Quantcast
Channel: Human Landscape – SAGE
Viewing all 65 articles
Browse latest View live

Just Enough: Fishing for Happiness in Southern Thailand

$
0
0

Ed. Note: Just Enough was awarded second place in the 2012 Sage Magazine Young Environmental Writers Contest.

It is daybreak in the southernmost tip of Thailand, and Pattani Bay is smooth as a lake, reflecting the purple and orange which streak across the sky announcing the sun. I am accompanying Abdulla, a local fisherman, as he draws up the crab nets he has placed the night before. Every morning after his pre-dawn prayer, Abdulla sets out from the shores of the small fishing village where he lives and spends about three hours in his boat pulling up 800 meters of net. Standing at the bow in his canvas hat and sweat pants, he works alone, sometimes humming as he pulls up the long strips of mesh, which sparkle as the water slides off them in the soft morning sun. When he encounters an entangled crab, he tosses that section of net to the stern of the boat where I am sitting. The catch comes in slowly, with about one crab per thirty meters of net, but the net is long. By the end of three hours about thirty crabs and a dozen or so fish of low value lay piled at my feet.

When the last net is pulled we return to shore and Abdulla’s mother, a lively lady with a warm round face, greets us. She comes to inspect the catch and immediately begins detangling the crabs, a process that will take the next hour or so. Abdulla will not let me leave without taking some, so try as I might to refuse, I depart with a small plastic bag of blue crab fresh from the sea. The catch that day is poorer than usual. Accounting for the price of gasoline, Abdulla will make a profit of about $4 –– on a good day it could be as much as $10 but usually it’s somewhere around $6. By the end of most days the money will be finished, but it may be just enough to cover daily food expenses, tea, cigarettes, and school fees for his kids.

Abdulla’s livelihood is typical of the thousands of fishermen living off the fragile estuarine ecosystem of Pattani Bay and many other small-scale fishermen throughout Thailand. Living on tight margins and relying on natural resources which are becoming increasingly scarce, he stands outside what has become the dominant narrative of modern Thailand –– a remarkable story of rapid economic progress. He also stands inside one of Thailand’s most troubled regions.

***

The Southern Three Provinces of Thailand, where Abdulla lives, are locked in an insurgency that rarely makes it into the news in America, but has claimed over 3,500 lives. Unlike the rest of the mostly Buddhist country, the Southern Three Provinces are predominantly Muslim, and local people speak a Malay dialect, which is written in Arabic script. Since their incorporation into the country in 1903, they have had a tumultuous relationship with the central Thai state, which has promoted a Buddhist-centered nationalism. In 2004, insurgent sentiments erupted in a series of raids on police and army outposts, and since then the violence has escalated steadily. Identifying the perpetrators has been difficult, and government policies have divided rather than healed, as heavy-handed military and police actions have vilified and oppressed the local Malay-speaking Muslim people rather than assisted them. Long-held cultural prejudices among the Thai Buddhist mainstream about Malay-speaking Muslims –– whom they perceive as under-developed, undereducated, and lazy –– only exacerbate the situation. By the time I first reached the region in the summer of 2006, it was considered by most Thais to be a very dangerous place.

I came to Dato, the small fishing village where Abdulla lives, not as a student of this conflict but as a student of the natural environment. After working in Thailand for two years on water and forest management, I was concerned with the wrenching changes facing rural communities that had traditionally depended on agricultural or fishing livelihoods but were finding it more and more difficult to make a living. The six dollars to be earned per day by fishing is meager when compared to the rising incomes of Thailand’s growing middle class, and small-scale fishing operations like Abdulla’s can seem less and less attractive by comparison.

At the same time, nearly everyone in the country –– on all sides of the political spectrum –– was touting the merits of something called in Thai setakit paw piang, which translates literally into the “sufficient” or “just enough” economy. Government-sponsored television ad campaigns, featuring soft-focus images of smiling children donning homespun clothes in emerald green landscapes, espouse the beauty of a simple rural life removed from material consumption and western excess. However, given the limited extent to which these values were embraced by the credit card-wielding, gadget-hungry Thai middle class, including those who conceived this campaign, I wondered if perhaps these ads were aimed mostly at convincing those who couldn’t join the country’s economic growth parade to be happy with the poverty they got in exchange.

My contacts at the Prince of Songkhla University, forty-five minutes away, directed me to Dato. I was studying rural environmental activism, and I wanted to learn how Dato’s small-scale fishermen, who lived far from the halls of power, had come to challenge commercial interests and government development schemes that threatened the bay where they lived. The people of Dato, in partnership with the local university, had planted large stretches of mangrove forests along their shores, started a youth conservation club, and led the efforts for policy reform regarding natural resource management in Pattani Bay. I also hoped that spending a summer in the Southern Three Provinces would help me penetrate the dense fog of misunderstanding surrounding the conservative Islamic culture for which the region was known. As I soon learned, only by getting to know this culture would I begin to find the answers to my question.

***

My first day in Dato, I waited for Dah, who had told my contacts at the university that she could find time to be my guide and interpreter during my stay there. She would help me talk to people in the village about how they made a living and about local environmental efforts. She had business in the neighboring village and would not be arriving for some time. The leader of the community religious school, Che’gu Rawning, had spotted me walking around awkwardly in the village square –– as a six foot tall woman, dressed in a bright green T-shirt, I was hard to miss. He invited me to the teashop next to the school; an old man had just bought me tea when Dah zipped up on her motorbike. She wore an ankle length muted batik skirt, long-sleeved tunic, and hijab, or headscarf. She looked about as old as me, in her late twenties, though when I rose to meet her I realized I was at least a full foot taller than her. She greeted me warmly and took charge right away, informing me that we would now go to her house. “You drive and I’ll sit on the back,” she said. I was too eager to make a good impression to argue, so in my first ride on a motorbike in over a year, I shakily navigated the two of us on her 100cc Honda Dream, skidding across the sandy square and then down the narrow sidewalk that formed the main thoroughfare of Dato. Small children and adults alike stared as we careened down the path, dodging chickens, goats, and toddlers, and skirting uncomfortably close to occasional puddles of sewer water pooling by the path’s edges. Except for the enormous American driving the bike, this was the standard mode of travel through Dato.

We parked at Dah’s grandmother’s house. Because I had said that I wanted to learn the local dialect, she spoke to me the whole time in abbreviated Malay instead of Thai. I understood nothing but saw that with Dah at my side, this would soon change. She had the authority and command of someone used to making knowledge sink into even the most resistant skulls. She was a senior teacher at the evening Islamic school, and her stern demeanor, quick wit, and underlying gentleness meant that she often taught the very youngest group of five-years-olds, whom no one else could control. As I would soon learn, she belonged to a cohort of bright young single women who were trained to the full extent of the Islamic education system and were now employed as religious teachers in the village. Their education seemed to have limited their prospects for marrying or dulled their interest in the endeavor, or perhaps a combination of both. Dah was the leader of this group, known for her clear mind and sharp tongue.

Dah took me to her great grandmother’s house across the street, and then to a sandy lot in back, surrounded by a tired wooden fence built to exclude the scavenging goats waging a tireless campaign at entry. We came here to meet her sister, Suraida, who was working as usual at the family business of making fish crackers. Suraida sat in the middle of a blue tarpaulin with a sea of small brown crackers rolled out around her. According to local legend, fish crackers were invented in Dato and they provided one of the three primary industries employing the people of the village; the others were fishing and restaurant work across the border in Malaysia.

Dato was more fortunate than its neighbors to have this diversity in its economy, and fish crackers probably allowed the village to send fewer of its young people out of the country. People fortunate enough to own the heavy but simple equipment required for cracker-making usually set up operations in their own backyards. They ground together fish and flour into dough, which was then boiled and sliced into crackers. They dried the crackers on woven mats placed on simple bamboo frames, high enough to avoid Dato’s enthusiastic trash-disposal system, the village goats. The dried crackers were then bagged and sold to middlemen and women who distributed them throughout southern Thailand. To eat fish crackers, one had to fry them, and then they took on a crispy porosity that first tingled and then melted on the tongue.

I sat down with Suraida at the edge of the cracker sea while Dah went to take a shower. Suraida was putting the crackers into plastic bags to be sold, and I tried to help her but managed to pack only one bag for every four of hers. Suraida’s kind smile and gentle manner, combined with her youthful excitement at meeting me, were disarming. While I clumsily struggled with crackers and cellophane, she helped me stumble through a few sentences in local Malay. She sounded out words patiently and smiled expectantly as she waited for me to piece together my next phrase, all the while filling bags of fish crackers. By the time Dah returned from her shower to take me to our next destination, I could just about announce to her that I couldn’t yet speak Malay, but I was learning. Suraida smiled at me and said, “I think that at the end of two months we will be very good friends.”

After this I spent my days trying to absorb the life of the village. I hoped to understand how people like Abdulla and Suraida made a living off the resources of the sea, and whether they thought it was enough. My work, like all activities in the village, became oriented around the five daily prayers. I awoke each morning to the pre-dawn call to prayer, when mothers were preparing foods for their family and fishermen were readying themselves for their daily outings on the water. On certain days I would go fishing with people like Abdulla who didn’t mind me tagging along, but on others I just walked along the edges of Pattani Bay as people brought in their boats, piled high with nets in the bright wash of the morning sun. I would spend the day talking to people –– young women chatting in store fronts with their new babies on their hips, old men in tea shops, teenage girls sorting out fish crackers to dry, school teachers and construction workers from the nearby agricultural extension project joining the locals for lunch at the most cosmopolitan of Dato’s establishments, Kak Na’s noodle stand.

In the late afternoon, I would visit the daily congregation of teenagers by the beach, the soccer games at the schoolyard, and the families lounging on the village square –– a vast expanse of sand in the middle of town, where men held bird-singing contests and women sat in circles while their children scampered shirtless across the sand. As evening approached, little girls in nothing but polyester sweat pants would abandon their sand castles and squirm back into T-shirts which had been discarded during their play. They would stick their hands in the air while their mothers pulled their stately maroon religious school uniforms down over their heads and fastened their hijabs around their tussled short hair, transforming these grimey-handed little girls into portraits of Islamic piety. After the early evening prayers, all the children from age five to age twelve would go to Koran reading lessons at the community religious school, sitting in rows in a large upstairs room, squirming restlessly while Che’gu Rawning, the head teacher, introduced the daily lesson. Then they would gather into small groups, helping each other read and recite verses under the tutelage of the school teachers, many of them older cousins, aunts, or uncles. When it was time to regroup, the children would line up again, small scuffles and giggles breaking out until it was time to solemnly follow Che’gu Rawning in the motions and words of the evening prayer.

I happened to be in Dato during the World Cup. Being a soccer fan, I was determined to find a place in the village where I could watch the matches amongst an enthusiastic crowd. This was how I first became friends with the wai run. The phrase wai run is loosely translated as “teenager,” but it actually refers to anyone from their early teens well into their twenties. It describes a stage of life more than a particular age – a stage when one is unfettered with serious responsibilities like raising a family and can “go out” regularly with one’s friends. Perhaps uncoincidentally, within the village this term was used mainly to describe boys, since most girls took on a great deal of familial responsibility at an early age and their “going out” was not much approved of.

Near my sleeping quarters, behind the mosque, was a teashop frequented predominantly by wai run – not just any wai run, but a group who seemed to have a particular penchant for keeping their hair a little long, wearing old punk rock T-shirts, and huddling around the one tinny mp3-playing cell phone that they had between them to listen to Nirvana. It would be unheard of for a young woman of my age from the village to come to the male domain of the teashop alone at night, particularly this teashop, with its clientele of wayward youth. But my foreignness, combined with my boyish clothes, short hair, and the strong showing I made a few days earlier in a village soccer match, created a certain fascination and androgyny around my person that allowed me to venture in.

Besides the teashop’s convenient location, something about the rebelliousness of these kids drew me to this spot. Environmental organizations throughout Thailand always talk about protecting the way of life and the ancient and venerable culture of Thailand’s rural communities. These organizations are perhaps the most committed promoters of the “just enough economy,” which they see as a means for empowering the rural poor and a desirable alternative to Thailand’s current development path, which they see as environmentally and culturally destructive. They have invoked the concept while fighting to limit the intrusion of commercial fishing boats into Thailand’s Southern coastal fishing grounds and the spread of pollution from factories and shrimp farms into Pattani Bay. However, in my work in rural Thailand, I often doubted that the younger generation felt that what was just enough for their parents and their NGO allies was just enough for them. Cell phones, rock music, and the lure of the city might be more compelling than going out every day in a one-person boat to catch six dollars worth of fish. I was interested to see how a group of kids who had carved the name “Kurt Cobain” into the table at the tea shop felt about continuing a semi-subsistence lifestyle based on fishing and making fish crackers.

The teashop was built off the back of its owner’s house, delimited only by a second wall and roof. At night, which was when it came alive, it was lit with a single florescent bulb dangling from a dusty string of ancient wires. The center of attention was the television, mounted high in the corner of the two real walls. Sunk into the sandy ground around it were two stone tables ringed with red and pink plastic chairs in various stages of dilapidation. The one or two “grown-ups” –– people who were already married and for reasons I never discerned chose to mix with this crowd –– would sit at these tables while the overwhelming majority of customers, the wai run, would fill all the remaining vacant spaces. The serious soccer watchers would sit inside while the others would gather further out, so that the radius of the tea shop informally extended to the porches of neighboring houses and the sandy lot in front where extra tables and chairs held crowds of giggling, gossiping, smoking, tea-drinking, teenage boys. Against the far wall was a low-lying wooden platform where some of the most dedicated customers would lounge or sleep, often draped on top of each other like puppy dogs.

My arrival at the teashop was always accompanied by whichever kid was working that night jumping up to get me a fresh cool drink, and my departure was always marked by his refusal to take my money for it. The choices of drink were tea, coffee, or ovaltine –– hot or cold. Teashops are the center of male social life in Muslim villages throughout Southern Thailand, where alcohol is prohibited by religion and where prohibition is mutually enforced by social discipline. While I wouldn’t be surprised if occasionally these kids ventured into town to try a taste of beer or liquor, I can report that night after night for two months they sat at this same tea shop from 9:30 until midnight at least, drinking tea or coffee with their Metallica.

By the fourth night of the World Cup, I no longer had to order my drink, and a cup of ovaltine –– iced with milk but no sugar –– would appear on my table, delivered by a quietly smiling young man in a Sex Pistols T-shirt, sarong, and fashion mullet. I would sit and watch the game with the others, cheering for the ball-handling wizardry of our favorite stars, analyzing the questionable calls of the referees, and clucking our tongues at the misbehaved players. This is how each evening went until the middle of July, when finally the World Cup ended and we could divert our attention from the TV screen long enough to have a conversation.

Our first real conversation arose when the evening news reported on George Bush’s latest posturing towards Iran, and a young man in the tea shop asked me why the American president hated Muslims. So I started my first conversation with the wai run in the unfortunate position of having to explain that the American president’s foreign policies were not in theory an expression of hatred towards Muslims –– an argument which was understandably difficult for them to accept. After such a colorful start, we moved on, happily, to more mundane topics. On one night I expounded, at their request, upon rock concerts I had attended in America (all were incredulous that I had never made the effort to see Nirvana on stage). On another night, to their delight, I played them an underground Thai hip-hop album that had been banned due to, among other things, its irreverent banter against corruption. When I pulled out the photographs I took of the village they would scoot up their plastic chairs even closer, pointing with excitement as they saw themselves and people they knew in print. They smiled knowingly at the portrait of a small boy hamming it up during a school performance –– “That’s Ali. He’s a funny one.” When they saw a picture of the man who had taken me fishing on the other side of the village, they chuckled, “Oh –– Baeh Saeh, he sings beautifully. All the kids love him.”

