I am not an evaluator of people's esthetic values. As far as most people are concerned, what they feel is esthetic and what I feel is esthetic are two different things. This is not an issue here.

Most people feel that Tiki-torches in front of a nightclub, that is esthetic.

What we are really doing is changing this whole country into one big armpit, as far as I can see. The real thing is and the whole strength of our country is our educational system and our scientists and technological advances, and in that realm of science, there is a whole group of scientists that need outdoor laboratories to research. We have just started to use them. We have just started to see the importance of them. We are building indoor laboratories, indoor classrooms, like crazy; as fast as they can pour concrete, we are building laboratories, but we cannot build any more. We cannot recreate outdoor laboratories.

Let me give you an example of the importance of this: I happened to be connected at one time with the University of Wisconsin. They are doing a continual briefing program. They want bigger and better potatoes along with the U.S. Department of Agriculture.

Every time they get in trouble with potatoes, they say they have too many scabs on them or they have too many grubs or they are not strong enough or the frost killed them, they go look for a new genetic variety; they go look for new potatoes.

You know where they go? They go to the High Andes. Suppose when you got to the High Andes there was a parking lot there where the wild potatoes were, or there is a go-cart there, or there is a pizza stand, or there is a ski-lodge, or a ski resort? What would they do for bigger and better potatoes? They would say, "Oh, to hell potatoes." Now, what would Congress say about that, huh? Now, you say compromise, that we should compromise, that they have two sides. The scientist has already compromised. He is letting millions of slobs in every day on foot; and the scientists say that no one should be in there, that that should be reserved for research, and we are finally forced to compromise to let people in there. But now you want to ruin it all, spoil it; you have to let it remain undisturbed to compare it. Biology, agriculture, physics, chemistry, all of these fields finally have to go to the outdoor laboratory; because, you see, we are all animals and we all live in an environment and no matter how thick the walls or how spiritual or how thick-skinned we are, sooner or later we have got to face the environment. We need to know more and more about that. This is where the strength of our country lies.

I ask a few questions in summary here. What you would find in science now, how about tomorrow?

No. 2, what is more important: USC first in downhill skiing and the Olympics; or USC first in agriculture and science?

Thank you very much. [Applause.]

Mr. HOSMER. Before you go away, Dr. Vogl, assuming everything you said is good in principle, how does it apply to this particular matter?

Dr. VOGL. Sir, one of the things you have been saying is that we have a problem here, we need this area for skiing, and why not go to the next hill?

Now, everybody in the country is doing this; they are all "going to the next hill." Same way for scientists.

Mr. HOSMER. Your emphasis was placed on this being a natural laboratory already in existence.

Dr. VOGL. That is right, and it is unique.

Mr. HOSMER. And, that it would become extinct by letting somebody in there.

Now, if it is already to an extent contaminated and it is within reaching distance of a large number of people, why should all the mountains in the world, plus this one, be preserved as a laboratory? You have brought a whole new issue in here.

Dr. VOGL. We will find that the environment is not the same from one area to another. If you have been born and raised in Michigan, you find that southern California has a different kind of climate, a different kind of environment; and, as a result, it has a different kind of impact on the plants and animals that have resided for centuries and centuries and eons and eons in those areas. We need to study each one of these types of environments, each kind. We need representation of each one set aside for future generations. For things that technology may develop in the future, we have no concept.

Your son may die of cancer and the cure for cancer may be in a rare plant that is found only on the top of Mount San Gorgonio, and there are quite a few rare plants.

Mr. HOSMER. The burden of your argument is that this is the last one of its type?

Dr. VOGL. That is right, in southern California. In the Mediterranean climate of southern California.

Mr. HOSMER. Doctor, how do you know there is not one of the same type someplace else? It does not necessarily have to be in the area of southern California for these purposes; does it?

Dr. VOGL. Yes; it does, because southern California has a particular kind of environment that exists no other place in the world; therefore, these plants have become extremely important.

Mr. HOSMER. Do you suggest then that this is the only one in the world, rather than the only one in California, southern California, that has that peculiar or particular ecological and other natures; is that what you are telling us?

