Protecting Montana Wilderness

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).

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.

The wilderness and forests need to be saved for the future generations, and a sort of “wilderness bank” needs to be formed in order to keep the reality of the wilderness alive and keep mankind grounded to the earth.

By using Pathos, Carter makes a strong emotional argument for the preservation of the wildlife refuge. Carter first uses fear of loss to motivate his audience. Carter even says, “I was saddened to think of the tragedy that might occur if this great wilderness was consumed by a web of roads and pipelines… ” (Carter 4). Carter uses imagery and speaks of the tragedy of a world where the wildlife refuge was lost. However, Carter also makes an emotional argument for the promise of gain. Throughout the article Carter refers to the refuge in many ways such as a “special birthplace” (Carter 3), “America’s Serengeti” (Carter 3), and “America’s last truly great wilderness” (Carter 1). Jimmy Carter explains, “It would be a grand triumph for America if we can preserve the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge… To leave this extraordinary land alone would be the greatest gift we can pass on to future generations.” Carter clearly aims to instill a sense that much will be gained emotionally by keeping the refuge

Before he shares his hunting experiences, he describes the forest with intense emotion. “And most precious of all, the flesh of the wild things that share with us these mountains and the plains to the east – the elk, the whitetail and mule deer; the ducks and geese, grouse and pheasant and Hungarian partridge and dove and chukar and wild turkey; the trout and whitefish.” (Bass, 255). He describes in such details the beauty of the nature that instantly makes us feel the connection. He helps readers understand how he feels as he hunts in a natural forest rich with a variety of prey. Likewise, Bass continues by drawing logos in his argument. He mentions that only 5 percent of the nation and 15 to 20 percent of Montanans are hunters but in the Valley almost everyone is a hunter. He states that is not due to peer pressure of the local culture or due to the economic boon of a few hundred pounds of meat rather due to the terrain itself. By reading this claim we can agree that the landscape can draw a person to hunt. There are small number of places that have valleys and forest which little number of hunter. Hence, Rick Bass’s love for the territory is one reason why he loves to hunt.

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.

Decisions regarding environmental problems require both knowledge and values. Placing value on specific issues can be sorted into four categories of justification: utilitarian, ecological, aesthetic and moral. California Blue focuses on the interplay of environmental issues and ethics emphasizing the conflict between industry and species preservation. Timber cutting in the Northwest United States is a mainstay of the economy. Although clear cutting is not as environmentally sensitive as selective harvesting and redwood cutting, some is essential to America's continued growth and prosperity. To ban timber operations and to throw people out of work, all to preserve an endangered blue butterfly, is to test the limits and logic of ecological priorities. The national policy of preserving endangered species serves the purpose of promoting biological diversity, which if not followed might threaten the ecosystem. This national policy of species preservation is a matter of social policy balanced with the competing interests of the local economy and human needs. Under the utilitarian approach one must balance the benefits of species preservation with the detriment of stopping human activity which threatens that species or the environment in which the

It says in document D “We rely on the land and resources of the North Slope for our physical, our cultural and our economic well-being.” destroying the wilderness will directly affect the Inupiat

The state legislature has favored the ranching industry above ecology and continues to do so. Public polls “conducted by Boise State indicate that the overwhelming majority of Idahoans (nearly 70 percent) support wolf restoration” (Laverty, par. 4) and the legislature is seeking to remedy this by re-educating the public with “a balanced view of the impact of wolves on big game species, those sectors of the economy dependent upon sport hunting, livestock, domestic animals, and humans” (State, 3). Furthermore, the “cost of wolf reintroduction will be presented as a part of any public education program including direct and indirect costs” (State, 3).

Alaska’s Arctic National Wildlife Refuge (ANWR), the crowned jewel of the nation’s 544 refuges is in danger of destruction (Lamar and Markey 12). ANWR has been in existence since 1960 and has slowly become one of the most controversial topics to hit Congress. ANWR is composed of 19 million acres on the northeast coast of Alaska. Although the government has been provided with this immense land they are fighting to gain more land. Why? ANWR is the second biggest oil field that is owned by the U.S. Now the government wants more land to construct oil reserves. The refuge is home to many endangered species such as migratory birds, polar bears, and wolves (Lynne and Roberts 1). Most of ANWR’s designated oil area is owned by indigenous Alaskan

The Yaak Valley of northern Montana is one of the most biodiverse ecosystems in the continental United States. It has cores of roadless wilderness that have been untouched by human activity and I believe that they should remain as such. The biodiverse ecosystem of the Yaak Valley benefits its human and non-human inhabitants and we should protect it from the detrimental effects of human activities, especially the violent changes caused by large timber companies and their practice of clear-cut logging. There are sustainable and pragmatic solutions that would address both human needs and protecting the biodiverse ecosystem.

The Bible claims that this beautiful planet, mother Earth, was created for Adam and Eve and their descendants. In the past decade, our once seemingly healthy planet has taken a serious toll in regards to the many aspects of the environment. We as humans, have lacked the better judgment to nurture and protect our beloved planet, leaving it in the paths of destruction and grievances on a global scale. Although it all appears to be seemingly pleasant and well, the world is drastically affected by the issue of sustainability. For the past several decades, the state of Montana has been challenged with the daunting task of preservation. On the surface, Montana is filled with green scenes and nature, seemingly environmentally-friendly and clean, but

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

Michael P. Nelson writes on 30 different arguments of why we should preserve the wildernesses around the world. Some of

Voyageurs National Park has been the subject of controversy for over 45 years. Issues have included conflict over land acquisition, as well as debates over recreation/wilderness use and local/federal control of the land (Gray, 2004). The three main stakeholder groups (local citizens, or “wise-use” proponents, the environmentalists, and the