Why We Need Nature
The frog does not drink up the pond.by Susan L. Feathers
It's raining a soft but steady rain and the Santa Rita Mountains are shrouded in white mist. The owners of Santa Rita Lodge feed hummingbirds and migratory birds that fly up from the Sierra Madre in Mexico. The canyon is filled with squeaks and bird chatter even in the rain. Oaks and shaggy junipers form tangles of dark trunks under a canopy of green. I've come to Madera Canyon in Southern Arizona to remind myself why we need nature. One thing I know for sure is that we depend on nature’s beauty for renewal and recreation. Recently, our governor, Janet Napolitano, sent an e-mail update to the "Arizona Family":
This week I headed off to the Grand Canyon for some rest and relaxation... I'm spending the week white-water rafting down the Colorado with friends, and will return to the office on Monday.
Arizona is a place you live or visit because of its majestic beauty. Our tourist industry nets the state $16 billion annually. Americans like to raft the rivers, climb the peaks, plumb the depths, or swing on the porch of a cabin tucked in the woods. Yet, I have long puzzled over our seeming schizophrenic behavior toward nature: while exulting in its esthetic, recreational, and economic value we are busy diminishing its integrity and productivity.
We come from a culture that still relates to nature as "other". A Cocopah elder once told me that her tribe has no word for "environment" because they have no concept of nature outside of themselves. "We ARE nature" she explained. Before Europeans arrived there existed a long tradition among North Americans of regarding human beings as one creature among many, and one that is totally dependent on other species for existence. The values and ethical principles embedded in these two cultural viewpoints demark the range of perspectives about nature that exist together in the United States today.
A red-capped woodpecker strikes sharply on the alligator juniper's trunk stirring my imagination. I see a group of people gathering under the trees as if the red-headed magistrate called together the court of environmental ethics to bring in the people for a full and respectful airing of the many viewpoints and values at work in our multicultural society. We will ask "Why do we need Nature?" We'll let the frisky gray squirrel with its bushy tail and its bright black eyes preside over the meeting. Let us gather in a circle which has no head, no tail, no beginning and no end. And to each member we give equal time to speak their heart and mind with no arguments, no retorts. We'll just let our voices be heard on the wind. We will speak only from our personal perspective and speak for no one else.
The rains are subsiding to a gentle pitter-patter. We'll pass an object to hold as we speak. The jay has just dropped us a long blue and gray feather. Shall we begin?
The Native American: "The frog does not drink up the pond."
The Utilitarian: It’s pretty straight forward. Breakdown the parts and solve for the whole. Nature can be understood, controlled, and used for the good of man.
A Devoteé: "Our true calling is to another world above this pagan universe."
The Puritan: "Man's works are God-inspired; we must prevail against nature or it will bring us down."
The Calvinist: "Man was made in the image of God and He gives him dominion over the Earth."
The Reverent: "Nature is God’s creation. We must not undo it."
The Steward: "We were put here to act as stewards of God's creation."
The Philosopher: "Nature is Good because God made it."
The Rightist: "Humans have rights and as long as Nature supports humans it is valuable."
The Capitalist: "Whatever is good for the market determines the value we should ascribe to natural resources."
The Cornucopian: "Nature has unlimited capacity to support life on earth; there is no need to worry. Have faith!"
The Holistic: "The whole system of life must be maintained and has its own moral value through the renewable aspect of its nature."
The Gaian: "We are part of a larger 'organism of life'! What befalls any part of her befalls us too."
The Ecofeminist: "The condition of women is inextricably tied to the condition of the Earth."
The feather passes back to the Indian. We have come full circle. The woods are perfectly silent. The court of environmental ethics comes to a close with a flick of the gray squirrel's tail and a few sharp strikes of the woodpecker's bill. All rise to leave in contemplation. The Cornucopian walks with the Indian under the canopy of oaks. He turns toward his companion and asks softly "What was that you said about the frog?"
A jeep-load of grinning hikers suddenly jolts me back to reality. Later, on the trip home I pass through grasslands at the base of the Santa Ritas. As far as my eyes can see grasslands radiate the heat of near-by desert. Slowing down I look back toward the mountains and scan the horizon for herds of pronghorn, Arizona’s gazelle. None today…. Twenty minutes later I am on a major freeway. In the Southwest open-land fills-in with new homes and infrastructure, shopping malls and more freeways. Mountains that once stood alone are becoming islands in urban seas. Like the other U.S. states we have lost substantial natural habitat and biodiversity. Ninety percent of Arizona's riparian habitat (where water runs close to or above the ground), and where the greatest biodiversity exists, is gone.
The Arizona story follows the story about water in the West. The Colorado River is one of the most controlled rivers in the world. No less than 20 dams direct precious water to support cities and agriculture. More demand than ever is placed on the Colorado’s flows by the seven states that have rights to its water: Wyoming, Colorado, and New Mexico, and Utah, California, Arizona, and Nevada. Phoenix and Tucson overdraft their ground water (draw off more than can be recharged by annual precipitation). It has recently been projected that by 2050 Tucson’s aquifer will be sufficiently drained, leaving the burgeoning city solely dependent on the Central Arizona Project (CAP) to bring Colorado River water across the state in an elaborate canal system.
Whether we look at nature from an economic, religious, philosophical, or political view is becoming irrelevant. We are all together in our need for clean water, clean air, clean food, and the myriad of ecosystem services that keep us functioning as living beings. These include provision of food, fuel and fiber, provision of shelter and building materials, purification of air and water, detoxification and decomposition of wastes, stabilization and moderation of the Earth's climate, and moderation of floods, droughts, and temperature extremes among many other essential "services" listed by the Convention on Biodiversity (U.N. Environmental Program).
As natural areas decline in health so will human health and well-being. Whether one is a steward of the Earth from the viewpoint of an overseer of Creation, a co-dweller with all species, a developer who seeks to utilize nature for human benefit, a politician who is concerned with the economy and jobs - or a person who throws his fate to luck - from all points of view – we can no longer afford to argue. The human global footprint is impacting the key natural systems that allow life to exist and to flourish. Many studies from multiple researchers around the globe show that in general the more species living in an ecosystem, the more productive and greater is its ability to endure environmental stresses like drought or pollution. The best estimate of the current loss of biodiversity world wide per decade is 6% (range of 1% to 10%). This is mostly related to population growth and consequent habitat fragmentation, introduction of exotic species, and pollution. E. O. Wilson, a respected Harvard University ecologist suggests that given the services that natural ecosystems provide humans we ought to exert prudence about how we impact them as a species.
While the Earth's natural systems hold great promise for future medicines, naturally-derived products, food sources, and innovations yet to be dreamed of by humans, we too must understand and contemplate the scientific research, ethical imperatives, and traditional knowledge that point to a more responsible relationship to other species and the natural resources we use for our benefit: As Wilson points out we are not "aliens" that arrived on this planet: we evolved among species and are a part of the entire community. Today our best bet for long term viability of natural ecosystems and thus human welfare is consensus building among disciplines and segments of society that have not traditionally worked together. Using our best science, technology, economic practices, religious and ethical principles — and good sense — we can set aside the areas of greatest biodiversity now. We can work among nations to ensure that people have enough food and adequate shelter and work to slow world population growth that continues to put demands on the world's most vulnerable regions.
Here in the U.S., a country that still marches to the beat of a Protestant work ethic that glorifies work and accumulation of wealth as a moral imperative, it's time to reevaluate the values and principles at work in our culture to secure a future worth living.