Dave Gibson's Notes from:
The National Wilderness 40th Anniversary Conference
Oct. 10-13 2003 in Lake George, New York, Adirondack Park
Note: These are my personal notes from selected conference sessions and do not constitute an official record of the conference.
What is Wilderness? What does it take to protect it?
On its first morning, the conference quickly turned to the very difficult issues that Wilderness managers and activists face every day and the great diversity of experience and viewpoints among those gathered on this 40th year of Wilderness by law.
Four experienced spokespeople, Becky Rom, TinaMarie Ecker, Lloyd Athearn and Brock Evans, were asked to role play as 1. Wilderness unit managers and 2. Wilderness activists for the following scenarios:
- A. In the Mt. Hood Wilderness near Portland Oregon (or the High Peaks Wilderness near Lake Placid), nearly half of annual users are climbers and enter from a certain location and dominate the landscape. Wilderness managers and rangers have all they can do to maintain some low level of order amidst competing users and huge numbers of people with all levels of climbing abilities. Administrators have come to the decision that managing this entry point for certain Wilderness characteristics, such as solitude, is impossible and that this part of the Mt. Hood Wilderness will be managed solely to minimize degradation of natural resources, requiring a large law enforcement presence. What would you decide?
- B. A new federal or state Wilderness area is close to designation, except it lacks support from the federal or state fish and wildlife agency whose supporters can help tip the balance of power and the Wilderness designation. That agency is asking the Interior Secretary (or the DEC Commissioner!) to permit some ongoing motorized entry points into the future Wilderness area in order to help to perpetuate a self-sustaining strain of endangered fish. In return for the greater levels of efficiency in endangered fisheries management that such motorized entry would permit, the fish and wildlife agency will support the designation. What would you decide as Wilderness activist?
Brock Evans, veteran Wilderness activist with Sierra Club and National Audubon Society, said regarding scenario B. that in his long experience compromises made in obtaining a Wilderness designation could be undone. His advice: work with the fish and wildlife agency, accept the compromise motorized entries for now and if necessary, achieve the new Wilderness and work to eliminate the motorized entry points over time as new information and management influence came to the fore.
Regarding scenario A., Evans took the view that for him solitude was not just an optional element of Wilderness character but a necessary one. He would not manage to zone for a special recreational corridor in Wilderness.
Lloyd Athearn, leader of the American Alpine Club, asked in wonderment why a fish and wildlife agency would hold a Wilderness designation hostage to motorized entry when such a use was not absolutely needed to manage the fishery properly. Their management objectives did not require motorized entry, so it ought not to be permitted. As to scenario A., Athearn reminded the audience that when the Wilderness was created in 1964, over 2000 climbers per day entered the Mt. Hood area. Thus, this use constitutes "historic use" and he wondered why managers or advocates would feel it necessary to ratchet back such use forty years later.
Becky Rom, Governing Council member of The Wilderness Society, argued that while she believes in a certain degree of zoning within Wilderness, solitude is a critical Wilderness characteristic. A user permit system was needed in the Mt. Hood example to spread use out both geographically and temporally. She also argued for expanding the Wilderness system in the State of Washington if more opportunities for solitude could not be made available within that one Wilderness unit.
TinaMarie Ecker, policy director for Wilderness Watch, reminded the audience that the Wilderness Act legislated human restraint, including restraint at the boundaries of Wilderness and at entry points. She would not compromise by zoning Wilderness to create defacto crowded areas. Nor would she compromise with the fish and wildlife agency in scenario B.
Taking Stock: What did the Wilderness Act intend to protect?
George Davis: Veteran Wilderness planner and activist George Davis reminded the conference that the concept of an enduring Wilderness is largely accepted in society, although there will be many battles to declassify. Further, recreational use in Wilderness is growing beyond carrying capacity in many areas. In Mt. Hood Wilderness, for example, you might as well declassify parts of the unit where overuse is occurring if managers are unwilling to institute a user permit system to protect some semblance of solitude, he said.
