Conservation as Land Health – The Gospel According to Aldo Leopold

“There are two kinds of conservationists, and two systems of thought on the subject. One kind feels a primary interest in some one aspect of land – such as soil, forestry, game or fish with an incidental interest in the land as a whole. The other feels a primary interest in the land as a whole with incidental interest in its component resources”.

These are the words of the great Aldo Leopold, in his essay Conservation in Part or Whole which was written a few years before his classic Land Ethic essay in the early 1930s.  I recently came upon this incredible writing in a book called Aldo Leopold – On Forestry and Conservation: Toward a Durable Scale of Values that is compiled and edited by Jed Meunier and Curt Meine. It’s a must-read book for Leopold enthusiasts and is available through the Society of American Foresters by clicking HERE

The context of Leopold’s thought process in this essay was being shaped  by the ongoing deer management debates at that time in his home state of Wisconsin. Forestry and wildlife management were still in their infancy. Deer management policy was being shaped entirely by politics and not science. Hunters and hoteliers wanted more deer ‘now’ – with little regard for long term carrying capacity, forest health and starvation factors. Leopold knew and communicated the dangers of such a short-sighted view.

This essay was written nearly eighty-five years ago – it’s amazing how such issues are so universal and timeless. We see it today in examples like the menhaden management issue in Virginia, the grizzly bear hunting ban in British Columbia and in many other states across the US where wildlife management decisions are still being shaped by political appointees with political interests. We have eighty more years of science and research, the most sophisticated technology in the world and more wherewithal than ever before to figure out how to exist with the land and all its parts – and yet it seems sometimes like we’re still at the ‘starting line’ of a long, dusty pathless trail.

Here are some guiding principles that Leopold espouses in this essay which are worth our contemplation:

1. “Conservation is a state of health in the land” – and not just the management of extractable supplies of timber, water, soil and game. Leopold in general viewed land much like a biotic organism, where its not only made up of components and resources, but has a functional integrity that governs its well-being and capacity to sustain itself.  It’s common for us to perceive resources as commodities that offer a supply of goods and services for human utilization and occupation. Leopold was a visionary that saw land as a functioning system with economic and non-economic components that equally govern the long-term capacity of the land to remain healthy and functioning enough to provide these services and amenities.
2. Leopold articulates a “unity concept” that ties the idea of land health to the concept of retaining as much of its original parts as possible; and the idea of land ‘sickness’ which is manifested through obtrusive and amplified impacts like soil degradation and erosion,  invasive species, extinction and endangerment. He concludes that maintaining some level of land in its natural state is a reflection of health, and that illness should be viewed in terms of function, not just in terms of what’s available in ‘resource inventory’ at one particular snapshot in time.
3. Regarding resource economics, Leopold openly acknowledges and accepts that some resources are inherently valuable to society and private landowners while others are more intangible. While not every part of the land has an identifiable economic value, everything in the system serves a key purpose and is equally important in maintaining the ecological function of the land to produce the economic goods that society needs and values.
4. In order to make conservation work, we  need a collective balance of regulations & laws, private land stewardship incentives and education and ethics. The first are not sufficient enough to drive the overall collective needs. Conservation motivated entirely by financial incentives or profit will generally fall short in maintaining land’s overall health and function as a system and only persist as long as it’s being incentivized. The verdict is still out on whether education and ethics can prevail.

So, how do we wrap some context around these ideas and work toward becoming broad-minded conservationists – advocates and users who are focused on land health as an objective and not just our favorite species, resource or recreational pursuit? This question is still just as much a challenge to our contemporary conservation movement as it was eight decades ago to Leopold. I believe that is because like most other conservation challenges, this is a human dimension issue and not a science or technological or knowledge issue.  The solutions and paths forward are shaped by human nature, economics, societal values and politics – forces that are formidable to change.  Here are some thoughts:

1. It’s human nature to be self-interested and to view perspectives through our own lenses which are shaped by our personal and professional values, attitudes, education and experience. Many of us belong to group number one of Leopold’s two conservation types – including myself. This isn’t  a bad thing – a tremendous amount of conservation success has stemmed from it.  I am a forester by education and profession. During my average work day; I assess the forest in terms of basal area, board feet, acceptable and unacceptable growing stock, species mix, stocking levels, age classes. A wildlife ecologist sees the very same scene quite differently. So does a hydrologist, a conservation biologist, an ornithologist, an outdoor recreational user, a photographer, a rancher, a vegan, an average public land owner. So do I as a hunter angler on the weekend, bringing a much different lens along than during my work week. In order to get beyond our own lenses and self-interest, we have to be open to seeing the land and its systems as a whole – and to help others do the same.
2. Conservation partnerships are now more critical than ever. Its imperative to have a diverse group of stakeholders at the table – both private and public landowners with wide-ranging knowledge and experience that can point toward a collective path forward.
3. Science informs, but values and emotions drive the American political and economic decision-making process. We have the science, the research, and a lot of know how when it comes to conservation policy.  Leopold’s questions and concerns are just as much about the nature of people, their values and their limitations as much as they are about wildlife and forestry. Now more than ever, we need to rely upon informed decision-making that provides  practical solutions to meet today’s needs while also considering the long-term health of the land and its functional integrity. We can also strive to be effective communicators and work toward framing key conservation issues in terms of the common good to shape public opinion and influence values and emotions.

Todd Waldron is a Hunt to Eat Ambassador from the NY Adirondacks, a 25 year member of Society of American Foresters and  a life member of Backcountry Hunters and Anglers.