
ASSEMBLYMAN WILSON: Yes. I have just one question. You
said the minimum wage less subsistence?
MR. STEARNS: Yes.
ASSEMBLYMAN WILSON: So that you would take one sixty-five
an hour and you would place a value on the room, a value on the
food, deduct that from the $1.65?
-105-
MR. STEARNS: Yes,
ASSEMBLYMAN WILSON: And arrive --
MR. STEARNS: This is what we would do with the seasonal
workers where subsistence and a bed is furnished. And the rent
is minimal because it's a barracks situation and it amounts to
not much more than laundry and SO forth. But the meal charge set
by the Board Control based on our overall is 66 cents a day. This
is deducted from all our employees who eat at the state facilities.
CHAIRMAN CULLEN: Do you have any machines in these places
for candy bars and Cokes?
MR. GRIGGS: We have vending machines in some places.
ASSEMBLYMAN WILSON: One other quick question. Someone
was indicating that they were 40 or 50 miles from the nearest
town. Now, when you receive your pay check, how do you go about
getting it cashed? Do you have to spend one-eighth of what you
get paid to go 25 miles to get your $40? Some people were nodding
yes. I don't know.
MR. GRIGGS: Well, you said 50 miles at first and then 25.
ASSEMBLYMAN WILSON: Well, I'm not -
MR. STEARNS: Their checks are there and there are trans-
portation problems from these remote areas. We have them from some
of our fire stations where there are other people so remote they
just give up going to town.
CHAIRMAN CULLEN: Don't you run a liberty bus?
MR. STEARNS: Well, they are running a liberty bus at Humboldt
and this is one of the kinds of internal shifts that we can make.
It depends on having someone to drive the bus and they have been
-106-
active in some of the local baseball and basketball leagues and
transportation is provided to those things.
CHAIRMAN CULLEN: Any further questions?
Gentlemen, thank you very much.
-107-
APPENDICES
-108-
APPENDIX A
State of California
Resources Agency
Department of Conservation
THE CALIFORNIA ECOLOGY CORPS
The California Ecology Corps is the solution Governor Reagan has adopted to
meet California's continuing need for a reserve of trained manpower to con-
front the ravages of wildland fire and to meet this State's commitment for
preserving the environment.
The Corps was officially established in an Executive Order (see Attachment
A) issued by Governor Reagan on April 27, 1971. That event marked the
beginning of the Corps as a legal entity, but it was by no means the first
step.
To find the first step we must go back in time more than 20 years ago when
California's conservation camp program was inaugurated and even before that,
back many decades to the days when state and county fire wardens conscripted
citizens off the street or out of a sawmill to fight forest fires. In the
intervening years, science has produced modern methods of fire control and
fire suppression, but these new tools have not eliminated the need for
trained manpower in organized crews.
Over the years, the Division of Forestry, the State's wildland firefighting
force, has of necessity increased in efficiency and in manpower. Today,
some 3,000 men, whose job it is to meet the challenges of the wildland fires,
are on the State's payroll. This force is augmented each summer by 1,800
Presented by James G. Stearns, Director, California Department of Conservation,
before the Assembly Committee on Efficiency and Cost Control, Sacramento,
California, April 4, 1972.
-109-
APPENDIX A
young men who are employed as seasonal firefighters. Together, they man the
fire stations, bulldozer crews and air bases that are three of the basic
components available to us for wildland firefighting.
Conservation Camp Program
In the late 1940's, the need for trained hand crews became evident to the
State's professional wildland firefighters as the fourth component. In
cooperation with the State Department of Corrections and the California
Youth Authority, the conservation camp program became a reality and was
formally organized.
This program enabled foresters to utilize minimum security inmates as fire-
fighting hand crews and to assist in the construction of our fire defense
system, working out of a new camp environment in the State's forest lands.
Working with the leadership of forestry personnel, the inmates have proven
to be a tremendous asset.
And then came social changes -- and new concepts in penology and dealing
with prison inmates. A new probation subsidy program was initiated in 1966,
providing for payment to the counties on a per-case basis so that county
probation staffs could be beefed up and the less serious felons who formerly
ended up in conservation camps could be dealt with at home.
Since the probation subsidy program started in 1966, the prison population --
and, of course the camp population -- began to decrease rather rapidly. In
recent years, the prison population had dropped from 28,800 to under 20,000,
as of this week.
-110-
APPENDIX A
A study was conducted in 1970-71 to find the alternative manpower sources
necessary to replace the dwindling camp population. A partial solution
was to contract with counties to use local prisoners to provide the man-
power. (San Diego County now supplies manpower for two camps; another
camp will soon be manned by county prisoners from Shasta and four other
northern California counties.)
As this narration indicates, the Department of Conservation was faced with
a problem, and with an obligation to find broader solutions.
California Ecology Corps is ONE of the solutions. But it is more than
that: it is a unique experiment in bringing concerned young men into the
field of conservation in this State to provide the work experience and job
training that can open career doors in many conservation fields.
The Problem Becomes Acute
Although we in the Department of Conservation had long been aware that
some day the conservation camp program would no longer provide the total
answer to the manpower reserve problem, and although we had been searching
for alternatives for a long time, the need became acute just over a year
ago when, simply stated, there were not enough inmates to adequately man
the camps then in existence. Looking at the program as it then existed,
it was obvious, from a purely financial point of view, that as many as
five of the conservation camps must be closed by June 30, 1971. That
prospect was not satisfactory to Governor Reagan or to the Legislature.
The question remained -- what shall we do?
-111-
APPENDIX A
In our earlier examination, we had thought of some type of program where
young men who had completed their high schooling and yet who had not
decided where their lives would lead them could serve for, hopefully, up
to two years. Such a program, we decided, would be patterned after
experiences in other programs we have administered using young men;
except that we would have these young people in our employ on a year-
around basis rather than just during the critical months that we know as
the "fire season." On the other hand, we knew that this program would
augment the conservation camp program to the extent that the young men
would engage in a variety of ecology and conservation-related work
projects similar to the federal government's Civilian Conservation Corps
of the pre-World War II era, including work on federal land where inmates
can only work on an emergency basis.
