Americans began to worry about their connection with nature when cities gained popularity and frontier closed. In the late 1800’s, Americans began to take notice the land they relied on for resources was beginning to show signs of overuse (Roosevelt, Theodore). The two most prominent activists for the conservation and preservation of American soil were Gifford Pinchot and John Muir. These two men both fought for regulation on how the land was used, but disputed over what this use looked like. Pinchot believed in conservation which meant using the natural resources to serve the needs of Americans for the longest time (Warren, 201). On the other side of the movement, Muir believed that man should leave nature untouched and left in its purist form.(Muir 40) Conservation and preservation impacted not only the land but, also on the people who lived on the land. The conservation and preservation movement benefited whites of upper and middle class who were able to earn a profit, explore, and utilize the nature that was being conserved/preserved. Consequently, the conservation and preservation movements created greater hardship for those who relied on nature's resources to survive, including, but not limited to the working class of Ely, Minnesota and the Indians in Yosemite National Park.
Ely, Minnesota is a prime example of how the conservation and preservation movement created a greater divide between the upper and lower classes. The elites of Ely greatly benefited from the
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
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).
“American seemed to think nothing of remarking nature for the sake of progress”, Alexis de Tocqueville, a French diplomat commented when he was visiting the United States in 1831. While the American people were overwhelmed by pride and pleasure from their achievement in making industrial and economic progress, the environment was harmed in an alarming speed. Landscape was transformed, and forests were destroyed due to industrialization. By 1990, only a fraction of the United States Virgin forests were still standing. Farmers cleared trees to plant crops, and loggers cut down large areas of woodland for business profits. More than that, the most horrific thing was the government was willing to encourage loggers to exploit the forests resources by selling them large plots of land in the North West. In other words, the government was inviting loggers to destroy the landscape. Besides the loss of forests, the increasing number of ranching boosted the erosion of landscape. Crops were
Conservation was the most important reform, from this time period, since it worked towards protecting the United State’s physical environment which leads to obtaining the essential resources of nature, preserving the naturality of the planet, and living a higher quality of life.
Not many people know of the used-to-be 150-mile excursion that the Glen Canyon had to offer. Not many people know how to sail a raft down a river for a week. Not many people know how to interact with nature and the animals that come with it. We seem to come from a world that is dependent on time and consumed in money. Edward Abbey is what you would call an extreme environmentalist. He talks about how it was an environmental disaster to place a dam in which to create Lake Powell, a reservoir formed on the border of Utah and Arizona. He is one of the few that have actually seen the way Glen Canyon was before they changed it into a reservoir. Today, that lake is used by over a million
The Progressive Era was a period of social activism and political reform that grew from the 1890s to the 1920s. Social reformers and journalists, like Jane Addams, Jacob Riis, and Ida Tarbell were some of the powerful voices for progressivism. “They concentrated on exposing the evils of corporate greed, combating fear of immigrants, and urging Americans to think hard about what democracy meant.” Many progressive reformers wanted to end corruption in the government, regulate business practices, address health hazards, and improve working conditions. It was also an era of conservationists. Conservationists are people who protect and preserve the environment and wildlife. Throughout the Progressive Era, there were many conservationists who wrote and described nature, but the most well-known figure in conservation was John Muir. John Muir worked to protect Earth’s beauty by traveling and exploring nature, co-founding the Sierra Club, and by influencing others through his writings and by showing some of the most important people how the wildlife was magnificent.
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.
The book “Changes in the Land” by William Cronon in summary is based on environmental history where science, social science, the way society affects human nature and vice-versa is all combined into his narrative. With that being said, he believed that humans are dependent on nature, and nature is something that’s either made or broken by humans. Same goes for vegetation and land area. He wrote about conflicts between two cultures, where when the settlers came in to New England, they took over the Native American’s home. The power the settlers had over the Native Americans grew so strong that it got to a point where the rule of usufruct was put in place, where Native Americans could make use of any natural resource on earth as long as it wasn’t being needed by another person.
In Paul Taylor’s essay, “The Ethics for Respect for Nature,” he argues that… In this paper I will first describe Taylor’s concept of “respect for nature.” I will then explain the part this attitude plays in rationally grounding a biocentric outlook on environmental ethics. Lastly, I will present Rosalind Hursthouse’s criticism of Taylor’s view, and state how Taylor might respond to this criticism.
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
Doing so will help citizens to expand their conceptions of the land and begin to appreciate it’s many resources. Which is equally significant when one considers the recent climate changes and negative effects of human pollution of the earth. Some opponents argue that intrusions of sacred Native American land and that harnessing natural resources from said land is irrelevant in today’s day and age. But it must be argued that this assertion is false and that current events such as the recent standoff at Standing Rock Reservation over crude oil pipelines in North Dakota have proven that this issue is still alive and well in American society.
Coming from an uncultivated society, such as the one that brought farming and ranching to the settlement of North America, humans have retained some sensitivity to environmental issues as they derived their livelihood directly from the land. But with the advance to an urban or metropolitan society, there has been a major disconnect between humanity and nature. Today’s urban society is provided with mowed parks, paved playgrounds, plush automobiles to move the public around on asphalt roads, housing with automatically regulated heat and cooling, and supermarkets with shopping carts and baskets, in which people can gather their food supplies from orderly shelves and freezers. Aldo Leopold’s “land ethic” term suggests that humans stop treating the land as a mere object or a resource, like how the world does today. For Leopold, land is not merely soil, like the public would think of today; land is a fountain of energy, flowing through a circuit of soils, plants, and animals.
John Muir is best known for his efforts to preserve the wilderness of the United States, which greatly contributed to the preservation of countless natural areas of the US through the National Parks Service. During his travels across the country and abroad, Muir recorded his thoughts and beliefs about nature and the fundamental connection people share with the earth. By voyaging into the wild and shedding the restraints and ideals of modern society, Muir argues that people can expand their understanding of the world and experience life to its full potential through immersing themselves in nature.
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
Right from the end of the 19th Century and the beginning of the 20th Century, there has been a fierce debate concerning how economic growth or development affects the environment or ecological setup of a country. The debate has its basis on whether it would be recommendable for a nation to concentrate on growing its economy while at the same time hurting or harming its ecological system. Naturalists like Pinchot Gifford, John Muir, Love Canal and Cuyahoga County always argued in favor of environmental preservation as opposed to concentrating all efforts towards developing the economy (Olmes 154; Miller 150-51). This paper will, therefore, discuss the struggle between economics and ecology specifically looking at particular events across the Twentieth Century. It will also attempt to explain the factors involved in the pursuit for change on the way people and the administration perceived the environmental conservation as opposed to economic growth.