George was the only speaker to overtly remind the conference of two big differences in the wilderness movement since 1964: the large increase in the numbers of women involved in the work today, and the spiritual value of wilderness. There is a yearning for spirituality and recognition of a higher being in the Wilderness idea and in Wilderness, he said.
Davis urged more Wilderness designations for native grasslands and for tundra and boreal areas. Finally, "I would be remiss if I didn't point out that the Adirondacks is the largest wilderness system in the northeast, with 17 units and created according to largely the same criteria as the federal system. This is the soul of wilderness," Davis concluded, noting that Howard Zahniser drafted parts of the Wilderness bill just twenty miles from this very conference center.
Greg Applet of The Wilderness Society reported on his work to rank Wilderness attributes in a kind of index to locate the "wildest" areas of the country and compare them with existing Wilderness. The index is built on two broad indices- Freedom from control (degrees of solitude, remoteness such as distance from roads, uncontrolled natural processes) and Naturalness (natural composition, unaltered ecological structure, degree of pollution). After entering all the data into overlay maps, the 50 million acres (plus or minus) of designated Wilderness in the lower 48 only includes ten percent of the "Wilderness quality" lands. In other words, ninety percent of lands in the lower 48 that have the highest Wilderness qualities are not included in our nation's Wilderness system. Contrary to the assumption of many in the Congress, who believe that all deserving Wilderness lands are already designated, the potential and the justification to add to the US Wilderness system are enormous.
Mary Wagner has been federal Director of Wilderness and Wild and Scenic Rivers for three months. A former Forest Service District Ranger and Forest Supervisor, Mary introduced herself as a new member of the wilderness community, a job she views as a lifelong journey.
She summarized the Pinchot Institute (Perry Brown) report from 2000-2001, and noted its emphasis on the need for a national protocol for all Wilderness actions, the importance of accountability and of measuring and stopping the loss of wilderness character throughout the system. While she noted that the creation of her new position suggested a growing professionalism of wilderness managers, there are large gaps and inconsistencies. "Integrated, consistent policies for Wilderness across all federal agencies remains an unrealized goal," she concluded.
Reaching Out Workshop
Evangelicals: faith leaders at the workshop said that evangelicals tend to view any outsider with suspicion, and environmentalists as suspicious outsiders who engage in earth worship. Of course a stereotype, but always keep in mind.
People who stick their necks out to bring religious-environmental communities together for dialogue often get their heads cut off.
Advice? With evangelicals, focus on key conservation issues at hand, build personal relationships, and describe how conservation activity benefits people.
Hunters/Anglers: To read hunting/angling magazines these days is to see how far the selling and marketing of weapons, ammo, gadgets and gizmos has overtaken the ethics and issues underlying conservation and "fair hunt."
Some politicians and policy makers seem to actually work more for these industries than they are for any principle or constitutional right.
In Montana there is real progress in organizing hunters/anglers in opposing energy development and policies that are damaging to wildlife habitats.
Wilderness Messaging Workshop
Communicating: Kim Haddow led a workshop about effective communications to help achieve wilderness objectives.
Affective approaches, reaching people through the heart will always work best. Use words carefully lest their political or socioeconomic connotations distract from your message.
Stop using jargon. "A Wilderness study area in need of designation" means next to nothing to a public concerned with outcomes and not process. By contrast, "A wild area that deserves protection" draws attention.
Threats to those wild areas should be thoroughly "combed" to assure the public understands what damage you are speaking about and how that damage relates to peoples' actual understanding and experience; for example, wild areas are not "degraded." Instead, use phrases such as wild areas are being "scarred by roads, polluted by waste, suffocated of their oxygen," and so on.
In making your case for wilderness, remember: our opponents in Washington, DC and elsewhere have mastered framing the argument to their advantage. They proclaim "balanced approach," "responsible environmentalism" and so on.
