Conservation in the United States
The early evolution of the conservation movement began through both public and private recognition of the relationship between man and nature often reflected in the great literary and artistic works of the 19th century.
Thoreau went on to bemoan the lack of reverence for the natural world: "I would that our farmers when they cut down a forest felt some of that awe which the old Romans did when they came to thin, or let in the light to, a consecrated grove".
[7] These observations, fraught with condemning language toward the way European hunters and sportsmen treated wildlife and resources such as timber, were published in widely circulated journals and magazines at the time.
[18] After his experiences traveling as an enthusiastic, zealous hunter, Roosevelt became convinced of "the need for measures to protect the game species from further destruction and eventual extinction".
[12] By the end of his presidency, Theodore Roosevelt, in partnership with Gifford Pinchot, had successfully increased the number of national parks and led to the forced removal of Native Americans from their homeland.
[21] This legacy, though establishing what many consider the root of modern conservationism, remained within the hands of powerful men of white European heritage for years to come, often excluding the interests of Native Americans and other demographics within the United States.
The United States government began driving groups of Native American peoples out of popularly visited in Yellowstone around the late 1800s once they ironically deemed them a conflict to tourists.
Historian Mark David Spence explains how the Blackfeet people, whose reservation was located just east of Glacier National Park, were over time slowly removed and filtered out of their homeland through corrupt policy from the United States Department of the Interior.
[23] By the mid-twentieth century, conservation efforts continued to gain ground with the creation and implementation of federal legislation aimed at protecting wilderness, natural resources, and wildlife.
[29] In exposing the individual dangers presented to both people and nature through the use of chemical pesticides, Carson inspired an environmental revolution, helping to root the modern conservation movement in a scientific foundation.
[38] Meanwhile, in 1956, Olaus and Mardy Murie embarked upon an expedition to the upper Sheenjek River on the south slope of the Brooks Range in Alaska, which would galvanize them to campaign for the protection of the area as a wildlife refuge.
[42] While neither Zahniser nor Olaus Murie would live to see the Wilderness Act signed by President Johnson, it is unlikely that, without their tireless efforts, the preservation movement would have been able to achieve so huge a victory.
On 3 September 1964, Mardy Murie stood proudly next to President Johnson in the Rose Garden at the White House and bore witness to the making of history, and the achievement of the very thing for which Zahniser and Olaus had campaigned so ardently.
[47] After the Republican victory in the 1994 elections, Clinton vetoed a series of budget bills that contained amendments designed to scale back environmental restrictions.
[50] The key person on environmental issues was Bruce Babbitt, the head of the League of Conservation Voters, who served for all eight years as the United States Secretary of the Interior.
Babbitt and Oklahoma Congressman Mike Synar tried to rally environmentalists and raise fees, but senators from Western states successfully blocked their proposals.
[52][53] Ultimately, the modern conservation movement in the United States continues to strive for the delicate balance between the successful management of society's industrial progress while still preserving the integrity of the natural environment that sustains humanity.
[54] In essence, projects, such as reforestation, create a viable market of eco-friendly services mutually beneficial to landowners, businesses and society, and most importantly, the environment.
Nonetheless, such creative plans will be necessary in the near future as the United States struggles to maintain a positive balance between society and the finite natural resources of the nation.
[56] Some of these methods are as simple as replacing the fixtures in government buildings and offering rebates to citizens, but are as complex as growing genetically engineered food crops so that farmers can consume less water for use on them.
At a 2014 event held at UCLA centered upon environmental figures like John Muir, a few historians and writers noted that the movements for conservation and preservation of the environment maintained a foundation in "economic privilege and abundant leisure time of the upper class.
"[60] Jon Christensen, a historian of UCLA's Institute of Environment and Sustainability, notes among the other critics at the event that writings and actions from conservationists at the turn of the twentieth century have created a legacy for the movement as one of an older white demographic.
Richard White, a historian at Stanford University, makes the case that viewpoints of early conservationists came from an Anglo-Saxon, biblical point of view and that this is reflected in the current demographics of visitors to national parks and protected areas.
[60] At the same time, recent polls suggest that the Latino community in California tends to possess more environmental attitudes when it comes to voting than perceived by the general public.
[61] A highly cited historian of Southern California, D. J. Waldie, posits that conservation for the purpose of public enjoyment is usually geared for places inaccessible to minority demographics, such as skiing or backpacking in the Sierra Nevadas.
He believes that “while surface similarities are present, it is perhaps more accurate to say that indigenous conservationists and restorationists tend to focus on sustaining particular plants and animals whose lives are entangled locally—and often over many generations—in ecological, cultural, and economic relationships with human societies and other nonhuman species” (2).
The bill would nullify the "General Provisions and Non-Federal Oil and Gas Rights" rule passed in November 2016, and this would remove protections to National Park lands and resources.
[64] On February 28, 2017, Donald Trump signed an executive order to review the Clean Water Rule, a bill he and Scott Pruitt have pledged to eliminate since he took office.
Funding to National Heritage Areas is used in part to support tribal protection officers and provides grants to underrepresented communities, ones who have already been putting conservation in practice.
[68] Ryan Zinke, Trump's appointed Secretary of the Interior, moved to reverse federal regulation that prohibits hunters from using lead ammunition in National Parks.