Dr. VOGL. It is

Mr. HOSMER. There are none in South America; there are none anyplace else in the world?

Dr. VOGL. Of the identical type, there is none at any other place in the world.

Mr. HOSMER. You mean it is that rare?

Dr. VOGL. There is none anyplace else in the world.

However, there is even a more important point, sir, and that is the accessibility of it and the expanding of our universities and colleges and a need for this kind of research area that is accessible.

Mr. HOSMER. You have a pretty good biology department, in your part of the State?

Dr. VOGL. That is right, but we are all paying for National Science Foundation money to send those researchers to places where the field laboratories still exist. You and I are paying the money for them.

Mr. HOSMER. All I am asking you to do, Dr. Vogl, is to find out why this is a particularly extraordinary and unusual and unique mountain and should be preserved?

Dr. VOGL. I think this is going to be brought out by some students tomorrow; the main thing is it has certain plants and animals and the type of an environment that is unique to this Mount San Gorgonio. It exists no other place in the world.

Mr. HOSMER. Thank you very much, Dr. Vogl.

Mr. BARING. All right, the next speaker, Dr. Edwin Woodhouse, professor emeritus, Los Angeles City College.

STATEMENT OF DR. EDWIN D. WOODHOUSE, PROFESSOR EMERITUS, LOS ANGELES CITY COLLEGE, LA CRESCENTA, CALIF.

Dr. WOODHOUSE. The question was asked, "Why here?"

I think I can answer that question, because, on the fringe of the San Gorgonio wilderness are over two dozen youth camps, including many church camps, YMCA, Boy Scouts, and the likes. If those ski lifts go into the San Gorgonio area, the San Gorgonio wilderness ceases to exist and the benefit of all of these camps for youth will be greatly depreciated.

That is the answer to "Why here?" because, all of these camps that are here already making use of that area need to stay here and the area would be changed for them if the commercialization is permitted. A couple of other points have occurred to me, with the talk of intercollegiate skiing, and I believe that is utterly ridiculous. By their own definition of requirements of being able to get in and back in an afternoon and have training in skiing, that would leave out USC, UCLA, LA State, Occidental, they could not partake that sport at Mount San Gorgonio by their own definition of the requirements for training in that sport.

Again, as a former scoutmaster and Scout troop committeeman, unless there has been some change made very recently, skiing is not included in the scouting program of the Boy Scouts of America. I hope I am correct in that, unless there have been some changes made very recently.

So, why here? There are thousands of children, youth, at the camps at the fringe or the margin of that wilderness and the wilderness would cease to exist; there is no question about that. The colleges have given you the facts and I will not take time to repeat what they have said, but I know them to be fact.

That is why the answer applies here, because those camps for youth are in the margin of that area.

We have all heard at some time or other, a cracked phonograph record repeating over and over the same words. I hold in my hand the record of hearings held before this body in Las Vegas last year. One hundred and one pages of this record (725-826) contain just about all there is to be said in regard to the wilderness preservation of Mount San Gorgonio. Yet the proponents of the commercialization of Mount San Gorgonio would have you waste your valuable time repeating that which has already been said since 1947.

Mount San Gorgonio is now open to family winter recreational use. No legislation nor change of any kind is necessary. The word “ski” does not appear in the several bills now under consideration. The proponents of commercialization are now trying to obtain by subterfuge and deception that which they have been denied by democratic procedures.

The one new contribution that I could add to this discussion is to call your attention to the mountains surrounding Banff, Canada, which I visited last summer. To the northwest is a mountain with denuded scars running down its slopes. They are the ski runs, visible throughout the valley. They do not improve the scenery; they do not benefit the mountains; their only benefit is to downhill skiers.

The Division of Camping of the Episcopal Diocese of Los Angeles is just as opposed now as it was a year ago to the commercialization of an area of prime importance to its camping program for young people. They do not want to see the creation of another Lake Tahoe. I again present their resolution, with the change of two words in recognition of the fact that the wilderness bill did pass.