I was, however, by no means the only thing that held their attention. One night I arrived at the tea shop to find them all sitting in rapt attention, eyes trained on the television screen where a jolly Thai chemist was mixing unusual precipitates in steaming test tubes on a popular science program. My attempts at conversation that night fell flat, as nothing I said was more interesting than the properties of dry ice being demonstrated on screen. Only when I rose to leave a bit earlier than usual did a handful of boys divert their eyes from the screen to tell me, with sincere regret, that I was going to miss a wonderful nature documentary that would air later that evening.

***

I soon made friends. One was a thin, gentle-faced young man in his early twenties, who I found out was Dah’s cousin. His name was Anwa, and although he was too shy to speak to me whenever I saw him during the day, at night at the tea shop he was the first to pull up a chair next to me. When I became tongue-tied in Thai or didn’t fully understand what was being said around me, he would kindly offer me explanations, and when no one else was talking, he would ask me questions. I came to rely on him for these translations, and he became a bit like an evening counterpart to Dah, helping me navigate a world that she could not enter.

I learned from Anwa that many of the wai run in this tea shop had not studied much beyond the eighth or ninth grade. In fact, most of the young people in Dato did not finish high school. In some cases it was a matter of money – pursuing high school education required traveling out of the village each day, and the expense of bus fares, books, and uniforms excluded many families living on the tight margins of fishing incomes. But in as many cases it was a matter of interest. Many young people had no better explanation for dropping out than being “bored” or “uninterested” in school, answers that would have only fed the prejudices that many in Thailand hold against the Malay-speaking Muslims of the South.

I couldn’t understand how a group of young men like the wai run at the tea shop, who were clearly intelligent and curious, could have such an abridged relationship with education. I was also concerned about the type and quality of education they received when they did continue their studies. The people of Dato consider it a spiritual necessity that their children receive a religious education as well as a secular education, so for secondary schooling, they send them to government-sponsored Private Islamic Schools –– which teach both Islamic and secular subjects –– or to bonoks, Islamic boarding schools. Secular education at many of these Private Islamic Schools is of lower quality than at regular government schools, and at bonoks, it is negligible. I thought of my friends among the wai run –– Adeh, with his carefully coifed hair, who wanted to be an artist, Lek who gathered honey from the trees in the nearby forest and was so enthralled with nature documentaries, Anwa with his quiet perception. I was concerned that at the religious schools they attended, they were being denied the exposure to a broad range of subjects that might spark their interests and make them excited about learning. Without a comprehensive exposure to the arts and sciences outside of religious topics, how would they be able to explore their potential to work in these other worlds?

I took these questions to Che’gu Rawning, who had become a good friend of mine within the village. A rotund man with a laughing face, Che’gu Rawning was the commanding voice that led one hundred squirming children in their daily evening prayers and the charismatic master of ceremonies of the school field days and performances that took over the village square and the town’s attention for a few days each year. He was also an outspoken member of the Pattani Bay environmental conservation network that worked with other villages and faculty from the nearby university to protect the rich resources of the Bay for small-scale fishing.

I asked him about the bonok system, which was criticized by those outside of the Southern region for promoting an insular culture among Malay-speaking Muslims and for acting as recruiting grounds for insurgents. I raised the common criticism that sending children to bonoks, where only religion is taught, limits their employment opportunities. Che’gu Rawning was used to fielding such questions, but they still frustrated him. “People who criticize bonoks don’t understand the Muslim way of life,” he said. “For Muslims, money is not important. We don’t need much, just enough to eat and enough to live. We gain sustenance from our hearts.” His defense of bonoks was a defense of a way of life to which they were linked, simple livelihoods like the ones in Dato, where moral sustenance and direction was to be found not in wealth and material consumption but in religious virtue and community. This constellation of values did not require the Thai education system, with its orientation to wage employment outside the village. Che’gu Rawning even insisted: “It’s like the just enough economy,” which the government promotes. I imagined that Bangkok policy makers might be surprised and discomfited by the suggestion that bonoks, which they suspected and even feared as a threat to Thai ideals of progress, might in fact have a role in the vision of the “just enough economy” that they so enthusiastically espoused.

Che’gu Rawning’s vision of a simple life oriented towards Islamic values was echoed when I spoke to the Tok Imam, the leader of the mosque and the highest moral authority in the village. He was a solemn but kindly old man who lived in a simple house behind the mosque. We spoke at length about the decline of crab and fish in Pattani Bay. I expressed my surprise that despite the availability of more aggressive fishing gear, fishermen in Dato continued to use simple boats and hand gear, which guaranteed them the same paltry catch each day. Some observers from outside the region interpreted this as further evidence of Malay laziness. Others attributed it to an aversion to taking on the debts required for further investment in gear. The Imam offered a different explanation: this restraint followed from Islamic teachings. Allah, he said, has provided humankind with natural resources, and these are enough for people to live off of. A person can take what he needs, but to take more than that and deprive others of their needs is wrong. “It is fundamental: we have to look after nature,” he said. “To destroy it is a sin.”

***

I met Amran and Wajihoh when I started venturing to what the people of Dato called “the outer sea.” Dato was built on a spit of land that jutted off the eastern shore of Pattani province to form Pattani Bay. Most of the village abutted the calm waters of the bay along the sandy shore and amidst the mangroves. However, a ten-minute walk down either one of the village’s two roads led to the other shore of the spit. This shore looked out over the Gulf of Thailand –– “the outer sea,” an altogether different beast from the placid bay. To a person like me, accustomed to the unruly breakers of America’s northeastern coast, this gently lulling expanse was about as tumultuous as a bathtub, but to the residents of Dato it was far more forbidding. When I started taking evening swims along the shore (with arms and legs covered by a makeshift wetsuit), I was hailed as a small wonder of athletic prowess and bravery.

The people of Dato considered this sea wild and unruly and only a small group of about fifteen families fished on these waters. In the evenings, they would gather under the shading tarpaulins that housed their boats, women chatting and mending nets, men scrubbing crab cages next to the water, and children frolicking at the water’s edge in varying degrees of undress. This was a time to work but also a time to be together as a family. It was also the most beautiful time of day, I thought, when the sun would shine its golden late-afternoon rays slantways upon the glistening sea and the laughing children, glancing off the hardened shoulders of men hunched at the waters edge, casting achingly stark shadows along the surf, all set against a brilliant blue sky. I was drawn to the beauty of this place, and I liked to think that the families that I met there in the late afternoon were also pulled there by something other than just work. It was here I first met Wajihoh. Not yet being married, he was sitting next to his boat mending his own nets. All the features of his serious face were trained on the red plastic threading tool darting in and out of the tattered green mesh of his crab boxes. He hardly looked up when I plopped down next to him.

I asked him about the gear he used in the outer sea. He seemed amused at my curiosity but answered me with few words. The outer sea required different equipment than the inner sea. Because the waves were much bigger here, he explained, he needed a bigger boat. He also used crab boxes, which were much more expensive to maintain than the simple nets used in the Bay. The catch in the outer sea was greater, though: twenty-five dollars worth of crab and fish was not unusual, and on a very good day, Wajihoh said, he could earn up to seventy dollars. He added matter-of-factly, “You also need to be brave. The waves can be high and you have to go far.”

Wajihoh studied to the ninth grade and then completed a three-year program to earn a vocational certificate to work as an electrician, an unusual move considering that few people in the village studied much beyond ninth grade. He worked as an electrician for a few years but stopped, he said, because “it was boring.” He then worked in Malaysia for a few years, before coming back to the village to fish with his younger brother.

The exodus of young women and men to Malaysia weighs heavily on community leaders in Pattani, since it reflects the decline of their traditional fishing livelihood as well as the inability of the larger Thai economy to support their people. Most of the migrants work without a proper visa in the kitchens of the numerous Thai restaurants sprouting up across the border in Malaysia’s Kelantan province. I have heard small-scale fishermen argue that if the seas were not overfished, then the young people would return home.

I asked Wajihoh if I could accompany him fishing the next day. He smiled at my foreigner’s enthusiasm for the mundane, but he said I would have to ask his younger brother, Amran, who I soon learned was the head of the operation. Amran was an energetic young man with the round curious face of a small boy. He was twenty-three years old, the same age as many of my friends in the tea shop, but his seriousness about work and his tendency to drink his tea with the older fishermen disqualified him from the ranks of the wayward wai run. When I asked him if I could join him fishing, his primary concern was that I would get seasick on the waves. My efforts to convince him of my seaworthiness –– I had spent days on sailing trips in waters much rougher than these –– were not effective.

Nevertheless, I arrived at the beach at 5:15 am. It was empty. I stood by the softly breaking waves utterly alone, with only the mosquitoes and the stars, which were so thick that they seemed to be splattered in the sky by a can of celestial spray paint. Then in twenty minutes, about ten motorbikes sputtered up the road to the edge of the beach. I could just discern the shadowy figures of the fishermen dismounting and approaching, right as the blackness on the water turned to deep early morning violet.

When they reached the boats they sprung into coordinated action, forming teams of ten in the half-light to heave their boats into the sea. I think it was only his surprise at my presence on the beach at that hour that compelled Amran to wave me on the boat. I took a seat by the bow. Amran captained at the stern while Wajihoh pushed us off and then jumped in, taking his seat in the middle.

As soon as we set off from the shore, they told me that if I was hungry or thirsty, I should eat the food and drinks they had brought on board. Since my arrival that morning was unexpected, I knew they were offering to give me their breakfast. Fortunately, I had tucked a paper-wrapped bundle of sticky rice in my bag earlier that morning, but I would join them in enjoying the cringingly sweet orange drink they had stuffed in the bow.

Just a few hundred meters from the shore, Amran gasped and pointed, “Look! Did you see it! A dolphin!” My disappointment at missing it was obvious, and Amran peered hard at the distance, trying to spot it again for me. He then began to tell me that the dolphins are where the catfish are, that he hadn’t seen one in a long time, and that old people say that when you see a dolphin there will be a windy day at sea soon. Thus began a running narration about the sea that would last the entire four-hour duration of our boat ride.

Amran and Wajihoh were a study in contrasts. Amran was eager and talkative, and his love for fishing beamed through his animated face as he pointed out the peculiarities of some crab, talked about last week’s catch, or railed against the depredations of the environmentally destructive commercial boats. Wajihoh, his thin handsome face smiling only occasionally, worked quietly, and allowed his brother to answer all the questions I directed at both of them.

As Wajihoh and Amran laid out crab cages, I was reminded of the refinement of skill required by every profession in this village. The rhythm and elegance of their system allowed them to retrieve, clean, rebait, and lay 330 crab cages in four different sites in about four hours. The two worked as one being, each taking up and cleaning every alternate cage, so they were pulled up in a steady line. Amran steered as Wajihoh tossed the rebaited cages over the side of the small boat, both of them steering and tossing so that the string that bound eighty cages together never got tangled or caught in the whirring propellers of the outboard engine.

Amran always addressed me by name, adding to the seriousness with which he told me about fishing in Dato. “Mira, do you see that patrol boat? That is the patrol boat that the fishermen use to keep the pushnets away, Mira.” He explained that the patrol boat, which was anchored by the shore, was being repaired, and that in its absence a pushnet boat had entered the coastal zone. “If the patrol boats don’t come, the pushnets will come, Mira,” he declared gravely.

Commercial pushnets and trawlers are the bane of small-scale fishermen in coastal Thailand. They push and pull, respectively, their large rigged nets across the ocean floor, disturbing micro-habitats, picking up all organisms in their path, and, crucially, cutting the lines of the small-scale fishermen’s gear. Locals working on small boats with simple gear charge that pushnet owners take both juvenile and adult crabs and these boats play a significant role in the decline of the coastal fishery stock. Since the 1960’s Thailand has aggressively encouraged the development of its commercial fishing fleet, viewing its marine fisheries as an important export earner of foreign exchange. A regulation passed in 1972 to protect small-scale fishermen prohibits commercial boats from fishing within 3000 meters of the shore. However, this regulation has been systematically disregarded throughout Thailand’s coastal waters, owing to the powerful political connections of commercial boat owners and the ease of bribing the Thai police. Years of lobbying and protest by the Small Scale Fisherman’s Association of Pattani eventually resulted in the provision of funding to the Fisherman’s Association to purchase their own patrol boats. These boats, although unable to patrol the entire shoreline all the time, are probably the single most effective method of enforcing the 3000-meter coastal zone. But as Amran noted, when they were not on patrol, the pushnets came right back in.

I asked Amran who owned the pushnets. “They are people from the neighboring provinces. Some people from Pattani, but they have mostly stopped.” Amran added, “If they are Muslim people, they will feel bad for us and stop. If they are Muslims, it is a big sin, to destroy things like this.”

Amran emphasized his own point. “If there were no pushnets here, people wouldn’t have to go to Malaysia.” I suggested that maybe not everyone in Malaysia would want to come back and fish. Maybe they like it there. “Yes,” he agreed, “Maybe it’s a bit of an adventure.” At this moment, Wajihoh spoke for the first time, “If they are older they will come back.” I remembered what he told me earlier about his time in Malaysia. I asked him if it was fun to live there. “There are many places to go out. It’s like Bangkok, or Hong Kong.” But when I asked him whether it was better to work there or here in Dato, he responded without hesitation, “It’s better to work in your home.”

When we returned to shore, the other fishermen and women rushed to help us pull in the boat. A few boys came to help Amran and Wajihoh retrieve the catch from the hull of the boat where they had been keeping it cool in the water under the floorboards. The day’s catch included a few large squid, and Amran placed one in a clear plastic bag for me as a gift, its dark ink spilling out so that it seemed I was carrying a bag of black paint. Amran practically skipped to his motorbike with his bucket of crabs. To see him fishing was to see a person in his element. I asked him if he ever thought of doing anything besides fishing. He smiled broadly and said, “No. This is more fun.”

Wajihoh, on the other hand, had done other things. I thought about how with a vocational certificate as an electrician, he most likely worked as an underpaid contracted employee for a service management company, wearing a uniform and deployed to gray florescent-lit buildings throughout the municipal capital. This stood in sharp contrast to the Wajihoh I watched working quietly, carefully placing bait fish in every crab cage, and then gazing out over the horizon as his brother steered to their next cage drop. When I asked him about his previous jobs he said, “There you work for someone else. As a fisherman you work for yourself.” It’s better, he said, “to be free.”

***

One night I arrived at the wai run tea shop just in time for an impromptu barbecue. The boys had gone collecting mussels earlier that evening and were using a piece of zinc roofing and a few cinder blocks to create a “grill” over a pile of charcoal in front of the shop. Anwa expressed regret that I had not been able to join the group in their fishing expedition, and I too was sad that I’d missed it. I love imagining this group of renegades, with their unruly hair and punk rock T-shirts, piled up three to a motorbike and heading out to the beach on the far side of the village with their nets and buckets. Anwa explained with animated eyes how lovely it was at the beach at night, how sometimes you could see dolphins, and how they would often just stay and sleep under the stars.

After we all gorged ourselves on fifteen pounds of fresh grilled mussels, I started chatting with them about fishing and making fish crackers, the two main occupations of people in the village. I decided to ask them if they had ever thought of doing any other professions besides these. Just about all of them said no, even when pressed further. They explained that they had enough to live already and were doing fine. Adeh, listening to his friends assurances, laughed and said –– “This is the ‘just enough group.’”

I didn’t know if he meant to quote the ubiquitous slogan of the “just enough economy,” used by both NGOs and government officials alike to promote a simple and virtuous lifestyle. But his use of the term made me think. I had always been skeptical of the “just enough” economy, but I started to take it more seriously that night – or at least Adeh’s interpretation: Here were the unemployed teenage boys who were supposed to be the fodder for insurgent recruiters. But somehow they managed to hold it together. They had no education past the eighth grade and most of them had never aspired to any work that would pay them more than making crackers, but it was unclear that further education would do much to improve their lives as they saw them.