Thus, with this concept in mind and the problem at hand, the California
Ecology Corps became a fact. To implement a new program would obviously
require considerable attention to detail, including recruitment. We
asked ourselves, "Where can we find young men who are readily accessible,
who are unemployed, and who could be put to work quickly within the
limits of funds available to us"?
It was at this point that we turned to the Selective Service System and
specifically to those with conscientious objector classification.
Conscientious Objectors
Let me remind you that the Executive Order signed by Governor Reagan and
subsequently ratified by the Legislature as part of the Budget Act of
1971 did not limit the California Ecology Corps to conscientious objectors.
-112-
APPENDIX A
The language of the Executive Order does not, in fact, set forth any
qualifications for persons employed in the program.
Nevertheless, we did ask that the Corps be designed as alternate service
for young men who had been classified as conscientious objectors by
local draft boards. Conscientious objector officials from the California
headquarters of the Selective Service System studied our request and
visited the facilities we proposed to use to house the Corpsmen. Dr.
Curtis Tarr, Director of the Selective Service System in Washington, D.C.,
also made a personal inspection trip, as did various representatives of
conscientious objector associations.
In the spring of 1971 there were approximately 5,000 consicentious ob-
jectors in California, and many of them were looking for alternate ser-
vice. Alternate service, incidentally, is easily defined as a 24-month
period when conscientious objectors must work for a non-profit or public
service agency, thus serving a time comparable to the time a draftee into
the armed services must serve.
And so to meet the immediate problem, namely the prospect of closing five
conservation camps, we had a program and we had an immediate source from
which to recruit. In the meantime, we had arrived at satisfactory
arrangements offsetting the additional costs of the new program (camp
overhead, corpsmen pay and subsistence) through cooperative agreements
with other conservation agencies of the State and federal governments.
Basically, these agreements allowed the Department of Conservation to
charge the other agencies on a man-day basis for the environmental and
conservation work to be done by the new California Ecology Corps. The net
-113-
APPENDIX A
cost of the Ecology Corps to the State of California in 1972-73 is
budgeted at $814,398 based on a corpsman population of 340. (See Attach-
ment B for a list of projects; see Attachment C for budget summary.)
The agreements were negotiated; and we decided to convert inmate-manned
conservation camps in Humboldt, Tehama, and Calaveras counties into
centers to house the new Ecology Corps. These sites were selected be-
cause they were the closest to the work projects that were the subject
of the various agreements that had been negotiated. (A fourth center
was later added in Inyo County.)
Draft Law Expires
We set July 1, 1971, as the date to officially launch the Ecology Corps;
but, as it turned out, this was not a good day insofar as the Nation's
draft law was concerned. The law expired on that date, and it would be
months before Congress would agree on a new law. In the meantime, al-
though many of the conscientious objectors did respond and select the
California Ecology Corps as their alternate service, many others con-
cluded that in the absence of a draft law, they were under no selective
service obligation whatsoever. Consequently, we did not fulfill our
earlier expectation of quickly filling the new Ecology Centers with
minimums of 80 men each.
The availability of conscientious objectors remains questionable.
Despite this, there is no plan to phase conscientious objectors out of
the California Ecology Corps, but rather continue the Corps as qualified
alternate service for those who volunteer.
-114-
APPENDIX A
Recruitment Expanded
On December 1, 1971, in keeping with the original concept of the Corps, I
authorized the recruitment of any qualified young men for six-month en-
listments; and this meant that we would no longer rely solely on our
original source for recruitment, the conscientious objectors. We have
been successful in the weeks since December 1 in recruiting young men
and more than doubling the size of the Corps. The attached graph
(Attachment D) illustrates our recruitment success, and I particularly
call your attention to the increase since the first of the year. I am
confident that each of the four centers will be at minimum capacity
within a few weeks, thereby giving us at least 340 men.
As of today, there are slightly over 100 corpsmen who are conscientious
objectors. These are men whose average age is 22, who average two years
of college. These are the "seniors" in the program; and the majority
are, and have been, highly-productive and dedicated workers whose extra
effort made the whole idea work.
Many of the newer members of the Corps are in the program as a result of
other forms of recruitment. Some are, for example, young men out of
high school -- and out of work. There are some Vietnam veterans in the
program now, and more are expected.
Benefits and Requirements
Corpsmen are not regular state employees: they are exempt contractees.
They do receive some benefits comparable to our regular employees,
such as vacations, holidays and workmen's compensation insurance. A
comprehensive health benefit program will be implemented August 1, 1972.
-115-
APPENDIX A
Since the beginning of the program, we have provided Corpsmen with food,
lodging, clothing and personal care items and have paid them $40 each
month. Beginning July 1, 1972, Corpsmen will receive at least $100 per
month plus the other items I have listed. On February 1, the overtime
rate for most emergency work was set at $2.80 per hour.
Corpsmen are entitled to approximately the same grievance procedure as
allowed regular State employees, including the permanent employees of
the Department of Conservation. A Corpsman with a grievance discusses
the problem with his immediate supervisor (generally a crew foreman of
the Division of Forestry) and, failing to receive acceptable adjudication
at this level can appeal to the Center Director, the Corps Administrator,
and ultimately to me.
During the summer fire season, Corpsmen must remain at their duty post
for a continuous five-day period. At other times, they are required to
perform their normal eight-hour work shift, Monday through Friday. These
requirements are not unique to the Ecology Corps, but are the same
requirements applied to all fire station personnel.
Offers Individual Potential
The California Ecology Corps has much to offer the young men who partici-
pate. Educational institutions, such as the North American School of
Conservation and Ecology, for example, are working with us in recruiting
Corpsmen. Several of that school's recent graduates are now Corpsmen
obtaining actual on-the-job experience in ecology and conservation work.
Already, some Corpsmen have gone on to employment for public and private
-116-
APPENDIX A
environmental agencies, since service in the Corps qualifies as job
experience for civil service examinations and for other employment.
Community colleges are looking at the California Ecology Corps as a
possible supplement to their environmental and forestry curriculum
for the same reasons.
Let me also emphasize the potential the Corps offers the State of
California as a training resource for future employees of the Division
of Forestry, the Department of Parks and Recreation, and other units
of all levels of government concerned with environmental protection.
