Geography 2412 Lecture Notes

Chap. 17: Open Land Resources

We’ll focus on the conservation movement in the US (sections 17.1, 17.2, and 17.3; and then on nature preserves: national parks (17.6) and wilderness (17.7, which also raises the international situation).

"Open Lands"---w/o agriculture or permanent settlement, typically in forest, grassland, or desert, ecosystems. Much of this land around the world is used for timber production, livestock grazing, energy, mining, and recreation. But it is also the largest remaining areas of wildlife habitat for preserving biodiversity, so consideration of it naturally follows from our look at biodiversity in Chap. 16..

The U.S. Experience

Essentially since the first European colonists arrived in the "New World," there has been government policy support for expanding: settlement, mining, grazing, timbering, water development, and all the other aspects of developing the land.

In terms of open land resources, especially forest and rangelands that were unlikely to be settled or farmed, the debate has been over how to manage them. The debate became acute around 1900 as the rapidly expanding nation and economy appeared to have increasingly negative effects on the quality of remaining undeveloped forests, rangelands, and watersheds—they became over exploited. Wildlife declined, people were surprised at how fast the huge bison herds on te Great Plains disappeared.

Some land abuses occurred, and concern over reduction in open space led to a mixture of Conservation and Preservation to emerge in the early 1900s. [Note: this was also the period marked by the political philosophy of "progressivism": that government had a role to play in smoothing over the negative effects of private enterprise and capitalism, including new policies on labor laws, child labor; natural resources protection, etc. Most personified in the anti-trust crusades by Pres. Theodore Roosevelt.]

From this tension arose two somewhat contradictory philosophies and prescriptions for the remaining open lands and renewable natural resources:

Conservation (wise use): this stressed the scientific management of resources for "sustained yield:" the steady yield of timber, water, forage, whatever, that could be managed for the indefinite future. One twist of this, linked to scientific and technological approach, was that sustained yield could be increased by interventions and management prescriptions (e.g., forests could produce more board footage each year if small trees were pruned or if fire was controlled, etc.). This sort of efficiency approach led to blanket treatments like clear-cutting. The notions that the land could provide forage for livestock, watershed values; timber, etc if those uses were properly managed. Scientific conservation was also practiced in a form of "multiple-use" on public lands---and part of the conservation movement was base don the notion that the government should own and manage these lands.

Preservation: The alternative philosophy, championed by John Muir, founder of the Sierra Club and a contemporary and friend to T. Roosevelt, argued that open lands should be protected for their natural values, not for extractive resources. This view argued for more National Parks, and was the genesis of the Wilderness Movement.

National Parks: idea emerged as antidote to urbanization, and even stemmed from urban parks movement (e.g.,: NYC’s Central Park led to Adirondack Park which led in 1872 –in act of congress -- to creation of Yellowstone as first National Park). The Park service was created in 1916, after several Parks had been designated, and the system has grown slowly since then (with additional historical parks0. Were interested in the large, natural area parks like Yosemite, Yellowstone, Everglades, etc.

Problems in Parks management:

Defining and protecting "naturalness": this is a big theme in national parks policy. What is natural? What is the baseline? Park policy generally sets the "Pre-Columbian" or pre-European settlement as the natural baseline. Problems with this include: Natives affected this ecology, so is it "natural"? If you designate a Park abut leave out native activities like hunting and fire, then is it at baseline conditions? What do you do about climate change and other factors that mean you can never go back to earlier conditions? [The answer, by the way, is that you use it as a guide, not immutable goal.].

Other problems: transboundary issues, like pollution, wildlife migration, etc.

Visitor use, recreation: public parks and wilderness areas, by law, allow certain human activities. Some of these (mining, grazing, roads, etc.) are less compatible with "naturalness" than other uses. Often a fine line: Parks have roads, stores, hotels, etc., but not hunting, logging, etc.

Wilderness: as codified in the US by 1964 Wilderness Act, wilderness is a purer form of preservationsim (than Nt’l Parks) : no permanent presence of humans (no roads, buildings, etc.) Still: recreation, some traditional uses, and transboundary problems make maintaining naturalness in wilderness problematic. .

Prescriptions for preserving nature on open lands:

• Need intact ecosystems (or close!): try to have entire systems of water, wildlife migration, etc.
• Buffer zones: where needed use land outside the preserve so as to support the goals inside the preserve. EG: work with ranchers around Yellowstone to be tolerant of occasional wolves and wold predation on livestock.
• Reduce human presence and disturbance: sometimes this is politically-difficult, like the proposal to remove roads and parking lots form the SO Rim of the Grand Canyon.
• Restore naturalness: fix past transformations, e.g., remove roads, buildings, etc. .
• Extract non-native species: to strive for a natural baseline of biodiversity
• Restore missing native species: same
• Allow/restore natural processes: often very difficult if this means allowing wildfires, disease, etc. that can spread outside the preserve boundaries.

Why Preserve Wilderness and natural Areas?

• Baseline for research, and comparison to non-wilderness areas.
• Reservoir of genetic diversity
• Spiritual and recreational values

Problem: wilderness preservation vs development: An obvious struggle in a growing global pop and growing economy.

In US: do we really want to "lock up", say, energy resources in a wilderness area? Do we go in there and develop the energy or minerals when we need them?

In Developing counties: does preservation of parks and wilderness and wildlife interfere with economic development? Take land away from people? Farmers near game parks in east Africa, for example, are not happy with wildlife straying out of the park. Preserve designations often take land out of traditional uses.

Yet, preserve can help foster ecotourism, which offers economic benefits to maintaining nature, and maybe a good way toward sustainable development.