The modern Environment Movement began with the passing of the Wilderness Act of 1964. The act established a National Wilderness System and created 9 millions acres. The main influence and writer of the act Howard Zahniser, who felt that we needed wilderness as it takes us away from technology that gives us perspective of mastering the environment rather than being a part of it (Nash, 2001). With the passing of the act Americans questioned both preservation and conservation. A new culture emerged in America that rejected societal norms and praised independence and freedom. This culture developed in the youth of America and sparked change in preservation growth and the overall outlook of wilderness.
One of America’s greatest conservation achievements is the Wilderness Act of 1964. Fifty-two years later, this act has a legacy to withhold. A legacy that meant something in 1964 and remains the same today: to protect unspoiled land. Even though, through this act millions of acres have been conserved, the key word is continue. That is why America should pass laws to preserve the wilderness before developers spoil them.
John Muir is arguably the most influential conservationist in American history. He was an active member in the preservation of the American wilderness from the late 1800’s until he passed in 1914. Muir is often referred to as the “Father of the National Parks” because of his efforts in the establishment of several National Parks. One of the biggest flaws of American history textbooks in need of change is the fact that they do not include the conservationists who have preserved the environment so today the same beauty can be see the way that they saw it. John Muir was involved in many American conservation efforts including the co-founding of Yosemite National Park, founding of the Sierra Club, and his overall career as a
1. Karl Jacoby book brings the remarkable accounting of the negative aspects of conservation movement to the sunlight. Jacoby uses the early years of Adirondack Park, Yellowstone National Park, and the Grand Canyon Forest Preserve to demonstrate his theme of the locals’ reactions to the creation of the park and the actions from the conservationists. And the fantasies the early conservationists’ promulgated of the locals of being satanic rapists of the environment are dispelled (193).
The environmentalist movement of the late 19th and early 20th centuries presents a picture of America at the time: torn between the desires to expand while seeking to protect nature. Although all members of the movement sought to protect nature, there were two predominant schools as to how to go about this. In their two philosophies, they created two methods for human interaction with the wilderness. The conservationist movement can be called the utilitarian movement, and sought the greatest good for the greatest number over the longest term. In contrast, the preservationist school aimed at keeping nature in its current state, although the
In “The Trouble with Wilderness,” William Cronon illustrates the paradox within the notion of wilderness, describing that if wilderness is that which lies beyond civilization -- beyond humankind, then so is the notion of nature outside the realm of the human... that humans are therefore, unnatural. Further, he explains that if our concept of nature (and ultimately our concept of God) is outside of humanity, then our existence is synonymous with the downfall of nature. That wilderness is purely a construct of civilization is central to this argument. For example, Cronon asserts that “the removal of Indians to create an ‘uninhabited wilderness’---uninhabited as never before in human history of the place---reminds us just how invented, just how constructed, the American wilderness really is” (pg.79). Instead of in isolation from civilization, Cronon finds that his most spiritual experiences with nature have always been closer to home… a sense of wildness (versus wilderness) can be found in one’s backyard, gazing from a front porch, and in the melding of the human experience with mother nature. One of Into the Wild’s final scenes drives home this idea by altering the literal point of view that main character, Chris McCandless, has had of both himself and of the world since the beginning of his two year journey. Into the Wild attempts to dramatizes Cronon’s argument to rethink wilderness; we will examine how the film succeeds, and where it fails, to support its premise.
Yet Americans in this period also revered nature and admired its beauty; the spirit of nationalism fed the growing appreciation of the uniqueness of the American wilderness
According to William Cronon’s “The Trouble with Wilderness”, the main concerns with the wilderness term being humanly constructed and lack of concern with the local environments. Cronon emphasize much of the historical and philological meanings of wilderness as a human construct via spiritual and religious perspectives. He desired for people stop putting so much emphasis on the above and beyond that is out of our reach and focus on the present. He pushed this into the idea of one should start putting emphasis and care into one’s own environment rather than just focusing on environments beyond the local one. He believes change should start locally.
Although Leopold’s love of great expanses of wilderness is readily apparent, his book does not cry out in defense of particular tracts of land about to go under the axe or plow, but rather deals with the minutiae, the details, of often unnoticed plants and animals, all the little things that, in our ignorance, we have left out of our managed acreages but which must be present to add up to balanced ecosystems and a sense of quality and wholeness in the landscape.
Of our 45 presidents, Theodore Roosevelt is not one that will be easily forgotten. During his time, his accomplishments wrought a change in the United States, and are still impacting us today, even long after his death. Among his many notable feats, many consider his conservation efforts specifically to be his legacy. He had a love and passion for nature, and he even became a permanent fixture of nature when his face was carved into a wall of rock, as one of the four presidents of Mount Rushmore. During the 1900s, “conservation” was not a word often thrown around in conversation. Today however, conflicts such as limited resources, conservation, climate change, and environment are words that have been on everyone’s lips at one point or
Terry Tempest William’s written essay, “A Shark in the Mind of One Contemplating Wilderness,” delivers to us, with intended purpose using shocking truths of greed and destruction. Actions took under the cloak and disguise of the needs of civilization, creating more jobs, or even to boost the rich man’s governmental legacy of our badly raped and abused national economy. How continued acts of greed and wanton disregard for the environment, are endangering nature the wilderness areas we have sought to protect? Acts that leave behind damage and destruction where once nature and wilderness thrived.
When Americans think of nature images of the wild west, wide open plains, and majestic landscapes spring forth. Nature is part of the American heritage; a site of beauty set aside for preservation outside the industrial cities that encompasses daily life. Because of this segregation between nature and man, it is easy to forget that everything on the planet is nature, not simply the parks set aside for preservation and egos. Throughout American history, dating as far back as the indigenous people, this connection between man and the natural world has been prevalent. By examining the the conservationist movement of the twentieth century and the impact Americans have had on the environment, there is a chance to close the chasm that now exists
Many people would find it easy to sympathize with the conservation of the natural, magnificent wilderness and all of its glory; and Subhankar Banerjee, the author of Arctic National Wildlife Refuge: Seasons of Life and Land, A Photographic Journey, uses that sympathy to gain the reader’s support in his claims. While his article does offer a very compassionate viewpoint with vivid imagery to capture the reader’s attention, it lacks strong logos arguments to back up his claims and falls victim to a few major logical fallacy points that injure his stance.
Environmentalism has always been two sided. Nature versus urban. locals versus national. Frequently, large tracts of public and federal land are bought and developed by industry. Pristine wilderness turned to bustling epicenters of human activity, all in the name of progress and economic growth. This tale of preserving natural wilderness is one that begins with John Muir, an advocate against the taming of Yosemite national park and the Hetch-Hetchy reservoir, while the head of the US Forest Service, Gifford Pinchot, insisted on the reservoir to supply the city of San Francisco with water. This timeless epic of conservation or preservation brings us to the Jumbo Valley, a vast expanse of uninhabited, pristine wilderness home to diverse
In North America, the classic voice of the colonizing person’s connectedness to nature and a has been the romantic individualist writing of wilderness.