Ecological Equilibrium: How to Best Balance Conservation with Recreation

 Madison, Wisconsin, holds many beautiful trails and nature preserves within strolling distance of its magnificent Capitol building. It provides a unique case study into maximizing conservation efforts while still supporting a booming population. Though these areas, like the Lakeshore path leading to Picnic Point and the UW arboretum are places designed for human traffic, I think they serve an important role that exceeds a healthy habitat. Conservation areas like this promote positive public views regarding green spaces, and nature as a whole. Thus, somebody that enjoys recreation in these parks is more likely to be in favor of conservation. 

Striking the right balance between development and conservation is quite tricky. There is no sure way to know just how much impact each housing development may have. Nor can we predict with absolute certainty the effects that conserving a habitat will have. However, I am a big proponent of the idea that nature will find a way. Nature will eventually survive well past humans on earth, and will adapt to meet its environmental conditions, no matter the obstacle. Thus, I think developments with conservation in mind is key to the future. We know that roads are a great indicator of biodiversity losses. Therefore, when undergoing a new development, placing roads in key areas to maximize traffic efficiency while minimizing their total amount is key. If that means a development will add five to ten minutes of traffic, while minimizing edge habitats created, that is the exact sweet spot I am looking for! 

In already developed areas, I believe salvaging as much as possible from the damage that has been done is the best approach to conservation. There is much land in southern Wisconsin that is already impacted due to Milwaukee and Madison's metropolitan areas. Hence, in my opinion, it is easier to support maintaining and creating as many parks as possible, rather than undergo large scale restoration efforts. Projects like those seem inefficient and unrealistic considering the extent of damage that has been done to the natural habitats, and the amount of people living in the area. Therefore, maximizing green spaces in areas dense with people promotes a positive view of nature, and conserves something instead of nothing. Furthermore, this approach helps establish and maintain some habitats for species. Though they may not be the most natural or healthy habitats, again, something is better than nothing in this instance.

In more remote areas, it is more difficult to determine the course of action. In our ever-stimulated existence these days, I believe "exurban" sprawl will become even more popular in the coming generations, as people seek refuge from daily life. However, as exurban sprawl goes, people will continue seeking more remote areas. This creates a positive feedback loop of less and less natural habitat available for people to see. However, there is good news. Generally, people that seek escapes in the wilderness are either environmentally conscientious or at least supportive of natural habitats rights to exist. Thus, they are more likely to put up with inconveniences in enjoying it as a form of recreation. Going back to what I wrote about earlier with roads, for example, people seeking this form of recreation do not need the direct commute that cuts time down to enjoy these habitats. In fact, they are more likely to enjoy the journey of a long travel to get there. Therefore, there is no need to greatly develop these lands. Creating enough access to allow people to get there at a cost minimal to the environment, maximum to the travelers is all that is needed. One road, it is all that is needed. I hope this is a common sentiment amongst the people making these decisions. Then, our great remaining natural habitats can be preserved for generations to come.



                  Aerial view of Picnic Point                                              Photographed by William Cronon, taken from UW Lakeshore Preserve web page
A March Sunset at the UW Arboretum (from the main entry road)
    (my photograph)

Photos:
https://lakeshorepreserve.wisc.edu/visit/places/picnic-point/




Comments

  1. Hi Sam! I think you made some really great points. Personally, I'll travel hours to experience peaceful, natural areas so I agree with your conclusion that access to natural areas doesn't have to mean increased development. I am a little curious about one of your first points. What do you mean by "large scale restoration efforts" in comparison with maintaining/creating parks?

    ReplyDelete
  2. Hey Sam, I like your use of Picnic Point as an example of a relatively successful wild-urban interface in which the 'wild' habitat is still healthy. It is pretty cool how much wildlife is at Picnic Point considering it is right next to a heavily altered campus. Recreating a 'Picnic Point' situation in already developed areas does seem challenging, but it does seem possible to protect wildlife areas in spots where development is expected. If a wildlife area is preserved and never developed on, it certainly has a better change of sustaining long-term health, even if there is nearby human activity.

    ReplyDelete

Post a Comment