And I thought about their lives. I thought about Anwa’s eyes while he described the ocean at night, I thought about the treat of barbecued mussels, and I thought about the moral sustenance that I too was beginning to find at the tea shop and the homes of the friends I had made in Dato. I thought about the unifying power of Islam within this village, where it was a moral compass and a basis for environmental stewardship. And I thought about the sea, which provided those mussels, and the fish that were made into crackers, and the crabs that Abdulla caught. I understood why the people of Dato and other Malay-speaking Muslim villages along Pattani Bay had fought so hard to protect them. I also began to see why the people of this region might bristle in the face of a government that didn’t understand these things.

Mainstream Thai society frets about the “backwardness” and lack of education among the Malay-speaking Muslims of the Southern Three Provinces. But perhaps it isn’t desirable to aspire to secondary education or “modern” livelihoods when the fabric of one’s life is held together by social bonds that could quickly dissolve if one achieved either. I still cannot reconcile the fact that Adeh may never get a chance to know the full potential of his creativity, and that Dah, who wanted to go to college very badly, never got a chance. But it is hard to see how further integration into the Thai system would benefit those who do not choose to live in the world of Thai cities, aside from making them better qualified to work for a Thai employer. Wajihoh can work as an electrician, but he prefers working with his brother on the sea to working for someone else on a shoddy contract.

A factory job or even an office job in the city leaves no time to spend with family and friends in tea shops, or to live in the landscape that nourishes you. And it isn’t clear that a Muslim from Pattani can set her career goals very high in a society that continues to see her religious customs as a barrier to her assimilation. The sea and the life it provides, while obstructing the freedom of material and social advancement in the larger Thai society, bestow the freedom to practice one’s religion and culture in the manner one chooses among a community of one’s own. That may be just enough.


Fed Up: Cultivating Elk and Acrimony in Wyoming

$
0
0

Overnight, a storm has moved in. The talons of Teton Range grip the squall, holding it in place. The clouds shed weight, desperate to be free of the mountains; a heavy snow has been falling all morning and shows no signs of abating. The landscape is largely obscured, indiscriminate.

Out of this washed-out emptiness emerges shadow after shadow: a long line of elk, nose to rump, heads bent against the January storm. The animals are healthy and sleek, stepping with an assured grace that comes from six months of browsing the high-elevation meadows found in and around Yellowstone National Park. These lands –– Yellowstone and Grand Teton National Park, along with the surrounding national forests and wildlife refuges in Wyoming, Idaho and Montana –– constitute the Greater Yellowstone Ecosystem, an area heralded as the final mostly intact ecosystem of the temperate northern hemisphere. The largest wild ungulate herds of the contiguous United States roam these lands, and of these herds –– pronghorn, mule deer, and bison amongst them –– none is more renowned than the Jackson Elk Herd.

An elk strolls through a wintry Yellowstone National Park. Photo by Ben Goldfarb.

Now that winter has arrived in force, the line of elk is seeking refuge in valleys, snaking south through a wide, flat landscape framed by mountains and buttes. The herd is just north of Jackson, Wyoming, and, were the storm to blow through and the air to return to a pristine, frozen-dry clarity, it would be clear that the elk cannot continue south: the town of Jackson sits nested in a bottleneck formed by a finger of the Gros Ventre mountains and a series of buttes unfurling to the west. This bustling community and the sprawling luxury homes that surround it sever a migration route that historically brought elk to the lower elevation Red Desert of southwestern Wyoming. Now the elk are blocked, cut off from shelter by human civilization.

Yet despite their entrapment, these elk have little reason to fear the winter settling around them. An engine grinds and snorts to life: muffled yet distinct even in the falling snow, the engine’s growl is a sure sign that, here at the National Elk Refuge, dinner is about to be served.

The rumbling engine sites in the hulking, boxy form of a Caterpillar Challenger, a behemoth of an earth-moving machine painted a soiled shade of yellow. Hitched to the rear is a 20-foot tow trailer, heaped high with alfalfa pellets.

Once it’s warmed up, the Challenger makes long passes, north to south, south to north, grinding the fresh snow beneath its treaded track. Elk, hundreds of elk, mill about undisturbed. Without any hint of fear, the animals move grudgingly to avoid collisions and seamlessly merge again behind the towering, exhaust-spewing machine as it passes. The elk seem only to see the alfalfa pellets that pour through spouts at the bottom of the towed trailer: six pounds of alfalfa rationed to each animal daily. The Challenger is feeding the elk.

The feed is laid out in long rows, side by side, as if the Challenger were planting a field of corn. And, indeed, a crop is being grown here; for in many ways this scene, equal parts ironic and iconic, represents a form of cultivation. The Jackson Elk Herd, which spends half the year pawing at the wildest lands that can be found in the lower 48, are eating alfalfa pellets left in the treaded path of a fourteen-ton Caterpillar Challenger.

***

The Teton Range looms over the land just outside Jackson.

Jackson, Wyoming, is a tourist town built for those who chase the mystique of cowboy boots and the wild west. The sign atop Teton Pass welcomes the road-weary crossing from Idaho into Wyoming: “Howdy Stranger, Yonder is Jackson Hole, The Last of the Old West.”

And strangers do come, in a steady stream of summer traffic coursing past a small square that marks the heart of Jackson. This square is largely open, save for a smattering of trees and four curiously constructed arches that mark its four corners.

Each arch is ten feet wide, reaches to a height of 13 feet, and is a pointed latticework fashioned out of nearly 2,000 elk antlers.

The antler portal into Jackson’s town square. Image courtesy of Flickr user dw_ross.

Jackson and its town square are surrounded by North America’s greatest density of wildlife and a geology that defies logic –– the abrupt Tetons rising dissonantly from the planar valley –– yet this seems to be the one picture that folks must have: the smiling family, decked out in ten-gallon hats, framed in an elk-antlered arch.

That thousands of elk antlers are so prominently displayed in the town’s center is no accident. More than any other wild animal, elk symbolize Jackson’s old west aura –– unlike grizzlies or wolves that were hunted from the landscape, elk have conspicuously flourished here over the last hundred years. Jackson lends its name to the elk herd, and the elk unwittingly reciprocate, granting the town its wild-west frontier allure.

In many ways, the town of Jackson has become synonymous with the National Elk Refuge, the winter home of the elk herd. The Refuge, established in 1912, is a crown jewel in the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service’s National Wildlife Refuge system. As the National Elk Refuge celebrates its centennial, it annually welcomes nearly 1 million visitors, all of whom pass through Jackson. The town and the Refuge share a common boundary, a boundary as sharply defined as the eight-foot high fence that runs between them, the town to the south and the refuge to the north. Though the fence line runs straight, the human and natural histories of the landscape have long been intertwined.

***

The National Elk Refuge feeds 7,000 elk and annually welcomes one million human visitors.

The National Elk Refuge is a product of Jackson’s geography. The wildness of Greater Yellowstone affords elk nearly unlimited summer range, and these animals spread through almost 1 million acres in June, July and August. Come winter, though, piling snow drives the herd down to the finite forage of valley bottoms. But even these valleys sit at high elevations, and none are perched higher than Jackson Hole. At 6,300 feet, the line between survival and starvation is razor-thin: during the valley’s harsh winters, forage is scarce even in the best conditions.

This isolating geography also delayed human settlement of Jackson Hole. But when homesteaders did arrive in the 1890s, the impact on elk was dramatic and immediate. Longtime residents recall stories passed down from those first winters of the 20th Century when, it is said, one could walk a mile on the backs of dead elk without ever once stepping on the ground.

Such winter mortality was caused by starvation. What once had been winter forage was being cut by homesteaders, mounded as hay, and fed to livestock. Elk, ever adaptable, soon joined livestock around the mounded hay. Where cattle had originally preempted elk forage, now elk were commandeering livestock feed. But such pillaging by ravenous elk herds left cattle hungry and created an untenable situation: if ranchers successfully razed elk off feedlines, the elk starved; if the elk joined the livestock on the hay, the ranchers faced economic ruin.

As the first decade of the 20th Century drew to a close, residents of the valley sought a solution befitting their ranching heritage: to protect livestock feedlines without condemning elk to starvation, the residents would feed the elk herd. A 1912 Congressional act built upon this local foundation by creating the National Elk Refuge and allocating federal funding to the feeding project.

What was reactionary in 1912 has evolved to accepted practice and is now fully embedded in the culture of Jackson. The Refuge feeds around 7,000 elk every winter. But the feeding is not confined by the boundaries of the Refuge, and Wyoming’s Game and Fish Department feeds an additional 13,000 to 15,000 elk annually at 22 other feedgrounds scattered throughout western Wyoming. The state has gotten so skilled at feeding elk that it even lends a hand on the federally managed National Elk Refuge, assuming 50% of the annual cost of the Refuge’s feeding. And in some ways, this acculturated practice has been successful: the winter die-off of elk is dramatically reduced –– die-off averages just over one percent –– and ranchers are assured that harvested hay will fatten livestock.

***

The daunting mountains of the Gros Ventre Wilderness drive elk toward Jackson.

But while feeding elk is part of Jackson’s culture, the practice is not universally embraced. Supplemental feeding has released a Pandora’s box of vexing problems. The conservation ethic that permeates the origins of feeding –– the desire to prevent the wild animals from starving –– is now threatening the health and sustainability of the herd. The siren’s call of a free meal congregates elk in large, dense groups on feedgrounds, incubating and rapidly spreading diseases, many of which can be transmitted to livestock. Feeding, by enhancing the reproductive success of elk, also encourages a much larger herd than the landscape can support. Many fear that elk are over-browsing the winter habitat and degrading the Jackson Hole area.

In the face of these elk management problems, everyone in western Wyoming seems convinced that a simple solution exists: their own. The conservation-minded crowd is desperate to cease winter feeding to maintain a healthy and wild elk population. Outfitters and hunters insist that feeding is the only reason that a healthy –– and huntable –– herd remains. Most ranchers hold as gospel that feeding is the only way to segregate elk and cattle to prevent the spread of pathogens into livestock herds. And wildlife managers from both the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and Wyoming Game and Fish find themselves in the unenviable position of navigating a minefield of entrenched opinion.

The dialogue around elk management has fractured under the strain of these competing solutions. Folks rail against bureaucracy: the draconian regulations of federal agencies, many claim, are perpetuating elk problems. Others insist that elk management only became problematic after conservationists and their leftist special interests arrived to use the iconic animal as a tool to invalidate the ranching lifestyle. Many maintain that scientists are creating problems where none truly exist: why, if nothing catastrophic has yet happened, are we so concerned? Still others believe that science is too often ignored, and that the results of research clearly reveal how to resolve the problems.

The acrimony embedded in these entrenched opinions has become so polarizing that people can no longer even discuss their differences. The breakdown in dialogue has shifted the debate to the courts, and the future of elk management is now largely being decided by our legal system. Most recently, conservation organizations sued the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, arguing that the agency has yet to accurately assess whether the feeding program is threatening the Refuge’s ecological health.

Intent on finding people who could help me better understand elk management questions and the competing perspectives of the people involved, I settled into Jackson for two months. I arrived an outsider, a New Englander, and undoubtedly left the same. As one individual warned me, the ranchers and outfitters have all but had it with people talking to them about closing elk feedgrounds. But I found the opposite: nearly everyone was warm, friendly and generous with their time –– and their opinions.

I visited the offices of conservationists –– low-ceilinged burrows with walls seemingly reinforced by an overlapping array of habitat requirement maps, and filled with well-worn chairs buried beneath stacks of scientific reports and articles. I sat across coffee tables from fourth and fifth generation Wyoming ranchers with the slow, easy speech of those accustomed to endless landscapes unfurling before them. I walked past mounted trophy fish and game animals to find the back offices of state and federal wildlife managers, their desks little-worn due to the owners’ long hours afield. I sat beside windows overlooking the serrated Tetons and listened to tales of the landscape’s history told by outfitters, those whose livelihood depends on knowing the land better than the next guy.

To have these conversations, though, I needed to know the landscape. So upon hitting the ground in Jackson, I turned to the land: I needed to see a feedground.

 ***

As the crow flies, I am a scant eight miles from the National Elk Refuge. I step out of the car, sluggishly stretching and squinting even behind dark sunglasses. The wash of highway air drains from my ears, fading into the openness of the South Park Habitat Management Area. It is warm, the mercury nudging north of 80 degrees, and brilliantly sunny; yet the air is unburdened by moisture and gently stirs on an unfurling breeze. I am comfortable if I stay in the shade: a perfect day so typical of summer in Jackson Hole.

Before me stand four open-sided, rectangular sheds, each measuring perhaps 100 feet by 20 feet. The sheds are simple. Twenty-two unfinished logs support a corrugated metal roof held some 20 feet above bare soil. The lodgepole pine logs, limbed and stripped of bark, are weathered to a sterile gray.

The South Park Feedground.

This is one of the 22 feedgrounds run by the Wyoming Game and Fish Department, and, December through April, approximately 1,000 elk will gather here. Already hay is being stored for the coming winter. One shed is nearly two-thirds full with large round bales, each weighing in excess of 800 pounds, and two other sheds hold incomplete rows of smaller square bales. The final shed remains empty, awaiting the next harvest. There is no Challenger here. This hay will be spread daily from a horse-drawn sleigh over the winter, an antiquated approach that persists out of respect for the biting cold of a Jackson winter: machinery doesn’t always start at twenty below.

Jackson is obscured to the north behind a roll of the land, but, just across a wire fence line, a small herd of cattle grazes lazily upon summer grasses. These sheds appear perfectly situated in an agrarian landscape. The rough-hewn utility of the structures and the veneer of minimalistic maintenance reflect the hard-scrabbled truths of the agricultural lifestyle –– time is always too short and money stretched too thin.

But if you stand with your back to the sheds and look southwest, the landscape is vibrating with the natural rhythms of the wild. Though there hasn’t been any rain in nearly a month, the land seems brushed in emeralds. A streamside mosaic of grasses and sedges flourish; a cold, wet spring has yielded a strong and lasting snowmelt runoff. Flat Creek, a stone’s throw from where I stand, is running full yet finally showing signs of settling into the pellucid riffle-and-run rhythm that shelters one of the few remaining populations of Snake River cutthroat trout.

This is the landscape in which the elk are fed. Although no elk are present here on this summer afternoon, the simple wire fence is an inconsequential division. Elk move at will over these lands and can graze ranched grasses as readily as wild forage. Elk and livestock are side-by-side on this simple landscape of South Park. And therein lies the many issues facing elk management in western Wyoming.

***

When an inconsequential wire fence is all that separates wild and cultivated animals, elk management conversations will invariably turn to the transmission of disease from wildlife to livestock. And while brucellosis has long been the disease of primary concern, a new, potentially more frightening threat is edging into conversations: chronic wasting disease.

Brucellosis is a livestock disease that was accidentally introduced into wildlife populations over 100 years ago. The disease has been all but eradicated nationally, with the sole remaining reservoir being Greater Yellowstone’s elk and bison herds. Congregated wildlife experience spikes in infection rates, and feeding practices that concentrate elk during the winter are exacerbating the situation: while brucellosis infects only 1 to 2% of free-ranging elk populations in the Greater Yellowstone, the disease prevalence can jump to nearly 30% on feedgrounds. In livestock and wildlife alike, infected females abort their first pregnancy following exposure to brucellosis. Due to federal regulations still bent on fully eradicating the disease, when elk re-transmit brucellosis back to livestock, ranchers essentially must slaughter infected livestock herds, destroying prized cattle breeding lines decades in the making.

