Savings in the age of Trump

With the election of Donald Trump, many wilderness advocates have become depressed and disillusioned and feel that conservation efforts are over. The Trump administration will undoubtedly try to repeal, impede, or roll back conservation laws and policies.

It is important to remember that there is nothing new in this. The old phrase “two steps forward and one step back” often characterizes all political issues.

Looking at the history of conservation, I see successes like the Migratory Bird Act, the creation of national parks and national forests, the Wilderness Act, the Alaska Lands Act, the Endangered Species Act, and other laws like discontinuous evolution. Long periods of little progress, then sudden big changes.

Years often go by without significant conservation success, but the stars almost always align at some point and conservation legislation is approved. It is impossible to predict when and how this will happen.

For this reason, one must be prepared to introduce a legislative proposal when the opportunity arises. It takes years of public advocacy before you can get a legislative hearing.

In the 1930s, Bob Marshall proposed protecting everything north of the Yukon River in Alaska as a vast national park. Marshall’s proposal must have seemed incredibly naive to most Alaskans at the time. Alaska’s entire economy in the 1930s was based on the exploitation of resources such as mining and commercial salmon fishing.

Still, Marshall’s idea simmered for years. The ability to protect most of northern Alaska was a result of oil development. When oil companies tried to build a pipeline in Alaska, Alaska Natives protested. They argued that they still had legal rights to the land and the construction of the pipeline was being delayed.

Paradoxically, it was the oil companies that lobbied on behalf of local groups for some quick solution to the problem. This obstacle to the construction of the pipeline was removed in 1971 Alaska Native Claims Settlement Act.

One clause of the Indigenous Claims Act required the Secretary of the Interior to nominate land for national parks, wildlife sanctuaries and other protections, which eventually led to the protected landscape we see today. The Alaska National Interest Lands Conservation Act passed by Congress in 1980.

If you look at a map of Alaska today, almost everything north of the Yukon River is some type of protected area. There is the Gate of the Arctic National Park National Park and Reserve, the Kobuk Valley National Park, the Noatak Reserve, the Arctic Wildlife Reserve, the Selavik Reserve, Cape Kruzenstein, the Koyukuk Reserve, the Bering Sea Bridge Reserve “, the Yukon Flats reserve, the Canti reserve, and even part of the naval oil reserve is semi-protected.

Fifty years later, the stars aligned, and conservation groups mobilized to protect much of the land north of the Yukon River.

For 25 years, conservationists tried to save most of it California desert under the Wilderness Act. The first legislative efforts to preserve desert wilderness began in 1986, when then-Senator Alan Cranston introduced legislation. However, it wasn’t until 1994 that Congress passed the California Wilderness Protection Act, which created more than 69 new wilderness areas. He also elevated the Death Valley and Joshua Tree National Monuments to national park status and created the Mojave National Preserve.

Subsequent legislation added 1.6 million acres Mojave Trail National Monument and the Snow to Sands National Monument to protect the California desert.
One interesting historical factor in California’s Wilderness Protection Act holds lessons for all such efforts.

Jim Eaton, now deceased, was the executive director of the California Wildlife Coalition at the time. Jim told me that when they created the original legislative proposal, they included every BLM area that they thought could be designated under the 1964 Wilderness Act. They expected that in the legislative debate around the bill they would invariably lose some of these areas.

Opponents of the law, however, focused all their energies on stopping the creation of Mojave National Park. In the end, the compromise was the creation of a national preserve that allowed hunting and continued grazing. But Eaton said none of the proposed wilderness areas have been eliminated.

The lesson learned was to put forward the best proposal you can defend because you never know how a political debate will turn out.

There are visionary proposals that follow past conservation efforts. For example, Law on the protection of the ecosystem of the northern Rocky Mountains (NREPA), which would designate more than 23 million acres of wilderness in five states, has been repeatedly introduced in Congress since 1993. Although it has not yet been adopted, this should not discourage wildlife advocates. No one knows when the stars will align and NREPA might pass Congress.

In the meantime, the NREPA acts as a road map that shows exactly what is at stake and what the future might hold for the northern Rocky Mountain wilderness areas. It is an articulation of what we need to protect. It’s a constant reminder of the opportunities that exist for wildland conservation throughout the region.

Another example is the original 9 million acre Southern Utah Wildlife Association (SUWA). Red Rock Wilderness Act offer for Utah Canyon Country. The law was first introduced in 1989. Since then, SUWA has defended its proposal and successfully pushed some wildlife legislation through Congress. Still, the remaining 8 million-acre proposal stands as a reminder of what is possible and what still needs to be preserved in southern Utah.

There are other visionary efforts across the country that I believe will continue to receive congressional support. For example, Combine the parks California’s Sierra Nevada effort seeks to connect the land between Yosemite and Kings Canyon/Sequoia National Parks with national monument status.

Efforts to protect over a million acres Owyhee Canyonland of Oregon is another long-term legislative effort that may soon bear fruit. Conservation efforts for all wild lands north of Yellowstone National Park, including NREPA, as well expansion of Yellowstone National Park or offer from Gallatin Yellowstone Wilderness Alliance to identify all roadless lands on the Custer Gallatin National Fork.

A similar effort to provide essential protection for the wildlife of central Idaho Friends of Clearwater in Idaho continues.

And in Me, RESTORE the Northern Forestcontinues to lobby for a 3.2 million acre national park in the region.

Restoration of the animal world is also underway. The spread of wolves in the West, including wolf packs in California and Colorado, demonstrates that activists can succeed.

The Montana Wild Bison Recovery Council seeks to establish several herds of wild bison outside Yellowstone and Grand Teton National Parks in Montana and Wyoming.

One of the conclusions I’ve come to after reviewing these and other conservation campaigns is that courage and vision breed public support. And even when one fulfills only a fraction of that vision, visionary proposals like SUWA’s Canyon Country Act or NREPA’s Rocky Mountain Wilderness Alliance continue to inspire people.

So while the Trump administration is unlikely to promote conservation, serendipity plays a large role in what is possible. The lesson I take home is to create a visionary proposal, constantly push it, defend its contours, and be ready when the opportunity to defend presents itself.

You can lose heart, or you can get down to work. I prefer to continue working to preserve our wild lands and wildlife.