As I have said, four centers are now in operation. The centers and a
brief description follows:
Tehama Ecology Center. Located 25 miles east of Red Bluff in
Tehama County near the community of Paynes Creek, Corpsmen are
performing a valuable service of habitat improvement on the nearby
Tehama Winter Deer Range for the Department of Fish and Game.
Calaveras Ecology Center. This center, four miles from Angels
Camp, houses Corpsmen who are engaging in numerous conservation
projects in the Sierras for several agencies, primarily the United
States Forest Service, National Park Service, and Department of
Parks and Recreation.
Humboldt Ecology Center. Situated in the midst of California's
State Parks, Corpsmen at this center are performing vital work in
recreational development for our State Park system.
-117-
APPENDIX A
Inyo Ecology Center. This center is 10 miles from the city of Bishop.
The Corpsmen here will be involved in trail construction and other
conservation projects in the High Sierra for National Park Service,
Bureau of Land Management, and Department of Parks and Recreation.
In addition to the Centers, several spike camps are in operation. Corps-
men assigned to these camps, such as those at the Sequoia-Kings Canyon
National Park Headquarters at Ash Mountain and at E1 Portal near Yosemite
Valley are engaged in special work projects for the National Park Service
except when they are needed for fire dispatch. (Photographs of the
projects are shown in Attachment E.)
The Corpsmen have performed, and performed well, in a wide variety of
projects since July 1, 1971. Representatives of several of the contract-
ing departments have prepared testimony for your information, and a
complete list of current or completed projects as of today is attached.
Beyond its mission in ecology work and emergency firefighting, the Corps
performs yet another valuable service. A skilled, trained mountain
rescue team is now available to local authorities throughout the State
to assist in the rescue of persons trapped in mountainous areas and
cliffs.
There may be some confusion between the role of the California Ecology
Corps and that of the Youth Conservation Corps, established last year,
and/or the California Youth Conservation Corps, which was authorized in
legislation proposed last year by Assemblyman Mobley.
The programs and the concepts are entirely different. The California
Ecology Corps is a permanent year-around program employing men who are
-118-
APPENDIX A
at least 18 years old. The other programs are primarily designed as a
summer work program for younger people, both boys and girls. Both of
these programs have definite roles in the protection of California's
environment; and, as a matter of fact, each should compliment the work
of the other.
Summary of Comments
To summarize the present situation with the Ecology Corps, I would like
to refer again to the situation the Department found itself in just
about a year ago.
We had five fine state facilities about to be vacated and a continuing
and pressing need for the trained hand crews that have become a part
of the State's resource management and protection system.
A continuing success of the Department of Corrections rehabilitation
program made it plain that it was vitally necessary to establish a work
force of free people to continue these worthwhile public efforts into
the years ahead.
We have succeeded in establishing the Ecology Corps in less than a year
and have found that we can recruit and organize into productive crews
the young men that have participated up to this point. We can look
beyond work projects now contracted for to a substantial expansion in
the program as other public agencies turn to these crews more and more
to accomplish the purposes for which they receive public funds.
The comparison must be drawn when we look to the future with the old
Civilian Conservation Corps we all remember from the depression. That
agency built practically the entire network of roads and trails and
-119-
APPENDIX A
campgrounds available to the Forest Service and Park Service today, and
opened an area of employment for thousands of young men whose oppor-
tunities were extremely limited. Some of those same men are high in
state government positions today, as they are in conservation agencies
across the country.
With careful management, the Ecology Corps can fulfill those purposes
in California again; and at the same time we can continue our partner-
ships with the Department of Corrections, California Youth Authority,
and the counties to the end that existing facilities can be utilized,
and the vital work can go on. I will say, again, the California
Ecology Corps was developed to make up the difference between the in-
mates and wards available to us and our manpower needs, and not to
supplant them. These proven programs will continue, with the
California Ecology Corps a new and exciting element.
I would ask your support and understanding to that end.
#
#
#
-120-
APPENDIX A
ATTACHMENT A
EXECUTIVE DEPARTMENT
State of California
EXECUTIVE ORDER NO. R-27-71
Preservation and protection of the bountiful resources with which this state
has been enriched demand ever increasing vigil and continuing effort.
To meet this responsibility, it has been determined there is a need for an
organized group of citizens who are willing to join in a common purpose to
conserve California's great natural resources.
Therefore, by virtue of the authority vested in me as Governor of the State
of California, the following is ordered:
Section 1. California Ecology Corps. The California Ecology Corps is hereby
established and shall activate on July 1, 1971. The Corps will be headed by the
Director of Conservation.
Section 2. The Director shall have authority to direct and supervise all
personnel and activities thereof. The Director shall take all actions as may be
necessary to organize the corps so as to carry out the functions and to achieve
the purposes set forth in this order.
Section 3. Functions. The Corps shall:
(1) Recruit and employ members to aid in the maintenance of the natural
ecology and the preservation of the beauty and natural resources of this
state.
(2) Utilize its members in conservation and emergency projects to effect full
utilization and protection of the natural resources for the greatest possible
number of people.
Shall assist in the protection of natural resources, which will include, but will
not be limited to, forests, grasses, vegetation, soil, air, water, wildlife,
recreational and scenic resources.
(3) Assist in fire prevention and fire protection.
Section 4. Cooperation. The corps shall cooperate with all sectors of
government in carrying out its objectives. All state departments shall, whenever
possible or feasible, cooperate with the Corps in the protection of environment
or preservation of natural resources.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and caused the Great
Seal of the State of California to be affixed hereto this 27th day of April, 1971.
OF
RONALD REAGAN
GREAT EUREKA STATE
Governor of California
Attest:
EDMUND G. BROWN, JR.
