Society and Wilderness
| Author | Gordon Steinhoff |
| Pages | 1-17 |
1
Chapter 1
Society and Wilderness
There is an importa nt discrepancy between wilderness as it has been
described within t he federal Wilderness Act of 19641 and the actual
management of federally designated wilderness areas. According to
the Wilderness Act, wilderness areas are to remain untrammeled, undevel-
oped, and in their natural conditions. ere may be no permanent structures,
installations, or human habitation within wilderness. In reality, however,
wilderness areas have been carefully developed, with permanent improve-
ments, for specic recreational uses highly valued within our society. Such
improvements include trails, bridges, directional signs, and, within desig-
nated campgrounds, tent pads, replaces, sources of drinking water, toilets,
and stockholding facilities. Wilderness has been brought into our society as
we have extended aspects of our culture into wilderness, molding this part of
nature to t perceived human needs.
Rather than criticize this departure from wilderness as conceived w ithin
the Wilderness Act, we should acknowledge that the development of wilder-
ness in these special ways has made possible the elevated status wilderness
enjoys within our society. In this chapter, I will argue t hat throug h proper
development or “cultivation” wilderness has been transformed into a “place,”
borrowing terms used by philosopher Mark Sago. Wilderness has become,
in the words of Sago, “a center of felt value because human needs ... are sat-
ised in it.”2 Wilderness is therefore granted protection, more or less, within
our society from nonconforming uses. I will argue that, as is the case with
wilderness and national parks, the preservation of natural areas is generally
possible only in this way. A natural area must be transformed into a “place”
through appropriate development to meet perceived human needs. e key
is limited, appropriate development that does not signicantly aect nat ural
conditions and processes in these area s.
1. 16 U.S.C. §§1131-1136.
2. M S, T E E: P, L, E 166 (2d
ed. 2008).
Note: is chapter is adapted from Society and Wilderness, 11 I. E. R.
1 (2010).
2 Naturalness and Biodiversity
Nature as Place
In an inuential book, Sago argues that human beings are an essential part
of natu re.3 He wishes to counter the view, which he attributes to modern
environmentalism, that nature is pristine, and that the preservation of nature
involves entirely excluding humans from nature. Indeed, Sago denes
nature in terms of human activities. According to Sago, an area is natural
(part of nature) only if humans have “cultivated” t he area through activities
such as farming, hunting, trapping, and shing. Cultivation involves placing
constraints upon a natural area, limiting or forcing it in some way, to meet
perceived human needs. Sago comes to this view by reecting on what it
means to be a “place.” He accepts the view of Ala n Gussow that, in contrast
to a mere environment, a place is “experience[ed] deeply.”4 A place “has been
claimed by feelings.”5 Sago urges us to abandon the concept of Nature (with
a capital N): “an iconic abstraction apart from culture and in d istinction to
it.”6 Nature should rather be conceived as a place, as something deeply expe-
rienced and claimed by feelings. We must “come[] to terms with nature,”
Sago writes.7 Only through such cultivating activities as farming, trapping,
and hunting can we acquire suciently deep feelings for a landscape. Nature
must function “as a center of felt value because human needs, cultu ral and
social as well as biological, are satised in it.”8
An appa rent dic ulty w ith this view is that there m ay be exceptions to
the idea that an area must be cultivated to be part of nature. Federally des-
ignated wi lderness areas in the United States a re considered pa rt of nature.
Many of them, for example, the John Mui r Wilderness Area in California,
are heavily use d a nd highly valued w ithin our societ y. Yet in accorda nce
with law, many cultivating activities are exclude d from wilderness, for
example, farming and commercial log ging. Mining is allowed only to the
extent t hat it existed prior to a specied date. Rather than essential, these
and other cu ltivating activities are considered nonconforming. e Wil-
derness A ct of 1964 announced the national goal of protecting designated
wildernes s a reas so they remain u nimpaired. Wilderness is apparently an
exception to Sago ’s view that cu ltivating activities are essentia l for an area
to be par t of nature.
3. Id. at 157-66.
4. See the quote from Gussow, id. at 163.
5. Id.
6. Id. at 162.
7. Id. at 166.
8. Id.
To continue reading
Request your trial