Human nature?

 

Figure 1. Landscape paintings such as this one were popular in the mid 1800s [1]. 

When European settlers first arrived to what is now known as the United States, they were struck by the vastness of what they deemed to be wild. This sense of awe turned dangerous as they quickly over-exploited the natural resources around them. By the early 1900s, Western environmentalists relying on philosophies of preservation and conservation decided to take action to protect the most inspiring of natural areas with the creation of the National Park Service [2]. 

Today, our continued expansion of urban areas within the United States poses challenges to the natural environment and humans alike. The same appreciation for natural areas is present today, and living near open spaces, forests, coastlines, or other natural spaces is important to many. As urbanization increases, so does the wildland-urban interface. One concern that exists in managing urban-wild spaces is fire management. Fire is very important to maintain certain ecosystems and habitats, such as pine forests and prairies. However, fire suppression is necessary to protect homes and property. At the same time, fire suppression can be dangerous as it encourages the build-up of flammable leaf litter and other dead, dry vegetation. One seemingly simple but very complex solution is regulated fires in wild-urban spaces. With care, fire management can allow for the safe existence of humans while encouraging ecosystems reliant upon fires to thrive. As we have learned, Indigenous communities have been engaging in fire management practices long before European arrival. 

Many of us seem to yearn to be amongst nature to really feel human, but our recreation in the outdoors can become a threat to nature. As more people travel to less inhabited areas, roads are built for their travel, homes and hotels are built for their stays and invasive plants hitch a ride along too. Yet, I believe outdoor recreation can be accomplished in a sustainable way that begins with a shift in perspective. If we acknowledge that nature doesn’t exist purely for our enjoyment, we might rethink how we enjoy the outdoors. For example, there is a wilderness area near my home - Nordhouse Dunes. Nordhouse is becoming an increasingly popular spot for hiking and camping which has caused interest in building a parking lot for increased access. A parking lot would mean more people would be able to appreciate the beauty of the dunes - but at what cost? Increased visitation would mean increased risk for invasive species, increased litter, increased damage to native species and the dune ecosystem, and increased travel on the roads that cut between forests. Without this parking lot, there may be days where I show up to Nordhouse and can’t find a spot to park. However, if I recognize that the dunes do not exist purely for my recreation, I can accept that I should return to Nordhouse on a less busy day, consider carpooling, or enjoy time outdoors elsewhere. While management decisions are important, I believe a change in perspective is what is ultimately necessary for humans and nature to coexist. 

Figure 2. Nordhouse Dunes Wilderness Area.

Side note: I developed this response after considering what I learned in the course AI/GEO 410: Critical Indigneous Ecological Knowledges. I highly recommend this course!!

[1] Keith, William. “Devil's Slide, Weber Canyon, Utah.” Chazen Museum of Art, 1874, https://chazen.wisc.edu/collection/25698/devils-slide-weber-canyon-utah/?galleries[]=41.

[2] Gilio-Whitaker, Dina. “The Problem with the Ecological Indian Stereotype.” KCET, 2017, https://www.kcet.org/shows/tending-the-wild/the-problem-with-the-ecological-indian-stereotype.