CALIFORNIA
Secretary of State
-121-
ATTACHMENT B
CALIFORNIA ECOLOGY CORPS
1971-72 Fiscal Year
CENTER
PROJECTS
SUPPORTING AGENCY
Humboldt
1. Construct 1,000 picnic tables, 750 camp cupboards, 750 camp stoves,
Calif. Department of Parks
200 fire rings, 750 stove grills, 1,000 assorted signs.
and Recreation
2. Construct roadside rest -- 1,400 man days
Calif. Department of Parks
and Recreation
3. Construct 75-unit campground.
Calif. Department of Parks
and Recreation
4. San Simeon State Beach - expand camping facilities.
Office of Architecture and
Construction
Tehama
1. Rehabilitation of the Tehama Winter Deer Range, including spring
development, big game water guzzlers, Ishi fire road construction
Calif. Department of Fish
and fence building.
and Game
-122-
2. Construct big game water guzzlers with exclosures in Modoc County
Calif. Department of Fish
and Game
3. Mechanical and hand drill planting of browse species (brush) for
interstate deer herd and rehabilitation of burned over area in
Calif. Department of Fish
Modoc County. (Snag falling and planting.)
and Game
4. Lopping mountain mahogany for re-sprouting deer browse on Hot Creek
Calif. Department of Fish
Ridge, Shasta County.
and Game
5. Flood control maintenance on Sacramento River - Colusa area
Department of Water Resources
Calaveras
1. Road stabilization -- water drains, culverts, and berms.
Stanislaus National Forest
2. Timber stand improvement -- brushing, clearing.
Stanislaus National Forest
3. Fuel break construction.
Stanislaus National Forest
4. Lake boundary cleanup.
Stanislaus National Forest
APPENDIX A
Page 2
CENTER
PROJECTS
SUPPORTING AGENCY
Calaveras
5. Cover type conversion -- range improvement, construct pre-attack road
(Cont. )
signs
Stanislaus National Forest
6. Fire station and fire access road maintenance
Calif. Division of Forestry
7. Water system maintenance.
Calif. Division of Forestry
8. Construct nursery potting flats and shipping tops
Calif. Division of Forestry
9. Surplus property acquisition and distribution.
Calif. Division of Forestry
10. Mountain rescue training
Calif. Division of Forestry
11. Training and development of visual aids for Fire Academy
Calif. Division of Forestry
12. Mapping for water pollution control and soil study classification
Calif. Division of Forestry
13. Campground maintenance.
El Dorado National Forest
14. Beach cleanup - Lake Tahoe.
El Dorado National Forest
15. Slip planting for Genetics Lab (Lab located in Placerville)
El Dorado National Forest
16. Fertilizing plants for seed and soil experiments
E1 Dorado National Forest
17. On site planting -- storing and shipping seedlings.
El Dorado National Forest
18. Hazard reduction -- tree removal.
Sequioa-Kings Canyon N. P.
19. Campground cleanup
Sequioa-Kings Canyon N. P.
20. Hogan Reservior Recreation area development.
Corps of Engineers
21. Tree planting -- Kaweah Reservoir.
Corps of Engineers
Page 3
APPENDIX A
CENTER
PROJECTS
SUPPORTING AGENCY
Calaveras
22. Trail maintenance - fire break construction, campground cleanup,
Calif. Department of Parks
(Cont.)
Calaveras Big Trees State Park.
and Recreation
23. Emergency snow removal
Calif. Division of Highways
Inyo
1. White Mountain Research Station maintenance and operations.
U. C. Riverside
2. Construct three dams on Owens River for fish habitat improvement.
Calif. Department of Fish
and Game
3. Pup fish sanctuary development.
Calif. Department of Fish
and Game
4. Construct drift fences on Tule Elk winter range.
Calif. Department of Fish
and Game
5. Stream improvements.
Bureau of Land Management
124
6. Water development, campground improvement, trail construction in
New York Mountain area.
Bureau of Land Management
7. Campground development.
County of Inyo
8. Water development, campground improvement, trail work -- Death Valley National Monument
9. Restoration of Ghost Town -- Bodie.
Calif. Department of Parks
and Recreation
ATTACHMENT C
APPENDIX A
1972-73
LINE ITEM DETAIL
BUDGET FOR ECOLOGY CENTERS
APRIL 1, 1972
Humboldt
Tehama
Calaveras
Inyo
Total
Ecology
Ecology
Ecology
Ecology
All
PERSONAL SERVICES
Center
Center
Center
Center
Centers
Salaries & Wages
Forest Ranger II
(1)
14,114
(1)
14,114
(1)
14,114
(1)
14,113
(4)
56,455
Fire Crew Foreman
(5)
59,258
(5)
59,258
(5)
59,258
(6)
71,110
(21)
248,884
Heavy Fire Equip. Oper.
(1)
10,878
(1)
10,878
(1)
10,878
(1)
10,878
(4)
43,512
Forestry Cook II
(2)
15,088
(2)
15,088
(2)
15,088
(.5)
3,772
(6.5)
49,036
Total Salaries & Wages
(9)
99,338
(9)
99,338
(9)
99,338
(8.5) 99,873
(35.5)
397,887
Staff Benefits
Retirement (Staff Only)
14,900
14,900
14,900
14,980
59,680
Health & Welfare
(Staff Only)
1,728
1,728
1,728
1,632
6,816
Workmen's Comp. (Staff)
1,818
1,818
1,818
1,828
7,282
Workmen's Comp. (Corpsmen)
9,000
9,000
12,000
9,000
39,000
Total Staff Benefits
27,446
27,446
30,446
27,440
112,778
Total, Personal Services
126,784
126,784
129,784
127,313
510,665
OPERATING EXPENSES AND
EQUIPMENT
General Expense
8,000
8,000
8,100
8,000
32,100
Small Tools
891
891
1,518
891
4,191
Housing
3,726
3,726
6,348
6,348
20,148
Oper. Supp. & Exp.
891
891
1,518
1,518
4,818
Communications
1,215
1,215
2,070
2,070
6,570
Travel-in-State
1,377
1,377
2,346
2,346
7,446
Motor Vehicle Oper.
18,063
18,063
30,774
30,774
97,674
Emp. Relocation
480
480
840
480
2,28C
Utilities
10,692
10,692
18,216
18,216
57,816
Recreation & Lib. Supp.
972
972
1,656
972
4,572
Repair & Maint. of Fac.
4,293
4,293
7,314
7,314
23,214
Subsistence
42,300
42,300
56,400
42,300
183,300
Corpsmen Clothing
13,950
13,950
18,600
13,950
60,450
Medical & Dental Supp.
