The Trouble With Wilderness Summary

Stegner wants to conserve the untouched land because he fears a world with no silence. He argues for the preservation of Robbers’ Roost country, as an example, “It is a lovely and terrible wilderness, such as wilderness as Christ and the prophets went out into… Save a piece of country like that intact, and it does not matter in the slightest that only a few people every year will go into it. That is precisely its value (Stegner, Wilderness Letter).” Saving the untouched lands, he contends, is a reminder of how uncontrolled the Earth is and how timeless it remains. Others disagree with this viewpoint, one of those people being American forester, Gifford Pinchot. In his writing “The Fight for Conservation,” Pinchot argues that conservation

We should learn to respect wilderness by how it is. In the article, “The Trouble with Wilderness; or, Getting Back to the Wrong Nature” by William Cronon, it says that we should learn to honor and respect the wild. This concept relates with the Yellowstone National Park. It talked about how people had different views and values towards Yellowstone. Cronon mentions that we should think about nature in a sustainable way also. That means to consider it in non-use. So bears should not be fed by humans, especially since they cannot tell the difference between natural and unnatural food sources. Also, fires should not be caused intentionally because human lives and homes are at stake. Causing intentional fires can also significantly change the landscape.

William Cronan argues that Bill McKibben's view of nature and wilderness are flawed. In The End of Nature, Bill McKibben writes about the environmental problems plaguing the Earth today. In his view, humans today are controlling the atmosphere around them more than ever before. Our ancestors used to live in an environment which they could easily predict. Seasons came at the right time, winters were cold and summers were hot. Now, because of global warming, that predictability has all but disappeared. The climate has become erratic and violent. It is this point that Bill McKibben tries to get across; the idea that the nature we perceive in our minds will be gone forever. Nowhere does McKibben imply that humans should be considered to be separate from nature. In fact, most of the time, McKibben's arguments seem similar to that of William Cronan's. They both agree, for example, that we are currently changing the earth more than ever before and that we are losing the tenuous understanding that we had of the earth. They agree that we must take action, for the Earth

As humans, or better put, as animals, we need the wilderness to remind us that we are small even insignificant. These large empty spaces, no matter where they are, forces us to realize that we are part of something bigger. When we create a world made purely of technology, we lose part of our animal selves and we are not happy. In “Wilderness Letter” Wallace Stegner outlines the idea of wilderness and how we need that idea in order to be happy. While making a point about becoming stuck forever in our own world, Stegner writes, “Without any remaining wilderness we are committed wholly, without chance for even momentary reflection or rest, to a headlong drive into our technological termite-life” (111). The wilderness allows us to be outside

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.

In Wallace Stegner’s “Wilderness Letter,” he is arguing that the countries wilderness and forests need to be saved. For a person to become whole, Stegner argues that the mere idea of the wild and the forests are to thank. The wilderness needs to be saved for the sake of the idea. He insinuates that anyone in America can just think of Old faithful, Mt. Rainier, or any other spectacular landform, even if they have not visited there, and brought to a calm. These thoughts he argues are what makes us as people whole.

Through removal and technology, humans have started to become isolated from the wilderness and the nature around them. This view distinctly contrasts with Thoreau’s perspective. “Though he [Thoreau] never put humans on the same moral level as animals or trees, for example, he does see them all linked as the expression of Spirit, which may only be described in terms of natural laws and unified fluid processes. The self is both humbled and empowered in its cosmic perspective,” states Ann Woodlief. The technologies that distract and consume us, and separate us from the natural world are apparent. Many people and children ins cities have seen little to no natural-grown things such as grass and trees. Even these things are often domesticated and tamed. Many people who have never been to a National Park or gone hiking through the wilderness do not understand its unruly, unforgiving, wild nature. These aspects, thought terrifying to many, are much of why the wilderness is so beautiful and striking to the human heart. “Thoreau builds a critique of American culture upon his conviction that ‘the mind can be permanently profaned by the habit of attending to trivial things, so that all our thoughts shall be tinged with triviality,’” pronounces Rick Furtak, quoting Thoreau’s Life

Wilderness in its true state is lush, sleek, and channels water. It is because of its true natural state that is has the ability to generate billions of dollars into America’s recreational economy. One provident example, is the San Gabriel Wilderness in California. Now of course protecting this land has natural benefits,

Roderick Frazier Nash’s book, Wilderness and the American Mind, compiled contemporary debates about wilderness by outlining the changing positions concerning wilderness throughout history. In chapter 11, “Aldo Leopold: Prophet,” Nash discuses Aldo Leopold’s house metaphor. Here, Leopold refers to six vacant lots and what it would mean to build houses on all six lots. He describes how the first few houses might make sense; however once you build upon all six lots you no longer remember the meaning of the homes. He argues that they somehow the sixth house would become “stupidity.” Conversely, I disagree with this theory. I feel each house, so to speak, is built differently and suits different needs and wants. Just as in the 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.

The idea of wilderness is a human-based construct. It is highly subjective, scalable, and represents different things to different people. Wilderness can be defined many ways, from a widely uncultivated land, to a deeply personal experience, and anywhere in-between. It depends entirely on the historical context assigned to it by humans. To Eastern cultures, wilderness was seen as a connection between oneself and the universe. To Western cultures, wilderness was a dangerous, uncivilized place. Wilderness can be considered as having a history because it is history. The wilderness existed long before the early days of humanity (in fact, the wilderness is where scientists often go when looking for answers about various aspects of the Earth’s history), but it was humanity who associated various philosophies to the wilderness. If wilderness is a place untouched by humans, then the places touched by humans, referred to as “civilization” in this assignment, must be intricately intertwined with wilderness- one cannot exist without the other.

Wilderness areas are a very important to future generations. WThe wilderness is designed to protect and preserve scenic lands. Without protected wilderness areas, animals that are native to the area will not have a habitat; future generations won’t have clean air to breathe, fresh water to drink, or natural areas to enjoy or escape to. Therefore, it is important that citizens today work to protect and preserve the wilderness areas that do exist.

Wilderness Protection is crucial to our environment, without it we would not have clean air to breathe or clean water to drink.

In his book “The Unforeseen Wilderness: An Essay on Kentucky’s Red River Gorge” activist Wendell Berry famously said “We do not inherit the earth from our ancestors; we borrow it from our children.” He said that in 1971. Obviously, our culture has not taken this to heart, which is shown through our offhand treatment of the ocean. Through our carelessness, the ocean’s acidity level has risen exponentially, causing a very detrimental effect on the coral reefs that we need to survive. Protecting our oceans and coral reefs will be beneficial for us in the long run because they provide important services for us.

Nature being a refuge can be interpreted in many different ways. One of the interpretations is seeing where civilization and the frontier meet. In the film, “The Last of the Mohicans”, the Cameron family lives in between two worlds, the world of civilization and the frontier that the Indians call home. This family lives in harmony of both worlds, having the pleasures of civilization as well as the struggles of the frontier. For example, the Cameron family is able to have a log cabin to live in and plates; a pleasure of the civilized world. On the other hand, the Cameron family -living on the frontier- struggles with the outside dangers such as attacks from enemy Indians in war parties. While the Cameron family lives in both of these words, more often than not does nature reclaim what civilization once had.