P3-Vol 2.No3 Dec 96 - International Journal of Wilderness

T
THE SUSTAINABILITY
OF U.S. WILDERNESS—
Ecologically, Socially, and Politically
BY JOHN C. HENDEE, MANAGING EDITOR
HE NATIONAL WILDERNESS PRESERVATION
System in the United States is a crowning achieve-
ment of our culture and also an important model for
other countries seeking to preserve the best of their remaining
wildlands. But even in the United States we must be
vigilant over the ecological, social, and political sustainability
of our wilderness.
Ecologically, the sustainability challenge is the preservation,
protection, and restoration of natural processes. Letting
fire, insects, disease, wind, and other natural processes run
their course, without undue interference, has proven to be a
challenge for wilderness stewards. In many cases true naturalness
has had to be sacrificed for practical considerations
relating to human safety, and to protect adjacent resources
outside the wilderness. Letting nature roll the dice in determining
ecological consequences—that is managing wilderness
as guardians not gardeners—is not easy.
Socially, wilderness is characterized in part by increasing
use (see article by David Cole in this issue). Most of this use
is by small, private groups of upper middle-class citizens on
foot; but, there is also a healthy outfitting and guiding industry
taking boaters, floaters, and backpackers to wilderness in
growing numbers. Some wilderness visitors use vacation time
to maintain trails or restore wilderness sites, while others go on
trips sponsored by educational, religious, conservation, or recreation
for-profit organizations. A current study found 700
wilderness experience programs operating nationwide for purposes
of personal growth, therapy, education, and leadership
development (Friese 1996), with a companion study of wilderness
managers indicating overwhelming agreement that
use by such programs is increasing (Gager 1996).
The economic benefits to local economies having adjacent
wilderness and the struggle to incorporate social input
to wilderness planning have been described in IJW (Tom
Powers, IJW Vol. 2, No. 1; McCoy et al., IJW Vol. 1, No. 2;
Merigliano and Krumpe, IJW Vol. 2, No. 2). The legal
requirements to maintain naturalness and solitude in wilderness
and allow only primitive forms of recreation are at
the heart of the social sustainability of wilderness.
But managers must also address unanticipated (social)
effects of limiting use. People that are not used to dealing
with bureaucracies, who are unable to pay for outfitted services,
permits, or transportation, may be essentially denied a
wilderness opportunity. While it is true that there is a limit
Friese, Greg. 1996. A typology and survey of wilderness experience programs
nationwide. Unpublished masters thesis, University of Idaho, Moscow.
References
to the ability of a wilderness to sustain
human impacts, it is also true that the
greatest value of wilderness may lie in
its ability to awaken the human spirit.
There may be no stronger protection for
wilderness than from people who have
rekindled a spiritual flame from their
wilderness experience.
Limits are needed on wilderness use
to protect its values of solitude, wildness,
and untrammeled nature. With
increasing population and wilderness
use, limitations are inevitable, but wil-
FEATURES
Article author and IJW
managing editor John Hendee.
derness stewards must also ensure that use limitations do not
exclude any particular group of people.
Politically, sustainability of wilderness demands response
to social change in addition to skill and judgment in dealing
with ecological and social issues. For example, the shift of
public responsiveness from national to local influences is
putting more decision power in local hands. We must respond.
Even more serious in the long run may be the upper
middle-class homogeneity of wilderness users and managers
that contrasts sharply with our increasingly multicultural,
urban society. At the 1994 National Wilderness Conference
in Santa Fe, a virtually all-white and predominately male
audience faced a few speakers who warned us of the dangers
of white, upper middle-class homogeneity in wilderness management
and use in a democratic country destined to soon
have an urban, multicultural majority. The Wilderness and
Natural Areas in the East conference at Gatlinburg in May
1996 likewise had few minorities. However, there was one Job
Corps center director from Atlanta who extolled the values of
the experimental Wilderness Discovery backpacking program
for young black women at his center.
The political sustainability of wilderness will depend on
making wilderness relevant to as broad a spectrum of people
as possible. The current initiative to have a national wilderness
leadership conference devoted to an urban, multicultural
theme deserves support by everyone concerned about the
political sustainability of wilderness. *
The sustainability of wilderness is more than an ecological
issue; it is about social and political considerations for wilderness
too. They may be the most difficult elements of wilderness
stewardship, but they also need our attention. IJW
Gager, Dan. 1996. Federal land managers policies and managers perceptions on
the use of wilderness for personal growth. Unpublished masters thesis, University
of Idaho, Moscow.
* For information about this initiative, contact Margaret Petersen, Chair, Society of American Foresters Wilderness Working Group. Telephone: (503) 326-3644.
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF WILDERNESS/Volume 2, Number 3, December 1996 3