Though brucellosis is a serious problem, the impacts of chronic wasting disease may be truly devastating if the worst predictions come to fruition. While infection rates are low rate in free-ranging elk, many fear that chronic wasting disease might spread to 60% or more of individuals in dense feedground congregations, with frightening implications. The disease is fatal because its infecting agent, a protein molecule called a prion, eats through brain tissue. Most frightening, the infecting agent needs no host to survive: the disease can persist in the soil for decades.

Chronic wasting disease was first found in wild elk populations in the 1980s and is spreading inexorably west across Wyoming. Now that it has been found within 50 miles of the National Elk Refuge, the fear is that if –– or perhaps more realistically, when –– chronic wasting disease arrives on the Refuge, it will decimate the Jackson Elk Herd, leaving the Refuge contaminated and empty. Would the visitors that drive the Jackson economy continue to come if the valley was barren, devoid of wildlife?

The disease problem, though, is only the first layer in conversations about elk management. Residents and visitors alike have come to expect a large, healthy, and active elk herd on the Refuge come December. Many in Jackson believe that a dead elk, any dead elk, means that the wildlife managers have made a mistake. Though feeding allows more elk to survive, not all people agree that an artificially large herd is desirable. Many worry that the National Elk Refuge is now ecologically imperiled because intensified browsing is overtaxing native species, particularly the streamside cottonwoods and aspens.

Inherent in this concern over the ecological health of the Refuge is a question: how large should the elk population be? The Wyoming Game and Fish Department weighs this question in establishing population objectives to guide elk management. Many believe that management is purely a matter of hitting these targets. Although the Jackson Herd population objective is set at 11,000 elk, the current population of 14,000 to 15,000 animals far exceeds that goal. And though hunting is the primary tool used to adjust the number of elk, Jackson’s matrix of multi-million dollar housing developments ––many with anti-hunting covenants –– makes maintaining hunting access difficult. Many feel that the constrained hunting situation thwarts effective management.

***

As I heard about an array of problems with elk management –– disease, die-off, habitat degradation, population objectives, hunting access, and so on –– I began to observe a similarity beneath the diversity of issues: the “problems” were almost uniformly focused on aspects of elk biology or ecology. But the more I listened, the more certain I became: the problem isn’t really about the elk.

Collectively, the described problems are expressions of an underlying human conflict over how the landscape should be used. And perhaps even more problematic, who gets to decide? These two questions –– how should we use the landscape and who calls the shots –– are the root of the elk management problem in western Wyoming.

This undercurrent of human decision-making and conflict made my conversations, so colored by entrenched ideology and an eagerness to pile blame on others, exhausting. I heard competing claims repeated, and repeated again, a cycling pattern upon which the conversation has clearly ground to a halt. Should the landscape’s wildness be preserved undiminished without trace of human hand?Should the region be the exclusive domain of a rugged frontier hunting culture? Or should the wilderness be tamed to the utilitarian order of agricultural heritage? Should the elk be fed or should the wild animals roam free and unaided by humans?

Still, as draining as these conversations could be, I was buoyed to find a common human thread in almost every instance. Despite the animosity and ingrained opinions, I found a nearly universal emotional bond to elk in those who call Jackson home: the local population loves elk and cares very deeply about the future of the herd.

The dichotomy of the situation –– a communal love for an iconic animal, yet contrasting and competing perspectives on how each person values the landscape –– is perplexing. On one hand the polarizing perspectives are demoralizing and suggest that the dispute is irresolvable. But in the universal connection to the land and the animals that populate it, I see a ray of hope: is it possible to lean on this common emotion to gain traction on intractable conservation problems?

***

My summer of conversations did not culminate in a single epiphanic moment, but as I gathered ever more perspectives on Wyoming’s management of wild elk, I noticed a subtle shift in how I thought about conservation. This shift had rather mundane origins: the breakfast table and a bowl of oatmeal.

In the last weeks of June, as I was settling into Jackson, I would begin my morning gazing mindlessly out a window over a bowl of oatmeal. A small birdfeeder hung in the eave of the house and, each morning, I watched a western tanager perch upon the feeder as Jackson’s thin air warmed to the morning sun.

The western tanager is of medium size and resembles an American goldfinch through most of its plumage –– vividly yellow with black wings and a jet-black tail. What distinguishes the western tanager, though, is that its head is breathtakingly red, a red utterly unnatural in its brilliance.

Each morning for two weeks, I watched a tanager alight and feed. The house’s owner made sure the birdfeeder was continually filled, a conscious decision that I gave no thought to at the time. But as the summer passed, I found myself thinking back to those tanagers, and I gradually realized that perhaps the feeding of Jackson’s elk is not so shockingly extraordinary after all. We’ve all witnessed the artificial cultivation of the wild at backyard birdfeeders throughout America.

***

The dramatic landscape of Willow Flats, an area frequented by the Jackson Elk Herd.

Despite our familiarity with the cultivation of birdfeeders, the elk’s cultivation feels different. And the inherent incongruence in this practice –– the feeding of pelletized alfalfa to supremely wild elk inhabiting one of the world’s most sublime landscapes –– poses the question: don’t we all cultivate the wild,or at least the image of wildness?

The supplemental feeding program, though it has been around so long that few seem to remember the origins, is the manifestation of a particular vision for a human relationship to the natural world: preserving a wildlife herd symbolic of the landscape’s essence without disrupting the economic and cultural qualities of a growing frontier community.

Perhaps, then, management of Jackson’s elk is a microcosm of conservation writ large. Conservation, at its core, is a question of human decision-making: should we utilize the world’s natural resources for our benefit, or should we leave resources untainted by human hand?

This centrality of human decision-making is often missing from conservation efforts. Conservation need not bear the imprimatur of a leading academic institution or government agency, nor is conservation reliant on elaborate priority area maps or mathematically modeled population viability assessments. Conservation is not distinguished scientific experts analyzing ecological research to identify the one correct course of action. Rather, conservation is a community creating a collective vision to govern human interactions with a landscape. Conservation is not about managing elk –– it is about managing people.

Yet, simply asserting that elk management is a problem of human decisions is not to suggest that it has an easy solution. Elk management is complex, and the biological challenges are real and difficult. Refocusing on the process through which human decisions are made does not suddenly make these biological problems disappear –– it simply suggests an alternate path, one focused on ourselves.

Managing people is not about prohibiting or ostracizing activities like hunting or ranching that may differ from a traditional conservation perspective. Rather, the alternate path that opens the potential for a new future of conservation turns on a question: can we recognize that people do have different perspectives, and, as importantly, that it is fine to have these differences?

If these questions are to be answered in the affirmative, we must strive to improve the way we interact as communities. An alternate path of conservation focuses on a process in which participants co-create decisions that reflect the valid demands, expectations and values of the entire community. We, as conservationists and citizens, must foster civil arenas for dialogue in which all participants can voice a perspective, engaging as humans, as neighbors, and not as ideological mouthpieces. Successful conservation turns on our ability to recognize one another as individuals with valid identities, perspectives, and concerns. Respectful relationships forged across differences establish the foundation of a community’s problem-solving capacity, and once built, open the possibility for productive conversations about real biological and ecological challenges, like disease and habitat degradation.

In two months in Jackson I spoke with people across all perspectives, but I continually heard a common theme: elk belong on the landscape. As one rancher unabashedly told me, “Part of the reason I’m in this business is so that I can be out as the sun comes up, watching elk move across the land.” Common ground exists, as elk are iconic animals to all who live in Jackson –– rancher, hunter and environmentalist alike.

The dialogue surrounding the future of the Jackson Elk Herd remains a cacophony of immobile, entrenched differences –– that the herd’s health depends on ceasing the feeding, that elk must be fed to be healthy, that feeding is the only way to prevent disease transmission to livestock. And as long as our management focus is on elk and not people, contention will persist in western Wyoming. Yet in this mess lies hope: if conservation is simply about human decisions, we can strive to improve the way we make decisions by focusing on human interactions. Managing people brings the underlying decision-based conflict –– how we use the resources and who get to decide –– into focus, and allows us to address the fundamental conflict that makes conservation work so exhaustingly reactive and incremental. What matters is not what is decided, but rather how we pursue decisions: can we ease and then reverse polarization and ideological entrenchment to create a durable future for our natural and cultural resources?

***

The sky hangs draped over the Tetons, the peaks obscured in dense clouds. Spring has been slow to come to Jackson’s high mountain valley, and we’ve packed warm layers even though it’s June. Still, the day is meant for hiking: the cool air is just short of raw and once we start moving I am comfortable in shorts and a thermal top. We left the car where a gate barred the road and are walking north on the graveled road toward Two Ocean Lake in Grand Teton National Park. We’ve driven the 40 miles north from town to look for elk –– and grizzly, if the precise six-inch wide tracks on the road’s margin are as fresh as they appear.

The elk have long since moved off the Refuge, but they’re still lingering at the lower elevations; the newborn calves, born in late May, are not yet ready to follow the greening forage to higher ground. We stop and glass a small group of elk a half-mile west of the road, feeding contentedly on meadow grass, tucked close to the sheltering security of an aspen stand. Though the animals are languidly browsing uphill of us, they are clearly alert to our presence.

As I study the refracted images of elk moving with a soft elegance through the glass of the binoculars, it occurs to me that the graveled road upon which we stand may be closed today, but tomorrow it will be open. A turned key and swinging gate are the result of human decisions, of which elk have had neither input nor warning.

The animals on the landscape do not –– cannot –– logically know of or follow this decision-making, but they must feel the truth that human decisions shape their future. This small band of elk will retreat to higher, wilder land tomorrow as the once-gated road yields to vehicles ferrying hikers and fishermen to and fro.

In the elegance of the elk I have come to see conservation as simply a series of human decisions about the use of natural resources. Conservation, then, must focus not on managing elk but rather on managing people. Acrimony will pervade conservation projects unless we can reshape our human interactions to build a foundation of respect on the recognition and acceptance of the diverse perspectives that we all hold. The more tangible issues that dominate conservation conversations –– problems like disease, die-off, habitat degradation, and population objectives –– can be hammered out upon this foundation as we pursue collective agreements that reflect the common interests of the community.

Perhaps hulking Caterpillar Challengers will continue to dole out a daily ration of alfalfa, or perhaps the elk will be left unaided to make what they can from the vagaries of the world. But this question is of secondary concern. If conservation is to succeed in a world of increasingly polarized worldviews, we must think explicitly about how we create our decisions. Managing people is currently outside the purview of conservation, but the elk of Jackson tell us that focusing our attention merely on elk –– or any other wildlife species –– won’t bring conservation successes.

All photos by Jon Peterson unless otherwise noted.

Scratch the Salmon, I’ll Have the Sea Robin

$
0
0

Ed. note: this article originally appeared in The Inquisitive Eater under the title “Fishing with the Phils.”

Perhaps it’s because farms are more visible than fishing vessels, or because there are more agricultural towns in America than seafaring communities, but the locavorism that has transformed the farming industry has mostly failed to touch the business of seafood. Farmed salmon, shrimp, and tilapia, all imported great distances, retain their stranglehold on our diets, and while there are hundreds, if not thousands, of Community-Supported Agriculture arrangements in this country, the sum total of Community-Supported Fisheries can be counted on fingers and toes. Most people seem to care more about where their tomatoes come from than where their swordfish does, and I think that needs to be rectified.

Which is why I drive, under cover of darkness one Friday morning, through pine barrens and potato fields, to the North Fork of Long Island.

My headlights catch a small white sign adorned with a hand-painted bluefish, and I swing into the driveway of Phil Karlin, one of Long Island’s longest-tenured farmer-fishermen and the owner of PE and DD Seafood. When I step out of my car the early summer air is ripe with horse manure and dead fish; across the dark yard I hear the talons of restless chickens scratching against wooden floors.

Karlin emerges from behind his truck, a white boxy thing whose engine is already running. “Benny boy, is that you?” he calls to my silhouette; he strides up and pumps my hand. He’s a short, vigorous man in his early 70’s, dressed in painter’s pants and a light sweatshirt covered in ambiguous stains. Ragged cats curl around our ankles as we load the truck with the heads and guts of yesterday’s catch, destined for the compost pile of a neighboring vineyard.

“Today we’re goin’ draggin’ for fluke,” he says as he slides the last of the reeking crates into the back of his truck, his gravelly voice unmistakably Long Island. “I set some sea bass pots, too, sometimes. Porgies, stripers. We’re pretty diversified. I do a little bit of lobstering, but not much anymore –– it’s been real poor the last couple years.”

After briefly stopping at the vineyard to unload the carcasses, we head down to the dock at Mattituck, an erstwhile fishing town of about 4,000 souls. Phil Karlin, it turns out, is actually Phil Junior, and his son, Phil III, meets us at the dock. The younger Phil is the recent founder of North Fork Smoked Fish Company, for which he catches bluefish and striped bass on rod-and-reel and smokes them in his own home. Before that, he worked for the National Response Center in Louisiana, helping set booms and skim the oil that bubbled from the Deepwater Horizon blowout –– a far more lucrative job than running his smoked fish company, but he doesn’t miss it. “Nothing like being your own boss,” he says fondly, gulping his coffee.

As we cruise west along the North Fork, the rising orange sun silhouetting the trawling gear on our stern, Phil the Elder explains how the region’s fishing regulations work. In April and May, according to the National Marine Fisheries Service, Phil is allowed to catch 210 pounds of fluke, also known as summer flounder, every day. Beginning in June, though, that number drop to 140 pounds. “That’s not a whole lot,” Phil says, his eyes locked on the bobbing horizon. “Of course, you need conservation, but our quotas are very low. There’s been a lot of boats that have been put out of business. You don’t have half the fleet in New York State that you did fifteen years ago.”

We return to a favorite spot of his –– a shelf, only about fifteen feet deep, where he’s had good luck with fluke in the past. Phil the Elder barks orders at his son as they lower the net; Phil the Younger, an accomplished fisherman in his forties, bristles good-naturedly at his father’s commands. “Would you be quiet and let me do this?” he yells as he guides the net off the winch, though he’s smiling. He turns to me and shakes his head. “Been like this since I was ten years old.”

We tow the net behind the boat for fifteen minutes and then winch it up. As the net rises from the Sound we see fluke, their brown backs gleaming in the early light, flapping in the mesh. The winch cranks the belly of the net on board and we rush to the bulging bag to ease it open, and its contents spill out across the deck for our perusal.

It’s a good haul –– plenty of lively fluke, broader than dinner plates, and about as flat. Along with the targeted species, the trawl deposits a panoply of other creatures onto the deck: two silvery striped bass; one black sea bass; a few fat porgies; a small delicate flatfish called a daylight flounder; and goggle-eyed, rust-colored sea robins, their winglike pectoral fins splayed wide. At least half a dozen species of crabs clamber around the deck, picking their way through the empty shells of moon snails and whelks that litter the floor of the boat.

“Go time, Bugsy!” yells the oldest Phil –– for reasons known only to him, he’s decided to call me Bugsy. “Grab those fluke! Grab ‘em! Two hands, two hands!” I scramble around the deck in pursuit of the flapping fish, whose irregular shape makes them almost impossible to grasp. They slide through my fingers and slap wetly against the floor. The net, hanging from the winch above us, splatters my exposed head with seawater and dollops of vegetation. All around me is writhing, slippery chaos, the sea’s mysteries unveiled and strewn across our feet, gasping creatures somersaulting back toward the Sound from whence they came.

The younger Phil kneels beside me, trying to wrap his hands around the full belly and narrow tailstock of a striped bass –– its sleek, silver body the Platonic ideal of a fish, as elegantly designed as the fluke is ungainly. The pair of stripers we’ve landed are gorgeous, but the commercial bass season doesn’t begin until July 1. So over the sides they go, vanished with one powerful stroke beneath the gunmetal water. I watch them disappear, locked in a kind of reverie, trying to imagine these same fish rejoining their comrades, great schools of them migrating together along the coast to New England…

“Bugsy, what the hell are you doing, Bugsy?” Older Phil hollers. “Get those fluke in the bucket, Bugsy!”

