Conservation East and West

The section of the reading that really stood out to me this week was from Schneider, 72-3, in which he discusses trapping in the Adirondacks, appearing to take the side of the trappers.  This was surprising to me, because as someone who studies the Adirondacks, and therefore clearly cares about them, I thought he would be against this sort of human intervention, but he makes a convincing argument.  He argues that for Adirondack trappers, “the ability to go into the woods day after day and year after year to collect furs for fun and profit gives them a greater stake in preserving the land around them then they might otherwise have” (73).  Because trappers rely so much on the land for their livelihood, they are in fact more invested and concerned with its conservancy than those who feel they have moral obligation to the animals.  He also points to other factors, such as “second homes, agriculture, acid rain, clear cutting [and] erosion” which he reasons are more detrimental to the wilderness than are trapping or hunting because they invasively alter the landscape, and therefore the nature of the land and the wildlife (73).  Schneider also argues that trappers and hunters have been the backbone of the conservation battle in the Adirondacks, and without them the conservationists would have much less traction.         

This is an argument that sounds familiar to me.  I have spent the last two summers working on a ranch in Wyoming.  Many environmentalists frown upon ranchers and their treatment of the land.  They believe for many reasons (overgrazing, methane from manure, massive consumption of water, erosion), that ranching has a negative effect on the land and the environment.  Ranchers on the other hand, believe that they are in fact the biggest environmental advocates because they rely on the land for their livelihood, and therefore care for it with more experience and devotion than any environmentalist (especially those who have offices in DC).  Because they have generations of knowledge and critical investment in their land, they believe that they are the most qualified to make decisions about how it should be maintained.  Ranches also tend to be passed from generation to generation and therefore the concern is not only for the short term, but also for the prosperity of the land for generations to come.  Ranches are keeping out development because they keep the land from being subdivided.  From this perspective, those who are using the land are in fact the ones who care about it the most and should therefore be the ones preserving it for posterity.