1,782
1,782
3,036
1,782
8,382
Search & Rescue
-
-
2,000
2,000
4,000
Corpsman Pay
36,775
36,775
45,970
36,775
156,29'
Exp. Acct. Property
1,000
1,000
1,000
1,000
4,000
Equipment
8,744
8,744
8,744
8,745
34,971
Total O. E. & E.
155,151
155,151
216,450
185,481
712,231
Gross Total Cost
281,935
281,935
346,234
312,794
1,222,89
Reimbursements
-104,000
-104,000
-120,000
-80,500
-408,50
Net Total Cost
177,935
177,935
226,234
232,294
814,39
B&SO
-125-
APPENDIX A
California Ecology Corps
Division of Porestry
Conservation Camps
July 1971 - April 1972
July 1970 -- April 1972
340
22
21
300
20
250
19
18
200
17
16
150
15
11
-
14
100
I
12
1:
50
TO
O
C.
A
S
0
N
D
J
F
M
A
J A S 0 N D J F M A M J J A S 0 N D F N
-126-
1971
1972
1970
197
972
APPENDIX A
TREATIFORNIA
The California Ecology Corps in fotos
HOUSE
CORPS
Mountain rescue training
climbing, and will be given additional training in
cold weather survival, snow and ice-field climbing,
and cross-country skiing. They will also be trained
Members of the Ecology Corps' new mountain
in first aid and follow-up field medical treatment, as
rescue team have been going through an intensive
well as litter handling.
training program which will eventually prepare them
Operating out of the Calaveras Ecology Center,
to handle rescue missions in difficult terrain and
the mountain rescue team will be available to public
under all-weather conditions.
agencies, statewide, for rescue missions in any of
Rescue team members have already received
California's rugged terrain, but especially in the
professional instruction in both free and aid rock
Sierra-Nevada range.
-127-
APPENDIX A
Timber stand
improvement
and fuel break
construction
Corpsmen working for the
Stanislaus National Forest have
been engaged primarily in tim-
ber stand improvement and fuel
break construction.
Timber stand improvement
involves thinning overcrowded
timber stands to promote better
tree growth, clearing brush from
areas to be planted as timber
plantations, and disposing of
road-side slash with motorized
chippers.
The construction of fuel
breaks generally involves clear-
ing a swath of brush from
alongside fire access roads. Fuel
breaks provide an early defense
against wildland fires.
-128-
APPENDIX A
Instructing COD trainees
Four corpsmen were given a tem-
porary assignment this January to in-
struct Career Opportunity Develop-
ment trainees attending a five week
session at the Division of Forestry
Fire Academy in lone.
Utilizing special program learning
aids, the corpsmen helped the C.O.D.
trainees review high school level
course material in English, mathe-
matics and physical sciences.
Fire road
construction
A major project at the Tehama
Ecology Center has been constructing
the Ishi road, an unpaved all vehicle
road that will serve both as a major
fire access road and as a major link
into the Tehama Winter Deer Range.
Corpsmen on the project are en-
gaged drilling blasting holes, and con-
structing culverts and header walls
around the culverts.
Constructing
camp ground equipment
Corpsmen working in the carpen-
try shop at the Humboldt Ecology
Center are presently constructing pic-
nic tables and camp cupboards for
the State Department of Parks and
Recreation.
The carpentry shop will also pro-
duce assorted signs for the Depart-
ment of Parks and Recreation.
APPENDIX A
Campsite development
At the Humboldt Ecology
Center, there are two crews of
corpsmen assigned to campsite
development at Benbow Lake
State Park.
Funded by the State De-
partment of Parks and Recrea-
tion, the project involves clear-
ing the land, leveling campsites,
installing pipe lines, building
fences, and constructing roads
and parking areas.
Corpsmen are also engaged
in removing hazardous limbs,
snags and dead trunks that
might endanger children playing
in the park; thinning trees to
make the campsites more access-
able for campers, and construc-
ting gates and log banks to pre-
vent cars from parking
improperly.
APPENDIX B
STATE OF CALIFORNIA--RESOURCES AGENCY
RONALD REAGAN, Governor
DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION
P.O. BOX 2390
SACRAMENTO 95811
March 31, 1972
Honorable Mike Cullen, Chairman
Committee on Efficiency and Cost Control
Room 440-B, State Capitol
Sacramento, California 95814
Dear Mr. Cullen and Members of the Committee:
Thank you for the opportunity to present testimony to your
committee concerning the experiences of the Department of
Parks and Recreation with the Ecology Corps Program.
At the beginning of this fiscal year, we contracted with the
Division of Forestry, Department of Conservation for $203, 400
of work to be performed by the Ecology Corps. $105,400 of the
work was financed directly by our Department and $98,000 is
to be furnished by the United States Bureau of Reclamation
from the Land and Water Conservation Fund on a reimbursement
basis.
Work to be accomplished for us through this program is as
follows:
1. Construction of the following facilities for state-
wide distribution to units of the State Park System.
1,000 Picnic Tables
750 Camp Cupboards
750 Camp Stoves
200 Fire Rings
1,000 Assorted Signs
Of the above facilities, 50 tables are complete and the
material for another 200 has been cut and prepared and
30 cupboards have been completed. The balance of the
facilities are expected to be completed by July 1.
2. Construction of a roadside rest at Franklyn K. Lane Grove
in Humboldt Redwoods which includes clearing, fill, park-
ing area, rest room building and water line. This will
be complete by July 1.
3. Relocate a 50 unit campground from Reynolds Wayside
Camp in Mendocino County to Benbow Lake State Recreation
Area in Humboldt County. This work is 50% complete and
will be finished by July 1.
-131-
APPENDIX B
Honorable Mike Cullen, Chairman
-2-
March 31, 1972
0
4. Construction of trails in Calaveras Big Trees State
Park. 96 man days have been expended to date and 510
man days remain to be used before July 1.
5. Construction of a 54-unit campground at San Simeon
State Beach which includes brush clearing, site
preparation, tables, stoves, rest room buildings,
water tanks, and campsite posts will be completed by
July 1.