I turn my attention back to the writhing mass of fluke, no less vigorous for having been out of the water for several minutes. I finally corral a fish and coax it into a red bucket with a few of its unlucky friends. Fluke that measure below 14 inches go back into the sea, and make a beeline for the benthos from whence they came.

Soon all the keeper-sized fish are in the red bucket. We then transfer the fluke into a gigantic wooden box filled with seawater, an ad hoc live well designed to keep our catch vivacious for the rest of the trip. Fluke delivered alive and kicking to the dock are worth twice as much as dead ones. After the net itself, the live well is one of the most important pieces of equipment Phil Karlin has on board.

Once the fluke are stacked like unhappy flapjacks in the live well, we turn our attention to the other species still squirming on the deck. The black sea bass and the bluefish will both yield great filets –– many people claim not to like bluefish, finding it too, well, fishy; but I think it’s delicious. The spherical moon snails and the twisting whelks all wind up in a bucket of their own, destined for Asian supermarkets in New York.

The sea robins –– huge-eyed, splay-finned, whisker-chinned, freakish in every way –– are packed into another crate and entombed beneath ice. I’ve never eaten sea robin, and they have a reputation as a trash fish, a perception furthered by their strange appearance; but their stout bodies reportedly contain tasty meat, and they’re a staple of bouillabaisse. And sure enough, Phil knows a French chef at a local hotel who makes the dish, and is happy to take the odd creatures off his hands.

Everything else that has come aboard –– the hundreds of empty, slime-furred shells, the skates, the uncountable spider crabs, hermit crabs, blue crabs, and green crabs whose legions spread across the deck on jointed legs –– is swept back into the ocean with a push-broom, leaving behind a dark streak of muck and a few doggedly clinging crabs that fail to realize it’s time to go home.

We make four more hauls of the net, none quite as successful as the first, and then Phil Senior decides to call it a day. It is not yet noon. The live well is crammed to the sloshing brim with fluke. Nearly every living thing we extracted from the sea is either destined for the dinner table or has been returned, alive, to its domain. A handful of spider crabs, crushed underfoot during the scramble to round up the fluke, are the sum total of the collateral damage.

***

Whether the fluke fishery is sustainable is impossible for me, a total outsider, to say. Certainly we’ve taken many fluke today –– around 300 pounds of the fish, accounted for by Phil’s 210-pound quota plus the extra pounds that he purchased at auction. And the bobbing white vessels that dot the horizon like seabirds, they’ve taken fluke too. Like they did yesterday, and like they will tomorrow. And these are only the eight or so boats that fish out of Mattituck ­­–– how many fish must all of Long Island’s fishermen be extracting every year? The National Marine Fisheries Service has set the 2012 Total Allowable Catch at nearly a million pounds of fluke, and you can bet fishermen aren’t catching less than the law entitles them to. When I remark to the younger Phil that it seems like we had a pretty good day, he shakes his head and stares out to sea, gazing at a gargantuan foreign tanker and the flock of tugboats that hovers around it. “This is a fraction of what it used to be,” he says. “A fraction.”

But that’s the ocean-half-empty perspective –– and on the other hand, shouldn’t we be heartened by the fact that there are still, even after all these decades of relentless extraction, a million pounds of fluke to haul up? How many of the species must remain, and how rapidly must they reproduce, that their population can sustain this fishery? Despite all the damage we’ve inflicted upon them, the seas in New York City’s backyard remain fecund, and that should be cause to celebrate.

Conservationists, of which I am undeniably one, are fond of wringing their hands over the state of the world’s fisheries, and there’s plenty of reason to hand-wring. As many as 90% of the planet’s large predatory fish have vanished, and, depending on whose research you believe, somewhere between 10% of 30% of fish stocks have collapsed entirely.

But the outlook for American fisheries may not be so grim –– in a New York Times op-ed last year, fisheries biologist Ray Hilborn made the case that most of the nation’s fish stocks are recovering, nursed back to health by strong legislation and sensible management. The striped bass that we caught, for instance, were the beneficiaries of a moratorium on fishing passed in the 1980’s, a drastic measure that transformed one of the country’s most imperiled populations into one of its most robust.

Despite its salutary effects on the fish, however, aggressive conservation hasn’t always benefited small-scale fishermen like Phil Karlin. Recent regulations in New England, for example, hailed by environmental groups as a potential panacea for the region’s troubled fisheries, have forced hundreds of artisanal fishers to quit the business, their quota allocations snapped up by huge industrial seafood companies. In New York, chronically low quotas have forced veteran fishermen into early retirement and prevented aspiring young fishermen from joining the industry. “It’s very difficult for somebody starting out today to get into the fishing business in New York State,” Phil says. “Almost impossible.”

Not only is the proliferation of industrial fishing vessels bad news for employment, it’s also bad news for the fish. Industrial fisheries have far higher rates of bycatch than small-scale, artisanal fishermen. The reasons for the discrepancy were obvious during my short trip with Phil Karlin. Industrial boats tow their nets for hours at a time, engulfing tens of thousands, if not millions, of fish –– many of which die in the net, crushed by sheer biomass pressed into such close quarters. Smaller boats, on the other hand, drag their nets for much shorter intervals –– Phil’s longest tow was only twenty minutes, ensuring that everything that came up in the net was still alive and capable of being released. And because smaller operations deal with only hundreds of organisms at a time, instead of hundreds of thousands, it’s far easier to pick out non-target species and immediately return them to the water. Phil couldn’t miss those two glistening striped bass atop his modest pile of fluke; but if the bass had been buried beneath a mountain of fluke, it’s doubtful that they could have been saved.

Finally, small-scale fishermen are often more connected to local markets, allowing them to find outlets for species that many dismiss as “trash fish.” Industrial boats have the luxury of singling out one species and relentlessly pursuing it: even if anchovies fetch less than a dollar a pound, catching a million pounds of anchovies will still allow a seafood company to turn a profit. But because fishermen like Phil can’t catch more than a few hundred pounds of anything, it behooves them to seek out all available markets –– even if that market is just a single French chef at a single hotel looking for a batch of sea robins for his bouillabaisse. If those sea robins had been caught by an industrial boat, the transaction never would have happened; instead, the robins would likely have been killed and wasted.

Yet all too often, consumers are unwilling to make use of the fish that flourish in their own backyards, unwittingly sabotaging local fishermen through their purchasing habits. “Porgies used to be a species that New York fishermen did very well on,” says Phil. “But a few years ago a lot of people went to tilapia and stuff like that, farm-raised fish that they can get cheaper than the wild fish. And now when a lot of porgies come on the market, there’s just no real demand for them. The price is so cheap that you can’t make a living.”

***

Two ospreys leap from their enormous aerie as we approach the dock, flashing their snowy plumage. A man named Kim, who operates a seafood distributorship and speaks little English, awaits us; he rummages through the still-living fluke in search of the healthiest specimens, which he tosses into another live well in the belly of his truck. “Pretty nice, huh?” Phil says to Kim, who smiles cryptically, scrawls a number in pencil onto a sheet of paper, and departs.

Back at Phil’s property, we offload the day’s catch. Unlike most fishermen, Phil owns a small plant that allows him to process and sell his own catch, a capacity that has helped keep him in business all these years. The processing plant is staffed by Phil’s immediate family –– another son, as well as a grandson –– and close friends; his wife runs the small store attached to the plant, which offers filets and fish salads. They won’t let me leave without taking a few pounds of fluke, and after a brief protest I acquiesce, fish tacos on my mind. “You’d better come back now, Bugsy,” Phil chides me as he holds the gate open. For sure, I tell him –– I wouldn’t miss striped bass season for anything.


An Ice Rink at 16,000 Feet

$
0
0

Editor’s Note: This piece won 3rd Prize in the first annual SAGE Magazine Young Environmental Writers Competition. 

Photo by A. Kathleen Higgins.

High in the Himalaya, Nepali and Ladakhi laborers pause for a moment from their backbreaking job of splitting rocks to watch civil engineer Chewang Norphel, 75, patiently check the level of the stonewall under construction. A teenage boy moves a thin pink string up and down as Mr. Norphel, gazing through a level mounted on a tripod, deems the stones satisfactory. The workers gather around Mr. Norphel as he sketches in the dirt with a stick and explains what needs to be done. “It is very important for the wall to be level,” he says. “Otherwise, the water will just come down one side, and then the freezing process is very slow and difficult.”

Colorful umbrellas dot the landscape in this high-altitude desert, shelter from the blazing July sun. Improbably enough, a square kilometer of ice will cover this same steep slope by December. Right now a backbone of stone bunds and empty cement irrigation canals trace a skeletal path down the slope. Beginning in October, metal gates will open, diverting some of the nearby glacial stream into Mr. Norphel’s canals. Over the next three months, these small diversions of water will flow through the canals and into a neighboring valley, where the stone walls will fraction the water into six small portions.

These small portions of water, like small ponds in a forest, will freeze solid well before larger rivers do. Once frozen, an additional layer of water is diverted to wash over these portions and link them together into a single mass of ice that starts to look like a hockey rink. More layers can then be added until it begins to resemble a glacier, though Mr. Norphel chuckles when recalling one year when he let too much water onto the frozen mass. Temperatures were warm, and the additional water turned the ice into slush. “We are always learning how to make it work better,” he said.

By the end of December an “artificial glacier” will have formed, a massive kilometer-long stretch of ice.

To Ladakhi children, it’s a dream ice hockey rink in their backyard. But, far more important, for farmers who can look ahead to the first buds of spring, this new fabricated glacier may mean an extra crop per season, or enough water to revive fields that have recently been left fallow due to diminishing water resources.As one quiet Ladakhi engineer, Mr. Nazir, puts it, “When there is no water there are no humans.” He chuckles as he says this, but there is sadness in his eyes.

Because the Tibetan Plateau is warming up on average two degrees Celsius faster than the rest of the world, the effects wrought by climate change are felt acutely in Ladakh. “I sweat more now when I am working in the fields. It is definitely warmer now than when I was young. Maybe this is climate change,” says one Ladakhi farmer, Tsering Tundup, of Rumbuk. “The whole valley here used to be covered in ice. When you went to town, you would have to decide if you should take the horses or the donkeys, because the horses slip more, and often they would break a leg on the ice and die there. The snow was so deep it covered the tops of the trees in the riverbed. Now we get maybe one foot of snow here.” Mr. Norphel has been listening to these anecdotes of climate change for years. “When I was young, ten or eleven, we had very heavy winters. All was fully covered in snow, and in the mountains at least eight to ten feet of snowfall. Now, the last four decades, we are having less snowfall. The glaciers are receding.” While climate change can be a political topic for some, Ladakhis roll their eyes at this idea, at the arguments that climate change is not happening. They only know what they see, and they see changes in the weather, in their water, and, ultimately, in the amount of food they produce to feed themselves.

The Himalayan Water Cycle & A Warming Climate

Despite the golden fields of barley rippling in the autumn breeze or the dark reds of apricot trees weighted down with fruit at summer’s end, Ladakh is a desert. Determined farmers in the rain shadow of the massive granite Himalayan massifs carve patches of green earth out of sun-bleached sand and rock. Situated on the Western edge of the Tibetan Plateau, Ladakh depends on the glacial melt flowing down from Himalayan glaciers. British mapmakers in the 1700s struggled to understand the complex watersheds of the region–the unexpected rivers springing from rocks, their sources somewhere in the sky. Ladakhis believe that the lu, or water spirit, causes the water to erupt from cliff faces and may leave if people become too greedy. To keep the lu content and the water flowing white silk scarves embossed with circular Buddhist symbols festoon ice-encased cliff faces, tied there at considerable risk to life and limb in a show of gratitude.

As spring arrives, the Ladakhi ready their fields in the lag between warming temperatures and the weeks when the water reaches the villages. Valley temperatures become warm enough to plough and sow the fields in March or April, depending on altitude; altitude also determines when the glacial melt reaches a village, as late as May or June in some places. Ladakhis are accustomed to the rhythms of this miserly environment, and make up for this short agricultural season by working from sunrise to sundown once the meltwater reaches their fields. Mr. Norphel explains the peculiar Ladakhi summer further, “The glaciers start melting in June. The sowing season begins in April and May. Summer season is very short, just a single crop. If the farmers don’t get the water at the right time, there is no crop that year.” Mr. Norphel’s artificial glaciers help smooth this uncertainty and provide water early to farmers who would otherwise wait weeks to sow their fields.

A period of relative calm follows in mid-summer, and then another flurry of activity in August through October during harvest. The last remnants of the glacial melt trickle down from the mountains in October, after final irrigation and harvest. Freezing occurs shortly after, with winter effectively halting the running clock of irrigation that drives Ladakhis to work twelve-hour days when water is available. In the stillness of winter, the cavernous family homes, quiet and empty during the summer days, become bustling hives of activity, families gathering around the kitchen stoves, enjoying the warmth and the fruits of their summer labor: barley flour noodles, carrots, and potatoes in thick stews.

In the past thirty years, Ladakhis have observed the strange flow of glacial streams through November and into December, a result of warmer fall temperatures. It remains too cold to grow anything, so the water purls through hibernating villages and down to the major rivers, primarily of the Indus watershed. It weaves through Ladakh and crosses the Indian border to Pakistan then disperses into the Bay of Bengal where the glaciers – in some way, Ladakhi livelihoods – are lost at sea. Observing this in 1985, Mr. Norphel began to wonder: What could Ladakhi villagers do with this unseasonal and wasted water?

A Man, A Plan, And Artificial Glaciers

When the seventy-five year old Mr. Norphel was growing up, Ladakh was an isolated oasis in the Himalaya. Most people carried out their lives never leaving the region. Without television, phone lines or electricity, their world was smaller. Yet Mr. Norphel’s parents knew that their son was especially smart; he had a knack for fixing things and was good at math even as a young child in the village elementary school. His parents made the difficult decision to send him away to school. They packed him a backpack of food and sent him over the mountains at the age of twelve, telling him to “walk down the mountain” until he reached the town of Leh, and from there to take a bus to Srinagar, in Kashmir.

In Srinagar he stayed with an uncle while attending high school. He came back to Ladakh years later after earning a degree in engineering, becoming one of the first educated Ladakhis. While many could have taken their education and run from rural life, Mr. Norphel returned to Ladakh and began working as a civil engineer for the government, whose early projects focused on irrigation in the cold, high-altitude desert. Although the government assigned him to design canal systems and water storage ponds, in the back of his mind he had another idea for how water could be stored

While walking around his property one winter, Mr. Norphel noticed that a small stream had frozen solid under the shade of a poplar grove, though it flowed elsewhere in his sunny yard. He suddenly had the inspiration to apply this natural principle to his work engineering irrigation systems. “The artificial glaciers are to supplement, not replace, the natural glaciers,” explains Mr. Norphel.

In the quiet of a winter weekend afternoon, at home in his backyard, Mr. Norphel had come upon an idea that could dramatically increase the amount of water Ladakhi villagers have available for agriculture. Upon reaching retirement, Mr. Norphel began to pursue this idea full time.

Photo by A. Kathleen Higgins.

In October and November above the villages of Ladakh, Mr. Norphel shifts large rocks and diverts fast-moving water from the main glacial stream into his canals. These stretch as far as a kilometer in some sites, winding around to reach a nearby unoccupied mountain valley. He shifts the rocks back into place after a few hours. Though temperatures reach the freezing point during those months, the main stream charges too quickly to ice over. Cold-climate homeowners who leave their pipes running through the night to prevent freezing are familiar with the simple principles of thermodynamics applied here: to discourage freezing, increase velocity; Mr. Norphel employs the reverse tenet: to encourage freezing, decrease velocity.