How to reply? Remember that the public like to hear personal stories about how an action damaged or destroyed something they and their people held dear, that was economically and culturally valuable to them. And people generally value the underdog, and the fact that fish, animals can not speak for themselves.
In assessing government decisions that might damage the environment, remember that the public does not like government to act in secrecy and behind closed doors. Fairness, transparency, opening up the decision-making process all connect to the commonly held value of fair play.
Minimum Requirement/Minimum Tool Test Workshop
Sue Matthews ran the workshop and is Fish and Wildlife Service Rep at the Carhart National Wilderness Training Center. Interestingly, she pointed out that fifty percent of Refuge personnel (?) receive some training in Wilderness stewardship/user management.
Sue urged all interested in Minimum Tool Decision Guide to go to www.wilderness.net, a "hugely successful" project and partnership of Carhart Center with U-Montana's Wilderness Institute and the Aldo Leopold Wilderness Research Institute.
Doing a Minimum Requirement/Tool Analysis:
- is the action required or necessary? Do you have to put a bridge in? Describe the need, describe the problem. Can you do this outside Wilderness and solve the problem/serve the need? What does other legislation or guidance tell you about the problem?
- What is the minimum tool or test that will least effect Wilderness? Explain why you reached that decision.
What are the benefits of this analysis?
- Visible process.
- Meets policy and legal guidelines
- flexible process
- prevents "decision creep."
Bill Rudge, DEC Regional Supervisor for Natural Resources in the Catskills said that DEC volunteers in the Catskill region are well trained in the minimum tool/requirement test and appreciate retaining Wilderness values.
He also said that DEC personnel in the Catskill Park have little flexibility for using mechanized/motorized equipment/vehicles for administrative purposes in designated Wilderness areas.
Imagining the Future
Mary Wagner, federal Director of Wilderness said: "for an enduring Wilderness to continue far into the future, we must value the law and the land. We must report honestly and openly about Wilderness conditions. If people come forward and get involved like they have in these Adirondacks for so many years, we can look here for our national model."
Rebecca Oreskes, Program Leader for Recreation and Wilderness in the White Mountain National Forest of New Hampshire and Maine, said: "restraint is more than a word. Restraint is very difficult to practice. If we rely solely on Wilderness areas to practice restraint in our impacts on all natural systems, we will ultimately lose both our culture and our Wilderness.
We must keep talking amongst ourselves and with others. It's hard enough to maintain meaningful dialogue with our own colleagues, much less with those not inclined to attend this conference. Remember, our jobs collectively are to protect the spirit of Wilderness. We must be open to a variety of management models around the world.
Later, Rebecca reacted to several questions and challenges from the audience: "how do we have a conversation with people whose traditions and needs depend upon wild areas? Be open to the view that recreation is not a secondary use in Wilderness. Explore their ideas and be ready when they may say 'Wilderness is a ridiculous idea.'
Chad Dawson, managing editor of the International Journal of Wilderness, said: "develop a relationship with some landscape early in life, help others do the same, and make this a life-long relationship. Wilderness can be among the benchmarks of someone's life. Don't be isolated. Our daily lives are part of a larger system that includes Wilderness. Help people locate various alternatives to satisfy their desires and their dreams, places on the "recreation opportunity spectrum.'
Creating the Future: Choices, Challenges, Opportunities and Consequences facing the future of America's Wilderness
Linda Merigliano, US Forest Service Recreation, Wilderness and Trails Program Manager, Bridger-Teton National Forest said Wilderness stewardship in the federal Wilderness system may be maturing, but is awfully spotty.
Frankly, "society doesn't value the primitive anymore."
Accountability is the key. What is Wilderness performance? What standards are we held to? What audits? Wilderness professionals require training and skill development.
There is a huge demand for wild areas five miles from the edge of town, she said. But that's the area we're losing to development. We are losing the middle ground that connects people from town to Wilderness and back again.
Notes taken by Dave Gibson, Executive Director