In conclusion: do not forget that Shylock wanted only "a pound of flesh, to be cut off nearest the merchant's heart." Regardless of the addition of fringe areas, the passage of one of these bills would mean the death of the San Gorgonio Wilderness; and, in turn, might well sound the death knell of the entire wilderness system.

I would include the following resolution:

RESOLUTION OF THE DIVISION OF CAMPING OF THE EPISCOPAL DIOCESE OF LOS ANGELES-RE WILDERNESS

RESOLVED: That the Division of Camping of the Episcopal Diocese of Los Angeles record its 100 percent endorsement of the basic policy of preserving such wilderness areas remaining in our country, whose preservation as wilderness is essential to give to future generations the opportunity to see and enjoy their natural heritage.

Further, in view of the enormous population increase which has already taken place in Southern California, and which will continue for some time to come, it is our conviction that it is more imperative than ever that those few wilderness areas within Southern California be maintained and protected.

Be it further resolved, that the Division of Camping of the Episcopal Diocese of Los Angeles supports the general policy of maintaining the San Gorgonio Wild Area in its present status and that it be retained in the Wilderness Area.

The above resolution was approved unanimously by the executive council of the Episcopal diocese of Los Angeles.

Thank you very much.

Mr. BARING. All right, thank you, sir.

The next witness, Mr. Richard Witz.

STATEMENT OF RICHARD WITZ, MONTEREY PARK CITY COUNCIL AND MONTEREY PARK RECREATION AND PARKS COMMISSION

Mr. Wrrz. Honorable members of the committee, I am Richard Witz, primarily representing the Monterey Park City Council and the Monterey Park Recreation and Parks Commission. I am presently and have been a member of the commission for the past 6 years, serving 2 years as its chairman. I am a charter member of the Izaak Walton League of America, San Gabriel Valley Chapter, and the past and

present vice president of this organization. I am presently an active member and a past officer of the Rotary Club of Monterey Park. I am a present member of the Alhambra YMCA. I have owned and operated a retail business at the same location in the city of Monterey Park for the past 18 years.

I know it has been a long day and everybody is tired. I have always given days of my time at the cost of many dollars to present something that I feel is important to the greatness of these United States, as is this. I could do no justice to my belief in as short a period of time as you are now allowing me.

I have six pages of testimony and resolutions and many pictures, from my city and from many other organizations. I would like to be heard when it may be fully digested.

I do not believe the committee is very fair to limit anyone who has put the time and the effort involved in such an important issue as this is and frustrate them with such a limited presentation and limitation as you are allowing here and forcing them to miss many important facts that are important.

Mr. BARING. Mr. Witz, the reason why you are on today is because you stated that you could not attend the session tomorrow.

We have gone over an entire hour tonight, or actually 2 hours, because some could not be here tomorrow.

Now, the same thing goes for the proponents who could not come today, they will be here tomorrow. There happens to be 30 of these witnesses who have testified in the last 2 hours.

Mr. JOHNSON. I would like to say also that we have sat here and we are only 3 members of a 30-man committee and we are out here to hear your statement and whether we hear it or not your statement and your material will be accepted into the record. The material will be accepted for the file and your statement will appear in the record as if read in full, and it will be there for the benefit of the other members of the subcommittee and for the other Members of Congress.

There are only three of us out here to take these hearings. The purpose of taking the hearings is to get a complete record, to get all the information in the file and then the staff will work that over and there will be reports made. It was the same way with people who appeared at the hearings in Las Vegas and presented the statements. They all appeared in the record as if read.

I think your statement is a little bit incorrect.

Mr. Wrtz. I do not think you can accomplish the same thing.

Mr. HOSMER. Well, Mr. Witz, instead of badgering the committee, why do you not give us something about your position-precisely and concisely that would intrigue us to spend more time reading it?

Mr. Wrtz. Well, it is all quite intriguing and at great effort I would like to come back tomorrow, if I may be permitted to have more time in which to present my statement. I would not waste your time or mine by presenting it now, because I could accomplish nothing in a minute or two.

Mr. BARING. If the gentleman can come back tomorrow, we will see that he gets more time.

Thank you, Mr. Witz.

Now, we will hear the next witness, Mr. Cleaver.