At the end of his canals in the empty valley, water slows to a trickle, gradually spreading over the cupped ground, and then it freezes in a series of small pools. Later, Mr. Norphel again shifts the big rock to allow more water into the valley. The ice thickens as this additional water freezes. He repeats this process again and again, adding inches of ice to the valley each time. The process is similar to creating a backyard ice skating rink. Patience and observation are required to avoid adding too much water, which creates a slushy pit.

The result is eventually a large mass of ice sitting in the valley. This ice, situated at much lower altitudes than natural glaciers, melts much earlier, providing irrigation water to farmers in the early spring.

Down By the River

More water means more food. In some villages agricultural yields have been declining along with decreasing amounts of glacial runoff. For these villages, caught on the precipice, even a small amount of additional water may allow them to stay in their ancient homes instead of moving down the mountain to be closer to the river and the city.

To live by the river is thought by most Ladakhis to be undesirable. The river water is considered dirty, not only because of the muddy color, but by virtue of the many people upstream using it in homes and fields. Ladakhis are notably conscious of good hygiene; to put ones’ mouth directly into a water source is to irreversibly pollute it. Living downstream from others is thus polluted territory.

The Indus River Valley is the urban center of Ladakh, called by some the “Crossroads of the Himalaya,” after the ancient spice trade routes that established the city. Teenagers view the internet cafes and shops hawking skinny jeans and black-and-white checkered sneakers as glamorous and modern, but parents bemoan the loss of culture when teenagers “hang out” with friends in internet cafes after school, instead of coming back home to milk the cows and help in the fields with their families. Yet with water decreasing, many families may need to reconsider city life and the Indus River, if the streams that feed their crops year after year continue to dwindle.

The village of Kumik, located in the remotest corner of Ladakh, a region called Zanskar, recently made the difficult decision to do exactly this. In 2001, a town meeting was called. The trickling water had run out a few weeks before the crops were due to be harvested, and crops had failed. It was a pattern that had repeated itself multiple times, and the villagers were seeing themselves in an increasingly precarious situation, forced to sell much of their livestock after yet another crop failure. At their town meeting the Kumikpas, as the people of Kumik are called, decided to move their village several kilometers away to land bordering the river. The land is flat and empty, barren of the hundreds of years of accumulated familial history, but it will provide water, and this is a tradeoff the Kumikpas felt pressed to make.

Artificial glaciers in this way may provide more than water; they may provide the next generation of Ladakhi youth with a reason to stay on their land, to resist the multiple forces pulling them down the mountain.

Artificial Glacier #3

It’s a chilly late-April morning and our Mazda school bus shudders to a halt on the steep incline for the third or fourth time. Forty or so Ladakhi high school students cheerfully and noisily spill out of the bus and prop rocks behind the wheels, then begin pushing behind the straining school bus. Across the dusty back window white letters spell out “LOVE WILL KEEP USALIVE.” The driver of the bus, who looks no more than sixteen years old, shouts directions over Bob Marley’s “No Woman No Cry” while revving the engine, and suddenly we begin to move uphill. There is a collective cheer, as students run alongside the slow-moving school bus and are pulled in by their friends; stragglers leap onto the ladder on the back and clamber onto the roof of the bus. We’re rolling again, slowly chugging up the vast mountain towards a bluebird sky, snowcapped peaks, and, somewhere in these barren brown hills, an artificial glacier.

Hours later, we’re still moving up hill, though now on foot. The school bus finally gave into gravity and remains stranded at a hairpin turn miles below. Ladakhi teens in hooded sweatshirts imprinted with the logos of skateboard companies and skinny jeans, or wearing traditional salwaar kameez and headscarves, trail after the unstoppable Mr. Norphel with well-worn hockey skates dangling over their shoulders, blades glinting in the mid-day sun.

The first two artificial glaciers have already melted, supplying water to the fields below, and we are hiking up to 16,000 feet to see if Artificial Glacier #3 at Stakmo remains. Reaching a massive boulder field, Mr. Norphel pauses and, with a wide crinkle-eyed grin, asks us trailing foreigners: “Kaxpo dug-a-leh?” (Difficult enough?) Just as some are despairing, there are cheers from ahead. Artificial Glacier #3 has been found.

Reaching the top of the valley perhaps twenty minutes after the first Ladakhi teenagers, I find myself standing on the edge of an oval ice skating rink, watching a blur of colors dance across the vast expanse of white.

Mr. Norphel and I watch the teenagers frolic. The kids may appreciate the ice skating rink, but what they’re really skating on is an investment in the future. The water will give their families the resources to irrigate fields that have lain fallow, requiring more hours of labor from everyone in the village, including these teenagers, and resulting in enough food for families all year. As the sun drops behind the mountain, Mr. Norphel and I keep hiking uphill to inspect the irrigation channels that feed Artificial Glacier #3.

“This one is pretty good, I think,” says Mr. Norphel. “There is still lots of ice. But next year we will improve it.” In this cold place, high in the Himalaya, hope is alive. Optimism is in the air at 16,000 feet. Below, two boys in rainbow knit scarves tear after each other, and a girl in a bright orange hijab, salwaar kameez and hockey skates launches off a steep drop off. She flails for a second midair, and a crash appears inevitable, but then she rights herself. She lands on her feet.

Photo by A. Kathleen Higgins

Pollinating Connecticut

$
0
0

A familiar face in the New Haven community gardening scene, the aptly named Benjamin Gardner runs a handful of agricultural ventures from his homestead farm in Bethany, CT. But Gardner is perhaps best known for his beekeeping work: he runs hives for homes, businesses, and schools, including the Yale Farm. Check out this piece about New Haven’s very own Apiary Artiste, and then slather honey over whatever you’re eating.

Infographic: Big Bad Corn

$
0
0

This infographic was created by LearnStuff.com.

If you’ve ever crept through a corn maze at Halloween, you know how corn can grab ahold of your imagination: benign stalks become monsters and discarded cobs turn into severed limbs. But take a look at the many ways that the United States uses (and subsidizes) this product, and you’ll see that corn has even scarier applications. Every time you eat a pound of corn products (which, if you’re anything like the average American, you’ll do 37 times this year) we hope you’ll remember the economic and environmental costs of our country’s biggest agricultural product.

Presence in Absence: The Lengths We Go to Leave No Trace

$
0
0

Deep in the wilderness that bridges Idaho and Montana, a cargo net bloated with irrigation pipes, barbed wire, and cement blocks is slowly pulled along a metal cable that spans the frothy waters of Moose Creek. A collection of Forest Service employees and interns from the Selway-Bitterroot Frank Church Foundation, a Missoula-based nonprofit, pull the net, chatting casually. On one bank, a dust-covered wilderness ranger loads a makeshift transport bucket by the banks of the crick. Young-faced interns arrive loaded with PVC pipes from an upper field. A man quietly talks to a team of horses hitched to a wagon.

Not many people have heard of Seminole Ranch, let alone visited it. It is one of the last private inholdings located in the third largest wilderness area of the lower 48, the Selway-Bitterroot. Only now, however, is Seminole Ranch being restored to the condition of the wild lands that surround it.

Those close to the project are discovering just how painstaking and tedious the work of restoration can be. The group toiling at the river is just one of many that have grappled over the years with the complex paradox of how to manage nature so that it appears, if not untouched, then not altered by people too much. In Idaho and Montana, there seem to be as many opinions about how to manage wilderness as there are federally designated wilderness acres. Despite their differing positions, all involved trust that though most Americans will never visit wilderness areas in their lifetimes, sustainable management of our nation’s backcountry paradises is worth the heavy lifting. Still, two primary questions trouble those charged with that work: Can a site that has been continuously inhabited for almost a century be actively returned to wilderness? And, if so, what is wilderness even supposed to look like?

Old irrigation pipes are laboriously hauled from the Seminole Ranch site by a cable block and tackle system.

 

 

An Exception in the Wilderness Act

From the air the Seminole site—its fields, its 900 foot airstrip, its outbuildings—looks like a tiny scar on an endless landscape of steep canyons, towering old-growth cedars, and surging blue waterways. The whole area is remote in a way that most people believe went out of style over a century ago. The only ways to get here are by plane, by multi-day raft tour, or by a half-day saddle ride through woods filled with some of Idaho’s most intimidating wildlife, including rattlers, bears, wolves, and the occasional mountain lion.

Anyone unfamiliar with the 1964 Wilderness Act might be confused by the thought of aircraft or ranches being allowed in wilderness at all. Howard Zahniser of the American Wilderness Society and the Act’s primary author defined wilderness as both an area where the earth and its community of life are untrammeled by man, where man himself is a visitor who does not remain” and as a place with “outstanding opportunities for solitude or a primitive and unconfined type of recreation.”

What most people don’t realize is that for the Wilderness Act to pass, Zahniser had to make provisions to certain groups that had been living, working, or visiting wilderness areas long before the land was federally designated. These special provisions included “the use of aircraft” where it “has already become established” and “such rights as may be necessary to assure adequate access”  for those relatively few hardscrabble families trying their luck at homesteading.

The Selway-Bitterroot Wilderness, along with every other wilderness area in the country, is part of a previously human-altered landscape. The challenge and controversy for wilderness managers and admirers alike has been to wed this fact to the strong discursive power of a fictitious, romantic wilderness: we want our imaginary primeval lands to look the way they do in our imaginations, with unaltered landscapes and communities of all-native species.

For purists private inholdings like Seminole Ranch, as well as official airfields like the one that exists at the nearby Moose Creek Ranger Station, directly challenge the idea of wilderness that archdruids like Howard Zahniser, Bob Marshall, Aldo Leopold, and David Brower fought so hard to establish. In A Sand County Almanac, Leopold writes, “Wilderness areas are first of all a series of sanctuaries for the primitive arts of wilderness travel, especially canoeing and packing.” For some hardened wilderness advocates, sites like Moose Creek and Seminole Ranch, with their small plane traffic, represent a problematic exception to the wilderness rule, a glaring asterisk in an otherwise charming narrative.

 

 

To Return This Small Area of Land to a More Primitive State

Wilderness Ranger Anna Bengtson manages the Moose Creek Ranger Station, which sits on a bluff above the confluence of the Selway River and Moose Creek, barely half a mile from Seminole Ranch. For most visitors to this part of the Wilderness, Anna is the face of the Forest Service. She is one of only six wilderness rangers who patrol the entire 1.3 million-acre Selway country. For the last three years Ranger Bengtson has overseen the on-the-ground restoration of Seminole Ranch. “In so many places outside of designated wilderness, humans are developing and destroying our remaining natural areas,” she says. “Here, in the Selway-Bitterroot, we have a rare opportunity to do the opposite: to return this small area of land to a more primitive state.”

Bengtson, a 32-year old native of West Glacier, Montana, possesses the knowledge and skills of someone who has passed much of her life in the backcountry. She is extremely competent with primitive tools like axes and crosscut saws, she is able to hike and camp alone for miles at a time across variable terrain and in inclement weather, she is comfortable working with stock such as horses or mules (the Cadillacs of the backcountry), and she is always cognizant of where the ripest huckleberry patches are. Shadowed by her black lab Lucy, she inspects trails and outfitter camps, makes contact with visitors, and coordinates backcountry personnel.

Despite an increase in workload for the rangers in the Nez-Perce Clearwater National Forest over the last few years, Ranger Bengston has seen her budget for wilderness stewardship decline. In this wilderness more work has to be done by fewer people. This can partly explain why the Seminole Ranch restoration project is still a work in progress.

According to Suzanne Cable, the Wilderness Program Manager for the entire Moose Creek District and Ranger Bengtson’s boss, “The Forest Service is in the second of four phases in the restoration process. Five years have passed since the Forest Service actively began restoring the property to wilderness. The final process of removing all invasive species from the ranch’s airstrip and promoting native vegetation to reclaim the site still seems a distant hope. For the Seminole saga, it has already been a long road.”

The first phase involved inventorying everything that was left by the owners at the time of purchase. “An old Willy’s Jeep was flown out by the previous owners, everything else was left behind,” said Cable. The “everything else” amounted to approximately 100,000 pounds of personal property, located a ½ mile from the nearest airstrip and 25 miles from the nearest road. Tractors, paint cans, dimensional lumber, and every other bit of ranching detritus you would expect to have accumulated after 104 years of successive human habitation had been left to rot at Seminole Ranch.

After the inventory, the Forest Service attempted to auction off anything of value, with the caveat that the winning bidders would have to remove their property from the Wilderness themselves. All but one set of winning bidders defaulted.

The only people not to were granted permission to fly a helicopter to the site and extract their recently acquired full-sized slate top pool table, tractors, and water wheel. After securing some unexpected funding, the Forest Service was able to pay for a helicopter to fly in and remove the remaining tractor and 10,000 pounds of salvage lumber, which was given to the Forest Service Historic Preservation Crew in Missoula. The auction process was just one wilderness restoration lesson in the many to come. Because the land surrounding the ranch is governed by a mandate that prohibits mechanical transport unless under extreme circumstances, the work to remove anything sizable is both dizzyingly primitive and logistically horrific.

During the second phase of the clean up, all ranching refuse with the exception of historical items and the buildings themselves must be dragged or carried down to the bank of Moose Creek, where they are arranged into large bundles. These bundles are then lifted onto a block and tackle system by Ranger Bengtson and her team, slung across the divide via a cable tram, loaded onto a horse or mule drawn wagon, for which special authorization was obtained to operate in wilderness, and hauled to the backcountry airstrip at the Moose Creek Ranger Station. Eventually a Forest Service plane will fly in from Missoula and transport it back to town, where it is unceremoniously dumped in the local landfill.

Critics of the process argue that at a time when the Forest Service has little money and personnel to allocate for projects like Seminole, the primitive approach employed on the Wilderness Act’s behalf has cost the American taxpayer too much. Using a more mechanized process of removal, they argue, would save time and precious resources. Joe Rimensberger, a backcountry pilot who served as a caretaker of the Seminole Ranch for the Conservation Fund while the Forest Service prepared to purchase the property noted, “The Forest Service could have kept it [the runway at Seminole] open to save money, but it was a good thing that they closed it in the long run because it was an accident waiting to happen.”

Besides the safety concerns, the geographic proximity of the Moose Creek and Seminole Ranch airstrips to each other appeared to make the latter an unnecessary affront to wilderness character. Cable, the Forest Service project lead on the restoration effort, defends the primitive work strategy as being the most cost-effective and least destructive, which she backs up by pointing to a thorough minimum requirements analysis. By using traditional tools, the restoration team is able to both save money and perform the work in the least intrusive manner.

The original cabin and chicken coop on the Seminole Ranch property.

 

A Presence in Absence

One of the most obvious and polarizing aspects of wilderness restoration involves the third phase: what to do about the historic structures on the Seminole site. Public opinions range from preservation to burning all thirteen buildings to the ground. Cable, Bengtson and other Forest Service personnel are reluctant to speculate on what may be done until the Forest Service archeologist finishes a report for the state of Idaho’s Historic Preservation Office. In the balance is whether the buildings are worthy candidates for the National Historical Register. However, since it is hard to imagine anything more suggestive and iconic of “man remaining” permanently in wilderness than a log cabin, saw mill, and old growth timber-hewn barn, the debate over Seminole Ranch’s structural integrity is extremely divisive.

Dr. Debbie Lee, an English professor at Washington State University and Project Leader at the Selway-Bitterroot Wilderness History Project, supports the removal of the buildings. She feels that with the structures gone “There is a presence that is also in absence.” As an oral historian working on recording the tales of people that lived and worked in the Selway country, she suggests that the historical legacy of places like Seminole Ranch would remain intact even without obvious visual cues like buildings. Dr. Lee’s comments on the controversial matter are particularly poignant because her grandfather homesteaded upstream at a place known as Three Forks, a flat V-shaped valley five miles north of Seminole Ranch, up the Moose Creek drainage. George Case, her grandfather, would later be an early Moose Creek District Ranger.