Cooperation in the development and implementation of this
program by Division of Forestry headquarters and field personnel
has been outstanding.
The Department of Parks and Recreation believes it will be
accomplishing about twice as much work and receiving at least
double the facilities through the Ecology Corps program. The
above programs have been accomplished by the Department of Parks
and Recreation personnel or day labor forces from the Office of
Architecture and Construction in the past. The campground
construction is of the primitive type; the restroom buildings,
of the vault or chemical toilet variety.
Extreme care and understanding have been exhibited by the
Ecology Corps regarding the effects of the development of this
primitive campground upon the environment and in providing a
better public service for recreation needs.
Sincerely
William Penn Mot Jr.
Director
-132-
APPENDIX C
Statement by Nathanial Stone, Corpsman
Humboldt Ecology Center, Weott, Cal.
to Department of Conservation Subcommittee,
Finance Committee, California Senate
March 15, 1972
Among all the COs at Humboldt Ecology Center there seem to be complaints
of some aspects of the Corps and, simultaneously, appreciation of other aspects.
With only one exception so far, the negative aspects outweigh the positive
ones at some point before a man's alternate service is done, and he leaves. Of
the 22 men that were at Humboldt at the end of last summer, only nine are still
here, and of those three are very close to leaving. The director of our camp
has said repeatedly that the COs have done a better job than what the California
Division of Forestry has seen from others doing our same job, and Parks Department
personnel we have worked with have supported that opinion. And yet, we find
these working conditions eventually intolerable.
Living in the mountains, working outside, and getting some firefighting
experience are pretty shining inducements to join and even to stay. Until one
really gets to know the Corps, the potential of actually doing ecology oriented
work is also a very important reason for joining and, at first, for staying.
Most of us are quite concerned with the ecology of this country and more speci-
fically of this state, and we saw in the California Ecology Corps a real chance
to do something about it and really feel that we were having a worthwhile and
positive effect upon the ecology. Except for possibly the newest arrivals, we
have all been sorely disappointed. The director of our center has said repeatedly
that the California Ecology Corps is not really meant to be an "ecology corps" --
its function is to fight fires! He has told us, and claims to even have
suggested to the Director of the Ecology Corps, Joe Griggs, that the name of
the Corps be changed so as not to mislead prospective corpsmen. Prospective
-133-
APPENDIX C
Nathanial Stone
2-2-2-2-2-2-2-2-
corpsmen are not the only ones being misled -- the people of the state of
California have been led to believe that their governor, through concern for
the environment, actually established an agency to do something about it. We
corpsmen have suggested many projects that would benefit the environment, but
that have been refused by either our camp director or someone over him. Among
them was a proposal to do such simple things as cleaning up litter from the
highways, parks, and woods, and cleaning up debris from the beaches in our
area. We proposed teach-ins, ecologically oriented tours, and literature
dissemination for the general public in order to increase an environmental
awareness. We asked to be allowed to work on stream clearance and assist with
the fish hatcheries. And we also asked to be allowed to work with Dr. Becking
of Humboldt State College on projects he deems necessary to safeguard the
endangered Redwoods of the Rockefeller Forest area of the Humboldt Redwoods
State Park. To all of the requests we have gotten the answers of "We are not
funded to do ecology work," or "You can do it on your own time but we can't take
state time for that kind of work." Instead, our projects are things like
constructing picnic tables, clearing camp sites in a future park, removing
Park Department equipment from a park so the Highway Department could put a
new stretch of freeway through it, splitting downed redwoods into fence rails,
and digging culverts along park roads to help keep them open. A small amount of
reseeding of bared areas has been done by a few Humboldt corpsmen, but even
there the man hours put in on state time was so minimal that next to what the
Sierra Club does in one day, on one hillside, our efforts were dwarfed. The
administration has, however, allowed one man to take state time one day a week
to work with the local recycling center. Other than that, any ecology oriented
work that gets done has to be done on one's own time.
-134-
APPENDIX C
Nathanial Stone
3-3-3-3-3-3-3-
Of course, we do fight fires during the fire season and have been lauded
as very good fire crews by the CDF personnel we have worked with on the fires.
I would in turn also like to praise our foremen for their conscientiousness
when it comes to our safety on a fire.
The safety consciousness of our foreman, however, contrasts sharply to
that of whoever orders our clothing. The boots we are issued and expected to
wear to a fire have soles that are dangerously slick -- so much so that the US
Forest Service will not allow any man on a fire line with that kind of sole.
The rest of our clothing is fair to excellent with the exception of the blue
jeans, which cost the Ecology Corps somewhere around $3.50 per pair and aren't
worth a buck. I've seen a few pair of them just fall apart at the seams during
the first wearing. We're issued other good clothes, however. The shirts,
jackets, coats and rain gear are all good quality.
At the Humboldt Center we are served good food. Allowances are made for
the large number of vegetarians among us and although when we first got there
the food was not really what I could call good, improvements have been made.
We have a committee of corpsmen, cooks, and a foremen to discuss food problems.
The relations between the corpsmen and the foremen and director change
so much all the time that it is hard to make a definitive statement about what
it is like, except that through it all, there has been a general trend from
congenial with the director and somewhere between congenial and tense with the
foremen, to the present condition of generally worsened relations. At present
the Director, Moises Estrada, has made us not only feel that he no longer cares
about us, but moreover, that he would much prefer to have the COs out of the
program and employ just the volunteers. In fact, he has directly said as much
to me. Relations with the foremen are actually very good on the job (with the
exception of in the kitchen and with the in-camp foremen). However, off the
job there is a growing distance between the foremen and corpsmen resulting in a
-135-
APPENDIX C
Nathanial Stone
4-4-4-4-4-4-4
growing dissonance in the camp. I personally have experienced one of the
CDF personnel swearing at me and I found myself cussing out another one about
a month earlier.
Judging from many comments made at the bi-weekly staff meetings, many of
the CDF personnel have lost any respect at all for our human values. For
instance, there has been stealing at the center since the introduction of
the non-CO volunteers and the solution that two foremen came up with for it
was for us to catch the thief ourselves and beat him up.
