Previous to European settlement, Native Americans coexisted with the landscape. There were no species that went extinct or huge areas of land cleared for development. The Native tribes used what they could find in their immediate environment for their every need. Modern life calls for iPhones, foods transported from countries where they're grown year-round, and fossil fuels from deep in the Earth.
It would be impossible to completely reinstate Native land care practices into our lives, but we can and should keep them in mind. The National Park system has protected land since 1916 and now covers 85 million acres around the USA (National Park System). People travel from all around the world to these parks to be among the wilderness. In the late 1980s, the "Leave No Trace" concept began to spread. The U.S. Forest Service, National Park Service, and Bureau of Land Management cooperatively incorporated Native land care ideas on how to care for and protect nature using these principles (History). In a perfect world, everyone would always follow these principles always but again, pretty impossible.
While someone may travel to Yosemite National Park and make sure to dispose of waste properly, leave what they find, and minimize campsite impacts, just getting to the park had an impact on our planet. Using an iPhone to take photos of El Capitan doesn't hurt Yosemite, but making a phone takes precious materials. The battery requires things like Tantalite, which are mined in the Congo Rainforest, creating waste chemical runoff and air pollution (A World of Minerals in Your Mobile Device). Hikers in Yosemite bring bananas that need to be shipped from places like Costa Rica or tuna brought in from deep sea fishing boats. Getting these food items to the hikes takes fossil fuels, and getting to Yosemite does as well. Fossil fuels are the biggest contributer to climate change, which is the biggest threat to nature.
It is possible to enjoy nature and still minimize your impact on it. There is no way to not do any damage but being mindful is the first step. It is easy to not litter, not harm any wild species, and not destroy the landscape. Every choice you make has an impact on our planet, you just decide whether it will be harmful or not.
Sources:
“A World of Minerals in Your Mobile Device - USGS.” USGS, https://pubs.usgs.gov/gip/0167/gip167.pdf
FRS Archives. Park Entrance Sign, Yosemite National Park, California, USA. Yosemite National Park, California, USA.
“History of LNT - Leave No Trace Center for Outdoor Ethics.” Leave No Trace, 16 Feb. 2022, https://lnt.org/about/history/.
“National Park System (U.S. National Park Service).” National Parks Service, U.S. Department of the Interior, 16 May 2022, https://www.nps.gov/aboutus/national-park-system.htm#:~:text=Units%2FParks,of%20Columbia%2C%20and%20US%20territories.
Hi Mia! I think you shared a really interesting perspective about how travel to enjoy nature can actually harm nature. I would like to add that while the Leave no Trace initiative is great, I think it is important to note that the underlying philosophies behind Native land management and Western land management are quite different. This is not my original idea: https://www.kcet.org/shows/tending-the-wild/the-problem-with-the-ecological-indian-stereotype
ReplyDeleteHi Mia, great post. I thought it was really interesting how you made a very cohesive argument about how visiting these natural parks is actually damaging when what there made for in the first place is to be protected. Even if this is to be true a seperate thought I had is that the educational value of these parks is greater than the cost they endure. These parks are one of the few things that can drag people away from their lives to visit and learn about the environment. Educational outreach opportunities and programs like ones provided by national parks are in valuable even if they come at this cost.
ReplyDeleteA question I got from your reading is how we should help solve this problem. National parks harbor massive public appeal and shutting them down could have massive consequences so how should we move forward making them accessible while still preserving them?
DeleteHey Mia, you wrote a great blog post that helped described the environmental footprint a person. Our impact isn't limited to the space we live in, but it extends internationally due to our consumption of foreign goods and resources. I liked you connection to the National Parks. I've read that excessive tourism to the National Parks is having harmful impacts through air and noise pollution and physical habitat degradation. Should we limit the number of visitors to National Parks? I'm not sure. Patrick brought up a good point about the educational value of these parks. Maybe that is worth the environmental toll the parks experience.
ReplyDeleteHi Mia! I think you did a wonderful job explaining the ramifications associated with actions in our everyday lives. I also thought it was very interesting how you brought the component of Native American practices and how we should keep those in mind. Do you have any suggestions on what particular practices we could implement to reduce our carbon footprints or traces of ecological damages? Is there any practices or certain things you do personally when you go to National Parks in order to protect them?
ReplyDeleteHi Mia! You did a great job in breaking it down on how everybody has an impact on climate change and how we can make a change in our own lives to cut it down. One of the hardest parts of change is where or how to begin and I think that by educating ourselves on how the world works, we can begin from there. Also I have seen many videos where tourists have been seen messing with wildlife at these National parks, which can harm either the person or animal. By educating ourselves on how to care for our surroundings and keeping the safety of all species in consideration, humans and wilderness can coexist together.
ReplyDelete