Dick and Terri Wenger, caretakers at Running Creek Ranch, one of the three remaining inholdings upriver from Seminole Ranch, say, “The loss of the buildings would be a shame.” They speak about the historical and cultural value wrapped up in them. Joe Rimensberger told me he’d been particularly touched by “an old rancher with us that didn’t want to see [the buildings] go.”

Seminole Ranch is not the first restoration project that the Forest Service has conducted. Three Forks was opened to concentrated homesteading during the early 1900’s. According to Lee, “The valley was traditionally used by the Nez Perce before [the homesteaders] came because of its unique geography.” A minimum of at least 12 homesteads and later several dude ranches were established by a shifting collection of hardened personalities, even by the day’s standards. It was a challenging lifestyle, and only a couple of the homesteaders managed to “prove up,” or qualify for a homesteading patent in the isolated environment.

As the concept of wilderness was being solidified in the public’s mind by legislation like the Wilderness Act, the Forest Service was in the process of buying back the private inholdings around Three Forks and returning them to wilderness, with mixed results. If anything, wilderness restoration is an evolving art form. At the time of the Three Forks rehabilitation, a common practice for both wilderness visitors and the federal government was to bury garbage. In wilderness settings, miles from roads, this approach is certainly more efficient and cost-effective than removal. However, despite the sincere efforts of early wilderness personnel, the field of wilderness restoration had room for improvement.

When exploring Three Forks today, it does not take long to find evidence of the area’s legacy of use and abuse: a rusty, moss-covered car protruding from the bank of East Moose Creek, the occasional errant smokestack from a buried piece of farming machinery, even the lonely graves of some of the area’s earlier inhabitants. When we apply the lessons learned at the Three Forks restoration to the current project at Seminole Ranch, we can be certain of one thing: if restoring the site as close to wilderness as possible is the goal, then exquisite attention to detail must be the new minimum requirement.

A Forest Service packer and two wilderness interns haul a load of ranch garbage across Moose Creek.

 

Zahniser’s paradox

Whether the Seminole project succeeds or fails depends on a lot of variables. The first is deciding on a definition of success that accounts for a range of interpretations of what wilderness actually is. Judging the results of restoration in black and white overlooks the reality of the very gray task at hand. The classic wilderness management paradox, best described by Zahniser, is that “We are managing wilderness to be left unmanaged.” When asked as to whether she found Seminole restorable, Suzanne Cable said, “Persistence and creativity can get it close.’”

Over time, the resilience of the natural systems will no doubt soften the physical impact of Seminole’s past users and residents. The oral histories will preserve the 132 acres, at least philosophically, as a ranch. Above all though, the pilots, recreators, outfitters, Forest Service personnel, and other wilderness visitors to come will continue to add their stories and experiences to the site, leaving the subtle and mostly non-material mark of their presence.

 


Tragedy of the Commons in Reverse: Talking Land Grabs with Fred Pearce

$
0
0

Displaced residents gather near the fence of Dominion Farm, which sits on land they used to occupy near Kenya’s Yala Swamp. (photo by Fred Pearce)

 

Sage Magazine asked Jennifer Baka, an anthropologist who researches effects of biofuel policy on rural communities in India, to sit down with world-renowned British journalist Fred Pearce. Pearce’s most recent book, The Land Grabbers: The New Fight over Who Owns the Earth (Beacon), investigates how governments and private companies are taking over public lands from the communities who have traditionally occupied them.

 

Jennifer Baka: What motivated your interest in land grabs?

Fred Pearce: I was looking around for something with a global perspective, and it seemed that land grabs really became an issue after 2008, after the food price spike, with national governments beginning to get worried and trying to secure food supplies. The Chinese, the Koreans, the Saudis, who are the biggest, at least in terms of deals done. And with the whole biofuels business, there was a push on the back of food commodity price increases — suddenly land  became such a critical resource. And then I just took it where it went. Some people criticize the book for not having a theoretical framework. I’m a journalist, I’m a reasonably intelligent journalist. I try to piece things together, but really I just go where the story takes me. That’s what I do.

JB: What about the term itself? What makes a land grab?

FP: It’s a loose term but I think it works. Land is being taken by those in power from people whose ability to resist is pretty minimal. Typically it happens in the form of governments handing out long-term leases— because governments have nationalized the land either in post-imperialist times or subsequently and held it in trust of the people. And I think there’s a lot of guilt in these countries at the failure of agriculture and being able to provide for the people in general, particularly in the case of post-imperial Africa, and they’re looking for a quick fix. They see foreign investment as that quick fix, whereas investment in the expertise and knowledge and skills of the people themselves—whether pastoralists, or community foresters, or smallholder farmers— would be the more sensible development investment. The two negative themes of land grabs are justice—that people are being displaced from their lands and have very little recourse to stop it—and that giving over your land to investment by foreign capital is a false model of development.

JB: What kinds of promises are being made by investors and foreign investors?

FP: They all say it will bring prosperity and jobs and food. Sometimes it brings some of those things, but not always.

JB: Right, a major question is: does the food come back to the communities where it is grown?

FP: Exactly. And jobs. Land grabs generate very few jobs, generally speaking. They tend to drive further movement toward the cities. I’m not opposed to urbanization as an idea, but when there is more push than pull, it does seem to be a problem. Land grabbing drives the sort of food economics in which agribusiness produces food for people who are cooped up in cities, rather than a model where a significant number of people are actually producing food and running their own markets. Basically the promise is a sort of western form of living where we can all be in cities and not worry about the countryside.

There are other things going on, of course. A lot of what’s going on in Gambela, in southern Ethiopia, is about migration and tribal disputes and responses to the famines of the 80s and the nature of the porous border with South Sudan.

Omot Ochan and his family beside their home in the Gambela forest of Ethiopia. Omot, who promised his father he would never leave their ancestral home, is being forced off the land in a deal made between Ethiopia and Saudi Star. (photo by Fred Pearce)

JB: Where is this notion of the imperative for foreign investment coming from?

FP: I suppose it’s neo-liberal orthodoxy, how we do development after the nineties. I’m not an economist, so I’m talking broadly.

JB: How did you get to all the places? I think you went to 26 countries in the book?

FP: Well some of those places I’d been before. I’d been to Sumatra, which is a classic example of a land grab, with huge tensions. I looked for places where things were fairly far advanced, where I could go find where things are actually happening, to see how things play out on the ground.

Fred Pearce speaks in front of a photo of large swaths of prairie-style agriculture cut into the Brazilian Cerrado. (photo by Tahria Sheather)

Brazil is another example. Brazil wants to save the Amazon—brilliant. But what’s happening is that all the people who were planting in the Amazon are now planting their crops in the Cerrado. They’re trying to do prairie-style agriculture in what is essentially a tropical savannah. Now the Cerrado is disappearing. The ranchers in the Cerrado are making a killing because they are selling their land for way more than it was worth before and heading over the border into Paraguay and trashing the Chaco. And we can look to Brazil also to get a sense for how things are going to happen in certain parts of Africa, too.

JB: What is the Brazilian-African linkage?

FP: Brazilians are doing quite a lot. Their mining companies are in Mozambique, their soya companies are now moving in, and they’re offering prairie-style agricultural techniques. The Brazilians are the first to do prairie-style agriculture in the tropics, and it’s really very impressive.

JB: That’s the thing that struck me in my research—both in India and also in Brazil—the role of the developing countries in these markets. One company that I was studying in Tamil Nadu is setting up jatropha plantations in Ethiopia.

FB: There is a lot of South-South going on. The prime movers are very often South-South. Indians are big land grabbers. I didn’t get to India for this project because it didn’t quite fit.

JB: Well, for starters you’re not going to find people with 400 hectare plots there.

FP: And also there, mostly, it’s Indians grabbing Indian land. There aren’t an awful lot of Indians grabbing land elsewhere. So it didn’t fit the simple model of what I was trying to do. So I’d be interested in hearing what you found there.

JB: I was just trying to see the mechanics. People were getting subsidies for biofuels from the government, because that’s the signal. The Indian government is saying we want to subsidize the growing of biofuel crops, especially on wastelands. So then they would go ahead and acquire these lands. That’s basically what my research is about, trying to understand this dynamic from multiple perspectives. They get the biofuel subsidies, plant a couple jatropha trees, then they sell off the land as real estate before the jatropha trees ever mature.

FP: In Africa jatropha has been just a disaster.

An abandoned Indian jatropha plantation (photo by Jennifer Baka)

JB: I would characterize it as the same in India. But we’re seeing another policy surge with it, because we’re seeing the European Emission Trading Scheme now encompassing the aviation sector. What alternative does the aviation sector have? Who’s going to pay a carbon tax?

FP: Yes, aviation is behind lots of it. Even if the yields aren’t what they expected, they’re going to stick with it.

JB: Does it strike you as curious that formerly colonized countries are now becoming colonizers?

FP: It’s not the new imperialism, it something much more complex. If you go to Ethiopia, it’s the Saudis and the Indians. The Brazilians are huge operators throughout Latin America, particularly in mining and agriculture.  They’ve got a lot of cash from their work in Brazil and now they’re acquiring cheaper lands.

JB: A main question seems to be what kind of land are they going after. In India, they claim to be going after wasteland, but when you get on the ground and talk to people, you quickly learn there’s really no such thing.

FP: Basically there isn’t much wasteland and there isn’t much unoccupied land. There are other terms, like underused, which the World Bank likes to use. By and large, a lot of smallholder farms are remarkably productive. If you look in terms of tons of grain per hectare it might not look so productive, but if you look at all the gardens and all the chickens and all the other crops hanging about, it looks rather more productive, as well as having a whole host of social uses that you just can’t get with an agri-business farm.

The whole debate about whether land is underused is very complex. A lot of that land is pastureland. Land is seen as unused if it isn’t fenced in and cultivated. That’s misleading. Livestock is a vastly important resource and a greatly undervalued resource. And the debate about the pastoral commons is very related to that about the forested commons. They both have to do with a conversation around privatization of resources and conversion to conventional business activity, rather than keeping land as a collectively owned resource outside the cash economy and therefore not even measured at the national level. A really big problem is how you measure economic activity in poor, rural communities. We don’t do it effectively until people show up in cities and need jobs.

Charcoal makers using the croptree prosopis, which has traditionally supported a number of local uses. Land grabs have recently begun to displace prosopis plantations in favor of jatropha. (photo by Jennifer Baka)

JB: Right, and there’s nothing for them.

FP: The countries say, ‘Oh we’re going to create a lot of jobs!’ but the question is: ‘Didn’t you just destroy a lot of jobs?’

JB: Have you seen any examples of positive outcomes of protecting local agriculture regimes?

FP: Yes. In the Machakos district of Kenya, there is an oft-quoted example, but it’s not unique in the least. About 50 years ago, the imperialists were writing off the area because of desertification. The cattle herding communities were beginning to turn themselves into farmers. They themselves realized there were too many people for pastoralism and that they were damaging the land. Now, 50 years on, there are more trees, more people, more food production, less soil erosion then ever before. They’re selling into markets in Africa, in the Middle East, into Europe. They’re doing it in a landscape that is thought to be beyond the limits of sustainability. People talk about the Machakos miracle.

JB: When I think about that, I just wonder how those local types of solutions may complement or counteract development dollars from the west.

FP: Well sometimes development assistance needs to get out of the way of that stuff, because often it does get in the way. Almost inevitably development looks like an infiltration by people who think they have all the good ideas. I would hope that more intelligent efforts are made to work with local people—and there are a lot of smart development workers who are beginning to do this—to not come in with a silver bullet solution but to look at the long term.

JB: We’re talking a lot about Africa and Latin America. Where else is land grabbing going on?

FP: A number of things are happening in Southeast Asia. The Chinese are moving in for rubber. Clearly there’s a rubber boom. There’s a long history of countries coming into Southeast Asia to grow rubber—that’s nothing new— but they did retreat somewhat. In recent decades, China has been coming into Cambodia with traditional plantation models. The Vietnamese as well.

But what I saw specifically was internal land grabs occurring in Cambodia. Cambodia’s recent history basically started with a clean sheet in trying to give people back their land. That is taking place, but there are huge loopholes in it. People can set up large economic zones where bigger players can say that national economic development demands big things are done. There are a number of particular guys who have used these policies to take over large sections of land, particularly from people who are using it, and create plantations. I followed the trail of sugar, which is being sold on to companies in Thailand and Taiwan. These companies are investing and developing these lands basically with the help of the Cambodian government. There were long-term contracts for the sale of that sugar, and the companies don’t want to talk about it.

Again, that was an example of a different form of state-sponsored land grabbing. In this case, because of the nature of Cambodian politics at the moment, and corruption, there are a few individuals who have been able to grab large sections of land. Usually, as I found it, people were able to keep their rice paddies. But in these areas people also had large areas of land to graze their animals, and these grazing lands provided a lot of the wealth of the communities. The rice paddies allow you your livelihood, a commodity you can sell at market, but your wealth comes from what occurs on the pastureland. It’s essential to the wealth of any community.

JB: And did the people who were working the paddies lose access to their pasturelands, or were they able to retain some semblance of control?

FP: A great deal of their land was pinched off and turned into sugar plantation, and a lot of it was cut off by the plantations. Essentially they could not take their livestock to their traditional pasturelands. And there is a lot of community conflict going on. We haven’t talked about that. Last April in the Ethiopian region of Gambela, a group of people attacked a Saudi Star camp and killed 4 people, a couple of foreigners and a couple of Ethiopians. As a consequence, the police went looking for the perpetrators and there was terrible violence, which caused a lot of people to flee across borders into the refugee camps in South Sudan. There are other places where long-standing disputes are bubbling over.

JB: In the communities I was looking at in India, though they were very small, lower caste communities, there were three or four cases in the courts, which were costing local people multiple times what they make in a year.

FP: People lose hope. Any of us would. Perhaps particularly in communities where things like land grabs happen quite quickly. Courts are far away and they’re slow. The idea of trying to achieve something in the courts—you can imagine how much harder it is.

A shepherd stands in front of a prosopis tree on the site of what used to be a working plantation. (photo by Jennifer Baka)

JB: Just the logistics of getting there.

FP: Yes, just getting the bus to get there. And then when you get there, you’re told to come back tomorrow. But there are heroes in this. People who take the big picture—I met some American lawyers in Liberia, for instance, where there are big land use issues— who were very inspired. There is an incipient international land rights movement happening. I don’t know if it will happen on a large scale, but there is potential for a global movement, like the environmental movement, to whom local people can turn and feel empowered.

JB: A recent World Bank report on land grabs said that 30% of the land that was taken actually got used for its stated purpose.

FP: Absolutely. An awful lot of projects crash and an awful lot of people walk away without personally having lost anything because they set up limited liability companies. If worse comes to worst and it goes bankrupt, you walk away and you haven’t lost. If those LLCs start doing things that are regarded as socially destructive, then you have to change the rules under which they operate.

JB: Politics have to intervene a little bit.

FP: Government is there to restrain the market. It is one of the reasons it’s there. The job of government is not to get out of the way.

JB: Karl Polanyi writes about unfettered capitalism, that the commoditization of the land would lead to the destruction of society because there is no intervening force, no regulatory force. This brings up for me something you write about in your book: you refer to land grabs as the tragedy of the commons in reverse. What do you mean by that?

FP: The conventional idea of the tragedy of the commons is that without private ownership, everybody tries to get their share out of the land without looking out for its long-term security. With land grabs, the privatization of land in large swaths is leading to a destruction of the land previously maintained in common. Very little land is held by the commons without any strings of ownership attached. If you go around the common lands of Africa, there are very complex traditional rules—they evolve, of course—but an outsider might view it as a commons waiting for its tragedy. It doesn’t work like that. Where it is like that it’s usually because traditional ways of use have been undermined.

