Why We Should Protect Natural Areas

• Author: Gordon Steinhoff
• Pages: 199-221

199

Chapter 10

Why We Should

Protect Natural Areas

Federal environmental legislation in the United States reects the

“anthropocentric” approach to environmental preservation. e fed-

eral Wilderness Act of 1964,1 for example, makes clear that designated

wilderness areas are to be protected for the sake of the benets such protected

lands bring to A mericans. e Act mandates the preservation of these lands

“unimpaired” for the continued use and enjoyment of the American people.

Philosopher Baird Callicott has criticized our system of protected wilderness

areas in the United States, and the very concept of wilderness in our society,

in par t on the grounds that wilderness preservation rests on an ineective,

anthropocentric foundation.2 Wilderness areas have become essentially large

playgrounds, Callicott believes. Wilderness la nds should be protected, he

argues, for the sake of preserving native biodiversity, not for human uses that

may actually threaten native species.

Within environmental philosophy there ha s been much eort to deter-

mine precisely why we should protect nature. ere have been many theories

and much controversy. Should wilderness and other natural a reas be pro-

tected for the sake of advantages provided not only to humans, but also to

other species, the “biocentric” approach? Do humans indeed have, as some

philosophers have argued, duties or obligations toward nature based on

inherent values that lie within nature?

In this chapter, I wil l argue that we should adopt a more pragmatic per-

spective. I believe there a re no denite ethical foundations that are essen-

tial in our eorts to protect nature. e A merican public is overwhelming ly

in favor of preserving natural areas and native biodiversity. is has been

shown in a number of recent opinion surveys. I argue that the proper founda-

1. 16 U.S.C. §1131(a).

2. J. Baird Callicott, Contemporary Criticisms of the Received Wilderness Idea, in W S 

 T  C C—V 1: C P  F D

(David N. Cole et al. eds., U.S. Forest Serv. Proceedings RMRS-P-15-VOL-1 2000).

Note: is chapter is adapted from Why We Should Protect Natural Areas, 5 A. J.

E. L.  P’ 364 (Spring 2015).

200 Naturalness and Biodiversity

tion for preservation of natural areas in t he United States is the deep anity

many Americans feel toward natura l areas and native species. Put simply,

Americans love nature. Our response to nature is primarily emotional rather

than intellectual. As surveys show, citizens believe that wilderness and other

natural a reas should provide a wide va riety of uses. Some favor recreational

uses, while others believe these areas should be managed to provide habi-

tat for native species. e wide variety of desired uses should be expected

and encouraged in our pluralistic society. ere are no incorrect reasons why

we should protect natural areas. Environmental policy making in t he United

States is especially dicult since we must accommodate, a s well as possible,

the various uses citizens wish to see provided by federally owned natural areas.

Anthropocentric Environmental Policy

According to the Wilderness Act, the policy of the U.S. Congress is to “secure

for the American people of present and f uture generations the benets of an

enduring resource of wilderness.”3 “For this purpose,” the Act continues,

there is hereby est ablished a Wilderness Preservation System to be composed

of federally ow ned areas designated .. . as “wilderness areas”, and the se shall

be adm inistered for the use and enjoyment of the American people in such

manner as wil l leave them unimpaired for future use as w ilderness....4

e Act species the uses that must be provided to the American public.

Wilderness areas “shall be devoted to the public purposes of recreational,

scenic, scientic, educational, conservation, and historical use.”5 Conserva-

tion is specied a s a use that must be provided, but conservation of wildlife

and other species is to occur within the broad context of providing for the

“use a nd enjoyment of the American people.” e Wilderness Act reects

the anthropocentric approach to environmental preservation. In accordance

with the Act, wilderness areas are protected ultimately for the sake of the

benets these areas provide to humans: current a nd future generations of

American citizens.

e anthropocentric approach is found, as well, in other federal envi-

ronmental legislation. e Endangered Species Act (ESA) declares: “e

purposes of this Act are to provide a means whereby the ecosystems upon

which endangered species a nd threatened species depend may be conserved,

to provide a program for the conservation of such endangered and threatened

3. 16 U.S.C. §1131(a).

4. Id.

5. Id. at §1131(d).