Another personnel relations problem we have experienced is a new one with
the advent of the men hired through the Public Employment Program. There are
four per camp. Of our four, three of them are really very easy to get along
with. Except for one man, who has caused a lot of disruption at the camp, the
problems are not caused by the individuals themselves but rather by the fact
of the disparate pay for equal or virtually equal jobs. Regardless of the
claims that the PEP men are not doing jobs formerly done by corpsmen, two of
them at Humboldt are. One of them replaced the corpsman maintenance man and
one filled the clerk vacancy that opened when our clerk finished his alternate
service and went home. It is demoralizing to see someone else who is no more
qualified than yourself, or possibly less qualified, doing virtually the same
job next to you and having authority over you and getting paid about ten times
as much.
Another aspect of the wage differential has been a source of discontent.
For example, a total of approximately thirty-three hundred dollars per month
is all that is paid for the salaries of a total of 80 men at Humboldt, while more
than twice that much (about $7500) is divided among just seven others there. A
corpsman gets just forty dollars a month or fifty if he is a leader, dishwasher,
or night watchman. That comes out to $.25 per hour. Sometime, just to see
what it is like, try to spend no more than fifty dollars a month, discounting
-136-
APPENDIX C
Nathanial Stone
5-5-5-5-5-5-5
the cost of your clothes, meals, and household expenses, such as rent and
maintenance. And then, in addition to that, try to save enough at the end of
six months or a year of living that way, so that you would have enough to keep
yourself alive until you find another job. It is unrealistic. It is slave
labor. If you find you can't do it on forty a month, try it on $100 a month,
which is what is promised to us by July 1. I am convinced that we will still
find it impossible to save any toward the day when we will have to be job
hunting again. I am sure that you are well aware that with the present economic
situation, job hunting can be an extremely long ordeal.
I do not want to see the California Ecology Corps fold up. I would like
to see it change. It comes back to the old question of change from working
within the system or destroying it altogether. I personally am in favor of
the change rather than the destruction of the California Ecology Corps, and
that is why I am here today. It has such tremendous potential but is now such
a farce and blatant attempt by the Governor to dupe the people of the state
into believing he is doing something about the ecological crisis when he is not.
That is the basis for one of what I consider our two most important requests
here today. In other words, let's have an Ecology Corps.
The other important request is nothing greater than a little justice with
regard to our wages. Let the pay equal the task. Give us what a private in
the Army gets, or minimum wage. Give us a wage equal to the work we give you,
the people of the State.
Respectfully submitted,
Nathanial Stone
-137-
APPENDIX D
To: The Honorable Ronald Reagan, Governor of the State of California
From: Members of the California Ecology Corps, Inyo Boology Center
Petition
The purpose of this petition is threefold. It will show that dissatisfaction
among the members of the California Ecology Corps (CEC) is more widespread than
the Governor has been led to believe. It will ask that the original intent of
the CEC be recalled and reviewed. It will request a discussion of executive
support for state funding of CEC projects.
I.
Since its inception, the CEC has shown a trend toward a low corpsman
population and a high corpsman turnover rate. Low morale has led to disputes,
resignations and general dissatisfaction within the Corps.
Such negative aspects tend to overshadow positive elements: satisfaction in
work accomplished and pride in readiness for emergency are undermined by anger
and frustrated depression over a lack of response to questions and grievances.
The undersigned believe that behind these grievances, and the low morale
engendered by them, are several definite causes.
The main function of the Ecology Corps is to provide trained hand crews for
the fighting of wildfires, according to Mr. Joe Griggs, Director of CEC.
Wildfire fighting is difficult and dangerous work, yet corpsmen have no life
insurance, no health insurance, and receive meager wages. Corpsmen receive a
minimal food allotment. During fire season corpsmen remain on call twenty-four
hours a day, five days a week without compensation.
-138-
APPENDIX D
Although Workman's Compensation provides some death benefits, Corps
personnel who are not working or on base are not covered in case of accident.
Two corpemen have drewmed since the beginning of the program and neither
left any bequest for the simple reason that they could not afford insurance
premiums, Life insurance is a distressing subject, but it would seen only
right that corpemen be provided some coverage over and above Workman's
Compensation as death can occur at any time.
Our only health plan is Workman's Compensation, which has never been
fully explained to us. Direct injuries incurred on the job or at the Ecology
Center are fully covered; but, even though we live in state barracks, only
one visit per man to a doctor has been allowed in the case of illness, and
medication or furthar visits to a doctor must be paid for out of the corpsman's
$40.00/month compensation. Corpsmen need a more comprehensive medical health
plan, and should be provided some dental care. In the case of a prolonged
illness a corpsman is discharged for being ill. Discharged corpsman are not
given any severance pay.
Despite the fact that our room and board and other essentials are provided
by the state, our wages are inadequate compensation for the type of work
corpsmen do. Our day to day projects are largely manual labor. For this work
we receive $2.00 per day. When on the fireline corpsmen receive only $.25 per
hour ($.60 after July 1, 1972) for the first eight hours, after which we receive
$2.80 per hour overtime wages. This totals $13.20 per day ($16.00 after Julyl),
or $1.10 per hour ($1.33 after July 1) averaged over a standard twelve hour
shift. CEC Director Joe Griggs has publicly stated that corpsmen should receive
the legal minimum wage at the very least.
-139-
APPENDIX D
Our food allotment of $.534 per-man/per-meal remains static while food costs
rise. While our liklihood of strenuous fire-duty increases, our nourishment
decreases. (See appended food-cost statistics.)
During the eight month fire season corpsmen must remain on base for 120 hours;
five consecutive days on standby alert without compensation for the sixteen daily
hours off work but still confined to the Center. This situation, according to
those who have experienced it, leads to boredom and irritability. This might be
alleviated by a general improvement in the areas previously mentioned.
At the Inyo Ecology Center the corpsmen are ananimous in their concern that
the above points be resolved, and that their dissatisfaction with current
conditions be known.
II.
The work performed by corpsmen at the Inyo Center is largely the same as
was performed by the previous, inmate population under the California Department
of Corrections. Corpsmen fight fires; are leased to other agencies for manual
labor projects, such as the building of rock and earth dams; and perform camp
chores. With few exceptions, these are the tasks which Inyo corpsmen perform
in the name of ecology. These tasks were all performed at Inyo by inmates
under CDC's Conservation Center program.
