For hundreds of years the ability to use and continue to use has been the motive behind conservation. Hunters, anglers (who until recently killed what they caught), farmers, ranchers, even loggers concerned themselves with their resources, their interests, their livelihoods. Today it's rare to see an environmental organization, such as the Sierra Club, ally with Ducks Unlimited, or Colorado Cattleman's Association, but now and then it does happen. (TU is more of a "green group" when it comes to use.) Green groups , NRDC, Earthjustice, Sierra Club, Alaska Wilderness League, have their ideological anchor fast in the rocks of righteousness - I mean no harm, however, time and again it would behoove those groups to partner with Pheasants Unlimited to help save the Greater Sage Grouse from being listed as Endangered, or to back the RESTORE Act and give millions of dollars to rehabilitating gulf estuaries and coastlines (despite 35% going to 5 shitty Governors who hate clean water). It's great that they throw their weight behind national causes such as Keystone XL, Pebble Mine, National Monuments, student activism, but teamwork, even in compromise, lightens the load.
These middle-ground platforms are not unheard of in conservation; they've been around for decades. Conservation was a republican ideal, Theodore Roosevelt, designator of the Grand Canyon, hunted around the world, Ducks Unlimited actually likes ducks, and now Patagonia has established another middle-ground, use-based platform this time for salmon production. As they've done with clothing, they hope to take a big enough share of the market, by selling to smart and caring consumers, to pressure other manufacturers to adopt some of their ideals and practices. This is conservation based in use.
No comments:
Post a Comment