And all the boards did shrink

Whiskey's for drinking; Water's for fighting over ~ Mark Twain

Global environmental discourses are often very broad and overly simplistic for the problems they address.  Many take a singular approach to a problem, vilify some core group, then propose a silver bullet as a solution.  Of course global problems are often influenced by many confounding variables making it difficult to even consider priorities let alone possible solutions.  With the disconnect between global forces and on the ground conditions, one might think that more localized issues might be more successful and may avoid the overly simplistic discourses.   

In the American Southwest one of the biggest localized environmental conflicts is water.  It has been reported throughout the scientific literature that our riparian habitats have been degraded by over 95% in the past century.  Many consider this an environmental crisis, with federal, state, and private individuals all focusing their attention on these fragile systems.  

Unfortunately a large part of the dialog is dominated by a Populist and Neo-Malthusian dichotomy.  The Populists acknowledge that there is a problem, but that the majority of the problem was caused by unsustainable land use at the end of the 1800's and early 1900's.  It was during that time when arroyo formations were at their greatest, where grazing numbers were the highest, and when rangeland conditions were at their worst culminating in the dustbowl.   The Neo-Malthusian view typically points to the past as examples of abuse, then associates that with current local resource users.  They maintain that these resource users are at fault for any riparian degradation and that regulations on resource use is the only way to restore these systems.

Of the two discourses the Neo-Malthusian view seems to be winning.  Federal agencies have been told to consider all riparian areas sacred, no matter the size, and executive orders protecting riparian areas have been issued at the state level.  Ideas of 95% riparian degradation leaves a lot to the imagination, and many assume that all dry stream beds were once free flowing perennial rivers.  These views have led to many strict regulations on riparian areas, and the implementation of restoration projects, in an attempt to recreate what is imagined lost.  

In the background of the discourse is the fact that the 95% riparian degradation statistic is most likely a gross exaggeration.  This stat can be found from many sources, but they all trace back to a single report on a rather unique stretch of the lower Colorado river.  There is no doubt that riparian areas have had some degradation, but it is likely that the discourse, regulations, and restoration are working towards something that has never existed.                           

Environmentalist's Folly

Today's environmental movement, though well meaning, is entrenched in several logical fallacies.  These include definitions of nature, wilderness, and our place as humans in the natural world.  Ideas of a pristine untouched wilderness often ignore millennia of human interaction, and even natural disturbances, while an obsession over the sublime artificially creates a human centric wildland value system that disregards many diverse ecosystems.   

Cronon touched upon the environmentalist's artificial wilderness.  The construction of which often includes some forested climax community encased in an impressive mountainous visage.  Of course these areas are beautiful, and it is great to think that they can be preserved to some romanticized snapshot of the past.  But the idea that a landscape removed of people will return to that of "pristine" and "wilderness" ignores the fact that these habitats are fragmented, inundated with invasive species, removed of the original native American influences, and experiencing indirect human influences from fire suppression to increases in atmospheric CO² to climate change.  There is a logical disconnect here in the environmentalist's world that somehow you can believe in "climate change" and "current wilderness potential as historic natural vegetation" simultaneously.  The latter can't exist in today's world without management, and yet management is often anathema to the environmentalist's constructed wilderness.

The obsession over the sublime ignores equally valuable but less charismatic landscapes.  These often include grasslands, shrublands, and deserts.  These are not afforded the protection of mountainous forests, but instead are often targeted as sacrificial areas to support a green environmental agenda.  Wind power is strongly supported by environmentalists, but this has caused a crisscross of invasive weed spreading industrial class roads across several non-sublime landscapes.  Crisscrossed roads that mirror the often environmentally criticized oil fields.  Also, the incidental kills of these wind turbines threaten several bird species, may soon put the Bald Eagle back on the endangered species list, and there is even one wind power plant in California that is legally allowed to take a California Condor.  

 

Left: The Horrible destructive road system caused by Natural Gas extraction in Wyoming.
Right: The wondrous beauty and sustainable road system caused by wind power in Texas. 

Solar power has similar problems.  Though sustainable if used as solar panels on rooftops, instead entire non-sublime landscapes are being plowed over.  Take the new Ivanpah Solar power plant in southern Nevada.  At 5 square miles it is the largest of its kind in the world, costing four times more than a traditional coal fired power plant for a fraction of the energy.  This Mojave desert landscape also happened to be prime endangered desert tortoise habitat.  Environmentalists took note and relocated approximately 200 desert tortoises at a cost of $55,000 each.  But as habitat destruction is a leading cause of extinctions worldwide, there is little comfort knowing that environmentalists are looking to sacrifice more of these non-sublime landscapes in the name of green energy and environmental sustainability.    

 

Ivanpah Solar Power Plant.  Environmentally sustainable complete replacement of Mojave Desert.  Photo by NPR.

Today's environmental movement does mean well, but as they ignore reality in favor of the fallacies of a constructed sublime they start to make unrealistic demands and start to cause more harm than good.  Landscapes are worth protecting, but not by banning people and naively hoping for the best; but by a logical measured approach using the best available science and "any" tools available.  Wishing for the past is okay, as is planning for the future, but they both will require management to succeed.