The undersigned request a discussion with the California Division of Forestry
and the Office of the Governor to define the types of work, ecologically
oriented or not, which are to be expected of CEC. We believe that "ecology" is
a misnomer for the work the Corps performs.
-140-
APPENDIX D
LII.
At the present time, the Ecology Corps 18 a self-supporting state agency.
Because of the limited funds of other state and federal agencies to which
corpsmen are leased, it is impossible to achieve the previously mentioned
requests without state funding. The undersigned ask the Governor to consider
executive support in the legislature oriented toward general funding of the
Ecology Corps to cover higher wages, health and life insurance, and a larger
food-cost allotment. We also ask the Governor to support limited funding for
specific ecology-oriented projects; such projects might be suggested by faculty
members of state colleges and universities. We believe that these measures
would appreciably improve morale, work-quality, and sense of pride in the Corps.
IV.
Conclusion
We request that the items mentioned in the first section be carefully
considered by the Governor, the legislature, and the California Division of
Forestry, and that response be made to each.
We request that the CEC's work profile be defined by the executive branch
and CDF.
If CEC work remains in the field of conservation, we request that the word
"ecology" be dropped from the Corps' name, and that a more realistic one, such
as "forestry" or "environment" be substituted.
-141-
APPENDIX D
We request that prospective corpsmen be shown lists of projects completed
or ongoing, and that the projects be in order according to man-hours spent
on each. There should be a separate listing for each Ecology Center.
We request a regular, quarterly meeting be held between the CEC Director,
the Center Directors, and Corpsmen Representatives from all Centers.
We request a direct response to this petition from the Governor of the
State of California.
The undersigned believe in the present and potential worth of the California
Ecology Corps. We believe that CEC can do much in the field of environmental
protection. However, we also believe that poor wages, poor food, lack of
severance pay and lack of insurance must be corrected; these factors limit
the Corps' attractiveness as an employment.
We hope that the California Ecology Corps will expand and improve as a force
for ecology in the State of California.
Copies given to:
The Honorable Ronald Reagan, Governor of the State of California
Mr. Joe Griggs, Director of the California Ecology Corps
Assemblyman Mike Cullen and Members of the Assembly Committee on Efficiency
and Cost Control
Members of the Press
Signiatures
Paul McKay C.O.
-142-
APPENDIX D
Signiatures
Jerry young C.O.
andrew Kemper C.O.
craig Bianchi C.O.
Jordan R. Blakeney Jr. C.O.
C C
Oscar Mayorga Val.
Jodd G. Bensen (cD)
Mark Bonander C.U.
Patrice Zall Co.
James C. Done C.O.
Lynn Gallaher) 20
Geenn N. Kageyama C.O.
Guy pull C.O.
David W. alraham e.o.
July D.Willams CO.
Sary Binker CO
Stove Winers C.O.
Russell law C.O.
Thomas B. Robinson C.O.
Burlan C.O,
Brian 8 manigg C.O.
Rafael D. Barraga vol.
Row Smith C.O.
step- n. Duln 6.0.
Bur TII. Camp hell C-O
Stephen Walb C.O.
J. Thaddeus Easto C.O.
Roger W. Bergmann C.O.
Scott Edgett C.O.
Jas. P.Celle
C.O.
Rep Bech
C.O
persephilles
John R Robertson C.O.
Gary R. Stalnaker C.O.
John Muller C.O.
Donald John Cans
-143-
APPENDIX D
In Absentia
Robert Heberleco(p.m.k)
Steve Baer C.O (P. McK)
Craig Thumbercol P. mck)
Richard Droper CO (P. mcK)
Bruce Engerholm C.O, (P. mck)
Jon merritt C.O(P. mckl
St. John minaberryc.a P. mck)
Gary mulder C.OCP. mck)
Ray Latham C.OC P. mcK)
Jeff middlehook C.O (P.M.K)
Tom Geen C.O (P.Mck)
-144-
I
PT1
pam)
Cha
Sept.
Oct.
Nov.
Dec.
Jan.
Feb.
March
Unit Cost
Percentage Cost
Meat
1971
1971
1971
1971
1972
1972
1972
Increase/Decrease
Increase/Decrease
Link Sausage
$.55#
$.67#
$.55
$.55
$.57
$.61
$.63
Up $.08#
Up 13%
Com. Top Round
.95
.95
.95
.95
.98
Up .03
Up 4%
Corned Beef
.83
.83
.87
.89
.92
.95
Up .12
Up 13%
Pork Loin
.63
.69
.69
.79
.83
.75
Up
.12
Up 16%
Ham Shanks
.59
.59
.59
.59
.60
Up .01
Up 2%
Wieners
.63
.63
.63
.63
.67
.68
Up .05
Up 7.5%
Spare Ribs
.65
.69
.69
.69
.73
.70
Up .05
'Up 7%
Stewing Hens
.47
.48
.47
No Change
No Change
Pear Ham
.89
.89
.89
.92
.94
.99
.99
Up .10
Up 10%
Ground Beef
.59
.63
.63
.63
.63
Up
.04
Up 6%
-145-
Bacon
.67
.67
.67
.69
.78
.78
Up
.11
Up 13%
APPENDIX D
Liversausage
.55
.55
.55
.55
.55
.59
Up
.04
Up 7%
Bologna
.55
.55
.55
.59
.59
.59
Up
.04
Up 7%
Chili Meat
.61
.63
.63
.63
Up
.02
Up 3%
Chopped Ham
.79
.79
.79
.79
.87
.87
Up
.08
Up 9%
Beef Heart
.49
XXXXX
.53
.55
Up .06
Up 11%
Stew Meat
.92
.92
.92
.93
Up .01
Up 1%
Short Ribs
.59
.49
.59
.69
.75
Up .16
Up 22%
Leg of Pork
.67
.67
.67
.72
Up .05
Up 7%
Fryers
.43
.45
.39
Down.O4
Down 10%
Filet of Cod
.69
.69
.89
.93
Up
.24
Up 26%
Beef Clod
.89
.87
.98
.98
1.05
Up .16
Up 15%