Are wild place still "wild" is wildlife are displaced from their homes by people? Painter Rod Crossman, one of the finest sporting artists in America, has long pondered the question. He believes that places vacant of wildlife lose part of their soul. To see more of Crossman's amazing work go to rodcrossman.com
EDITOR'S NOTE: Lorea Zabaleta is Mountain Journal's summer college intern. We have asked her to reflect on what prompts young users of the outdoors to become advocates for wildlife that inhabit the places where humans recreate. She has set out looking for answers among members of her own generation. The purpose is not to debate what members of her peer group say but rather get a sense of how they perceive the future of public lands, what they seek as recreationists, their thoughts on making space for wildlife and how to make lands more inclusive to people of color.
by Lorea Zabaleta
It is no secret that Yellowstone National Park, and the Greater Yellowstone Ecosystem as whole, is an (if not the) epicenter of large wildlife diversity in the Lower 48. In fact, it is one of the largest almost fully intact temperate ecosystem left on the entire planet. This is no small feat, yet for those who live in, travel to, and recreate in its grandeur it may seem taken for granted.
For those who grew up skiing, climbing, and hiking merely hours from Yellowstone itself as I did, perhaps the park and ecosystem is less about the animals who make sanctuary there and more about the sick lines they can find. For instance, Bozeman is a beacon for those who wish to partake in near constant outdoor recreation due to the easy access yet the concentration of users becoming advocates for protecting wild nature seems rather low. Do people simply not care?
While this cannot speak for all, after having several phone conservations with various college-aged people who are avid outdoors “users,” it became clear that they all cared a great deal about the wildlife habitat Greater Yellowstone holds,, and act upon this attitude with varying degrees of commitment.
I spoke to Ari Jaffe, born and raised in Missoula, Montana and backcountry skiier/mountain biker Isaac Rutt, originally from the East but who recently fell in love with the West and now lives in Missoula. I also interviewed Matthew Silverman from California, a climber and nature photographer; and Ian Lange of Bozeman who is also into photography, skiing, and climbing.
These individuals came from different locations and backgrounds but the general consensus when prompted by my questions was that conservation or at the very least practicing minimal impact recreation was something ingrained in them young.
For some it was the influence of relatives who are actively involved in conservation and environmentalism (from organization like Gallatin Valley Land Trust and Greenpeace), and for others it came from the outdoor community as a whole. The common responses to what they as individuals did to protect ecosystems were mostly user practices such as Leave No Trace.
Jaffe said that while he does not necessarily consider himself an advocate for nature and wildlife, he stills cares deeply for the beautiful landscapes in which he was raised and gets to enjoy and will find himself calling out people who sees not affording those lands the respect they are due.
Silverman and Lange, on the other hand, more consider themselves activists or advocates. Silverman, having attended protests while young for environmental causes, now uses his photography as a voice for wildlife.
Matthew Silverman on a hike through the understory. Photo courtesy Matthew Silverman
In regards to specific goals or causes, Lange states that for the Bozeman area “I think that there needs to be development of more trails so that there are more access points to the mountains around here so that we can spread out the impact because right now we really have a fairly limited number of access points."
It is his perception that increasing population concentrates impacts on a few locations. "And so I think, you know, if we could disperse that a little bit, spread it out, I would imagine that that would have positive impacts on [wildlife] migration routes and just kind of wildlife human interaction. So I think that it's something we can work on as a community in supporting that.”
Another question asked of the interviewees was this: what they would be willing to give up, in terms of their own access, their own use, their own recreational desires, in order to protect wildlife.
For all, their answer greatly depended on context. For instance, Jaffe said, “Well, I guess it would depend on like how big of an area and [for how long].. If someone said you can't go back after skiing at all in Western Montana for the month of December that might that seems a little crazy but I feel like I probably would still do it. I guess I don't know.”
Lange provided a more concrete example of when and why he would avoid the backcountry saying, “What immediately comes to mind is the areas in Yellowstone National Park that are always closed for grizzly activity in the spring and you know, I sometimes I'll forget that and I'll go there trying to do a ski in those areas and be initially annoyed that they're closed. But [then] I fully recognize and value the reason for their closure and I think it's important that we—that everyone respect those closures; that whenever wildlife requires that extra level of isolation that the powers-that-be facilitate it and close those areas.”
Lange also offered his opinion on a potential long-term solutions to aid both wildlife and recreationalists: “I think you know one caveat to that is that I think that if there were there was less private property and less fences and development that's going on in the backcountry in Montana (and everywhere). maybe we wouldn't need to have those closure because wildlife would simply be more spread out and migration routes wouldn't be disrupted in the way that they are right now because of development.”
When pressed further on this idea and asked if he thinks that the backcountry is an "under-ulitized" resource in terms of sheer volume of recreationists, Lange said we should be “not filling up the backcountry per say, but spreading out usage so there aren’t massive concentrations of tourists and recreators in small areas, thus driving away wildlife."
He recognizes the growing competition for space between people and animals in the places where the latter call home. "I think there needs to be a continued expansion of wilderness study areas where the public is not allowed, or is allowed in a very limited capacity," he said.
Reflecting more, he added, "I do think about these issues from the perspective of wildlife and that largely influences how I think about land management. With the caveat that I’m basing these ideas solely on what I’ve observed and gleaned from articles over the years. I think that with the vastness of our public lands in the West it would be far better for wildlife if human usage (access) was spread out rather than being concentrated in the limited trailheads we have today in many areas."
I also posed the question of whether the backcountry is seen as an underutilized human resource to Silverman. “We shouldn’t discourage anyone. It should be there and available. The way I view that is if there were to happen it would essentially make the backcountry not wild anymore. That’s the risk you run rather than being in predefined areas. I've never thought about the issue from a grizzly’s bear perspective; from the perspective of wildlife. I'd rather [that recreation] be concentrated so there’s more wild spaces for oneself as for wildlife. [So that] not everywhere I go I might see other humans.”
"I've never thought about the issue from a grizzly bear's perspective; from the perspective of wildlife. I'd rather [that recreation] be concentrated so there’s more wild spaces for oneself as for wildlife. [So that] not everywhere I go I might see other humans.”
This concept of private property versus public also brings to mind the racist past of national parks in which land was taken from indigenous peoples and continues to uphold a very white model of the concept of “wilderness.”
There is, however, no doubt that having places such as Yellowstone National Park serves and benefits wildlife and biodiversity in a way that we simply cannot afford to lose. So how can that be reconciled with the racist past of national parks as well as the overwhelming whiteness of outdoor spaces?
In regards to this, Silvermen said, “As unfortunate as the roots of these places are, I do think that they still need to exist. But I also do agree that it would be very good to maybe even, if we can't completely give the land back because unfortunately that doesn't seem like something that the US government would be interested in doing, we could definitely make an effort to involve the native people in the management of the land. So that they have their ancestral land and some control over it. If not completely giving it back to them then doing something like what the Tompkins Conservation has been doing down in Chile.”
Among the core convictions of Tompkins Conservation are: "All life has intrinsic value. Beauty in all things matters. We are not master but members in the community of life. Our impact on the biosphere must shrink. It's unethical for people to cause other species to go extinct. The grave challenges facing life on Earth call us to urgent action."
Among the core convictions of Tompkins Conservation are: "All life has intrinsic value. Beauty in all things matters. We are not master but members in the community of life. Our impact on the biosphere must shrink. It's unethical for people to cause other species to go extinct. The grave challenges facing life on Earth call us to urgent action."
Lange echoed the injustices that have happened to indigenous people and added: “Yeah, and just to add on to that as far as areas that aren't national parks that aren’t stolen land. I really feel like there needs to be, I mean obviously, land redistribution is an extremely loaded term, but I think we need some form of that because it's, I think, just wrong that you have is you know, millionaires and billionaires, whatever, who own a hundred thousand acres of that country [as private land] in Montana.
Greater Yellowstone is renowned for its wildlife in part because the diversity of animal populations still present here have vanished from most other areas of the Lower 48 states. A question for outdoor-minded members of Generations Z through X is this: how can ancient wildlife migrations, like those for elk pictured in this map, persist with unprecedented expansion of the human development footprint happening along with rapidly rising levels of outdoor recreation in the public land backcountry?
As a whole, all those contemporaries I spoke to were generally in agreement that protecting wilderness and wildlife are a priority for them while recreating outdoors yet there were hesitations and concerns raised when asked exactly how much they personally would be willing to give up in order to do exactly that.
As a whole, all those contemporaries I spoke to were generally in agreement that protecting wilderness and wildlife are a priority for them while recreating outdoors yet there were hesitations and concerns raised when asked exactly how much they personally would be willing to give up in order to do exactly that.
It is easy to make large normative statements, particularly about what the government should or shouldn’t do and honestly, we should be making our voice heard in regards to how nature can better be protected on a structural level. Yet that does not absolve us of our personal responsibilities. It is difficult but this is truly a situation in which changes must come from within.
Even if every person recreating in the outdoors only has one harmful habit, only ignores one single recommendation by a biologist or ranger, they are still creating a cumulative level of harm that quite frankly the ecosystem cannot afford to absorb. And if everyone is doing that?
For members of my generation, there needs to be a shift between saving the wildlife and outdoors for us and our use to simply preserving it for its own sake. So long as we are viewing the outdoors solely as our playground and wildlife as existing for our purposes, we will never be able to make the sacrifices necessary to preserve it.
About Lorea Zabaleta
Lorea Zabaleta is a writer who grew up in Bozeman, Montana as the daughter of a professional conservationist mother who has also been an elected member of the local school board and a European father who is well known as a climber, carpenter and advocate of human rights. Lorea herself is an avid mountaineer, skier, wildlife advocate and lover of the great outdoors. After attending prep school in the East, she enrolled at Colorado College where she is studying international political economy and journalism. She is Mountain Journal's summer intern for 2020.