JB: What about the role of the banks and the financial institutions in all of this?

FP: What I find interesting is that the people involved in pushing investment in land and food commodities talk the same narrative as environmentalists did 40 years ago. Especially in Latin America. These guys will give you prospectuses and documents, saying, ‘This sums up what we’re doing,’ and you read the bloody thing and it sounds just like Limits to Growth. It’s all about populations doing this and that. It’s rather crude and Malthusian, with which I have always had quite serious problems. It disguises all politics. It suggests that there is no political solution, and we’d all better just run off into the hills. And this is reinforced by the fact that these narratives are now being used by people touting investments in these commodities. They’re talking about resource crunches and all these things. ‘There are going to be food shortages, so buy buy buy! It’s bound to increase in value! You can’t lose!’

Workers at Dominion Farm in Kenya’s Yala Swamp. Dominion Farm is owned and operated by an American group based in Oklahoma. (photo by Fred Pearce)

JB: What do you think can be done about land grabs?

FP: For Africa at least, there’s room for an increase in confidence and reliance in its own resources. There is a post-colonial reflex to think that all good ideas come from somewhere else and that foreign investment and foreign expertise, foreign consultants, are what’s needed. The foreign capitalists are very happy to collude with that. I think it’s a mistake. I don’t want to put up barriers and shut out all foreign investment, but Africans have to be in control at all levels. People talk about social capital, which is a totally abstract term, but when you go into a rural community and see how people interact, how when farmers are looking for new seeds, they don’t go the store, they go into the local markets and exchange with other farmers, it becomes clear. Those kinds of social capital and knowledge and contacts and links are something that should be built on, rather than demolished.

People talk quite a lot in the development world about looking at communities as networks of livelihoods. There are farmers, but people are also doing handicrafts and other making goods, trading them with each other, setting up markets. There are complex networks within farming communities. One of the lovely stories, for instance, is the Indian dairy industry, the coops. They are built around smallholder farms, usually a handful of cows, yet have scaled up into a mega industry. I was in Gujarat working a few years ago on a book, meeting farmers who literally have just two acres and three or four cows. They would wake up every morning, milk those cows, put the milk in the churner, and take it to the dairy. It was just stunning. You think: look, people can do that. Why aren’t there more dairy coops?

I always have arguments with environmentalists in Europe. We import a lot of green beans from Africa, and the environmentalists say, ‘Oh you shouldn’t do that, we should be boycotting these beans because of the chemicals and the working conditions.’ But having been down there, I’ve seen that this just isn’t true. Most of those vegetables are being grown by smallholders. Yes, they’re being told what to grow and how to package those beans, but they are making a good living, they’re playing into a global market system, and nobody local is going hungry. If you can do that, you can have dairy coops selling back to the local communities. We need to facilitate people in running their own businesses.


Thinking Like a Mountain Climber

$
0
0

Yvon Chouinard first came onto my radar in 1999.

I was a young lass from the Midwest, transplanted for the summer in southern Utah and awestruck by the dramatic landscapes of the West.  Having never traveled beyond the forests of Missouri, I was eager to explore these wild mountains, deserts, and rivers. I soon discovered what would become my greatest passion: rock climbing.

My early climbing mentors taught me lessons in balance and delicate footwork during the day, and recounted stories of the Yosemite Golden Age rock legends over the campfire at night. The names of Salathé, Frost, Robbins, Pratt, and Chouinard were brought to life, through tales of near-mythical ascents up immense granite walls I couldn’t even begin to imagine tackling.

Yvon Chouinard was a central character in the climbing firmament, an emblem of the beautiful lifestyle with which I was falling in love. His climbing heroics, combined with anecdotes about how he taught his children to eat roadkill as a practical source of food, earned Chouinard my early admiration.  While I refrained from adopting this unconventional diet myself, his climbing adventures helped inspire me to dedicate myself to the sport, and my own skills began to develop apace.

I learned a bit of history, too, about Patagonia and Black Diamond, two companies Chouinard founded which have long been renowned in the climbing world. At first, however, I had no interest in digging much deeper: to me, Patagonia and Black Diamond were just purveyors of quality products or gateways to further adventures in the mountains. Chouinard was a hero of mine for his rock-climbing feats, not for his business endeavors.

Yet these two worlds converged when I started reading the environmental essays embedded in the Patagonia catalogs. Interspersed amongst pictures of the mountaineering gear for which my sister and I were pooling our savings were essays about endangered habitats and threatened species, and how Patagonia was actively campaigning to save these ecosystems and wild places.

One of the essays that stands out in my memory was one written by Chouinard himself, on the role of grassroots citizen organizations in catalyzing social and environmental change. Chouinard believed that government and private industry lacked motivation to advocate for conservation issues, but local people — farmers, climbers, fishermen, kayakers — who are truly dedicated to their ecosystems, and affected by injustices, can and will fight for the cause. As Bryce Courtenay put it in The Power of One, the book given to me by the guy who taught me to climb, “Little beat big when little is smart, first with the head and then with the heart.”

I read about Patagonia’s commitment to donating 1% of their sales to these activist grassroots organizations, and their vital role in creating the alliance of businesses that have pledged to do the same. I was captivated by their 2007 campaign to protect the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge, and later their Freedom to Roam movement, which focused on establishing migration corridors that allow wildlife to move between protected landscapes. And I remember the influence that Patagonia’s Vote for the Environment campaign had in Boulder, Colorado — my home at the time — during the 2008 presidential elections.

But it wasn’t until Yvon Chouinard came to Yale, where I’m now a Master’s student, that I truly came to appreciate how deeply both Chouinard and the company he founded are committed to fighting environmental crises through every available platform.

Yvon Chouinard holds forth at the Yale School of Forestry and Environmental Studies. Photo by Anthony Clark.

During his two lectures at Yale and a personal interview, Chouinard’s story came through to me clear and steadfast: We have grown too big. We are running out of resources. And we all — industry included — need to completely rethink how we live on this planet before it’s too late. Twice Chouinard quoted the legendary environmentalist David Brower: “There is no business to be done on a dead planet.”

Patagonia attempts to address these issues through its business conduct, by focusing on high-quality products, socially responsible labor practices, and a natural growth rate. To be sure, Patagonia has not been perfect: like any other business, they have certainly caused harm in the past. To its credit, however, Patagonia’s business approach is, as Chouinard put it, to “find out what we’re doing wrong and fix it, and then prove to the rest of the world that it’s good business.”

This model is typified by the company’s journey to exclusively sourcing organic cotton. In 1988, Patagonia opened a store in Boston in an old retrofitted building, and within days its employees were complaining of headaches. Environmental engineers found the structural problem to be the ventilation system, which was recycling the same air inside the building, but Chouinard wasn’t convinced: he wanted to know if there might be another cause. The engineers kept searching, and soon discovered that all of Patagonia’s treated cotton garments, such as wrinkle- or shrink-resistant fabrics, contained formaldehyde, the health impacts of which were being exacerbated by the recycled air.

Instead of just fixing the ventilation system, Chouinard promised to switch Patagonia’s entire cotton supply to organic cotton. “If we couldn’t find an organic substitute,” he says now, “we were going to close up and stop selling cotton clothes.” The transformation was difficult, both logistically and financially, but by 1996 Patagonia was providing all its cotton from organic sources.

Chouinard has created a company that challenges our preconceptions of industry, a company that suggests that businesses can indeed profit without harming the environment. Waste and toxic chemical reductions, innovations in bio-based and recycled materials, forays into renewable energy, fair labor practices: across the spectrum of environmental and social responsibility, Patagonia has been a pioneer even as it continues to grow and increase its profits. As Chouinard wryly remarked at the lecture events, Patagonia actually does well in the recession, when prudent consumers pay closer attention to their purchases. “Whenever I am confronted with a business problem,” says Chouinard, “the answer is to improve the quality.”

The author contemplates the imperative to climb within her means.

The notion that consumption is linked to the deterioration of the natural world is a familiar theme in the worlds of environmentalism and corporate responsibility. Less familiar, though, was Chouinard’s intertwined story of how risk sports define his approach to business strategy. And, as a climber, it was this final message that I found most resonant.

Chouinard isn’t asking us to all become risk sport enthusiasts, though I think that might amuse him. What he’s asking is for us to think like risk sport enthusiasts: to understand our limits and live within our means. These are fundamental concepts in risk sports, where the failure to be cautious and prudent results in drastic penalties. Attempt to free solo beyond your climbing abilities or drop blindly into a rapid you cannot paddle, and you may not return to tell your story.

While risk sport aficionados innately yearn to push the limits, theirs is a self-regulated determination, coupled with an acute understanding of their personal capabilities and the consequences associated with their actions. Chouinard cites many of his outdoor adventures as foundational learning moments for building Patagonia, and he uses those lessons to offer a simple, if unorthodox, proposition to the global consumer: Know the limits of your consumption, live within your means, challenge yourself to live as responsibly as you can, and above all, respect the Earth.

The Patagonia mission statement –– “Build the best product, cause no unnecessary harm, use business to inspire and implement solutions to the environmental crisis” –– mirrors these humble requests. Chouinard and Patagonia are working to convince us that it is possible for us to live on this planet and cause no unnecessary harm.

And not only is it possible, it is imperative. Whether we are a corporation or consumer, we are faced with the obligation to reduce our footprint. As Chouinard succinctly concluded during the Yale lecture series: “This is it. This is the planet that we have. And we’d better take care of it.”

When a Tree Falls in the Amazon

$
0
0

As our plane prepared to land, I peered out the window and tried to make sense of the blackness. I could see a few points of light, like fireflies; but otherwise the landscape seemed to hold nothing but dark water, trees, and more dark water. I was finally in the heart of the Amazon Forest, and the vast wilderness surrounding the airport seemed to prove that Manaus, the capital of Amazonas, was simply a patch of concrete in the middle of nowhere.

My initial impressions were slowly shattered as the days went by. What I thought would be a relatively small town — at least compared to my hometown of São Paulo — turned out to be a sprawling city, populated with shopping malls and large avenues. Wilderness had vanished: even in the depths of the forest, floating restaurants and shops peddling indigenous artifacts were easy to find.

Nevertheless, Amazonas is known for having some of the best-protected areas in the Amazon region. That’s because the state relies heavily on tourism rather than soy plantations and cattle ranching. In the state of Pará, for example, deforestation occurs due to land conversion for pasture, while in Mato Grosso, soy crops dominate the region’s economy. Compared to those two states, Amazonas’ wild lands are well-preserved.  Yet despite Amazonas’ efforts to invest in protected areas, the landscape was still more diversified than I expected: covered with luxurious forests one minute, big farms the next.

In the Brazilian state of Amazonas, conservation and development often rub elbows.

Discussions about the “ideal” balance between development and environmental protection are widespread in Brazil; terms such as “sustainable development” have entered common parlance. And indeed, Brazil has come a long way — both in economic development and environmental protection — through a series of financial reforms and stringent environmental law and policy.

Although many environmental groups consider any development of the jungle anathema, modernization has produced its share of benefits. Brazil’s celebrated economic growth from the late 1960′s to late ’70′s was partly caused by rapid industrialization: the so-called “Brazilian Miracle” depended on expanding territorial occupation in all corners of the country, investing in hydropower and ethanol, expanding the country’s agricultural yield, and exploring natural resources, such as timber and oil. In other words, progress has been aided by compromising the conservation of nature.

There’s an important difference, however, between the modernization policies pursued by Brazil’s old military regime from the mid-1960s to mid-1980s and the policies that today’s government implements. Under the military regime, public participation and accountability were absent from the formulation of environmental laws and policies. Once a democratic government was installed in the mid-1980s, however, the voices of indigenous groups, small farmers, and environmentalists finally had a chance to be heard. At the same time, the 1988 Brazilian Constitution set out a new paradigm for economic growth, built on protection of natural resources and respect for human rights, including the recognition of indigenous communities’ land rights.

This shift coincided with growing international attention to the destruction of the Amazon. Throughout Brazil’s history, the fate of the Amazon forest was always considered a matter of strictly national concern, and external involvement was unwelcome. But when the issue of tropical deforestation became internationally prominent in the 1980’s, Brazil’s policies began sparking the interest and outrage of countries around the world. Countless pictures and articles about forests burning, along with the killing of indigenous and traditional peoples in land use conflicts, have garnered even more attention for Brazilian environmental policy. From Andrew Revkin’s book, “The Burning Season,” about Brazilian rubber tapper and environmentalist Chico Mendes, to chief Raoni Metuktire fighting alongside superstar Sting to protect the Kayapo tribe’s land in the Xingú Indigenous Park, international attention began to focus on the socio-economic impacts of forest degradation. Still, while the concept of environmental law was gaining momentum, the actual implementation of those laws remained mostly feeble.

Meanwhile, Brazil was positioning itself as an “international player” and seeking leadership roles in the environmental arena — for example, by hosting the 1992 Earth Summit in Rio de Janeiro. Brazil’s active role in environmental negotiations became even more prominent in 2009 when former president Luis Inácio “Lula” da Silva met with a small handful of other leaders in Copenhagen to devise what would be the final agreement in the Conference of the Parties to the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC).

Despite this burgeoning leadership, the current state of environmental protection in Brazil is muddled, to say the least. On one hand, Brazil designed a robust climate change plan and committed to a reduction of between 36.1% to 38.9 % of projected greenhouse gas emissions by 2020, including a specific provision to reduce deforestation in the Amazon by 80%. On the other, the government is building what will be the third largest hydroelectric dam in the world in the middle of the Amazon. The Belo Monte dam is just one in a series of infrastructure projects which are part of the federal government’s “Growth Acceleration Program,” launched in 2007, which includes investment and economic policies to stimulate development in Brazil. According to the environmental impact assessment report for the Belo Monte dam, some of the negative effects include loss of biodiversity, decrease of water flow and water quality of the Xingú river, deforestation, and impacts on fisheries.

Moreover, one of the most important pieces of legislation in Brazil, the Forest Code, enacted in 1965, is undergoing significant changes, not all of them positive. Among the most controversial provisions under consideration is the “amnesty” granted to landowners who illegally deforested their property. According to the original text of the Forest Code, all rural properties must include what is called a “Legal Reserve,” a protected area in which land use is restricted, whose size can be up to 80% of total land area for properties located in the Amazon. The changes proposed in the 2012 Forest Code would exempt landowners who illegally cleared vegetation before 2008 from facing liability or sanctions. Although President Dilma Rousseff recently vetoed a few prejudicial provisions regarding permanent preservation areas and vegetation recovery requirements, the latest changes introduced by a presidential decree weaken ”Legal Reserve” rules in areas deforested before 2008, meaning that at least 3.9 million hectares of forests will no longer be recovered.

Brazil is a land where environmental progress is often immediately followed by backsliding, a place where salutary and destructive regulations coexist to such extent that it’s nearly impossible to forecast what lies ahead. Incoherence is perhaps the main trait of Brazilian environmental policy. In an era of intense public scrutiny and rising environmental awareness, the Brazilian government still manages to reverse decades of environmental and human rights protection in the name of economic growth.

The Teatro Amazonas opera house is an incongruous bastion of human culture in the heart of the Amazon.

Still, all is not lost. Resistance against environmental destruction is burgeoning in courts and in the streets. Civil society mobilization is one of the biggest drivers of change in Brazil, as environmental NGOs, church groups and human rights activists have helped orchestrate protests, petitions, and lobbying initiatives in the Executive and Legislative branches. Similarly, the Ministério Público (an independent body composed of public prosecutors) is one of the most active institutions in courts to ensure that rules in the book see the light of day.

For instance, the environmental licenses for the Belo Monte Dam are being challenged in Brazilian courts by the Federal Public Prosecutors’ Office, which contends that indigenous communities were not properly consulted prior to the issuance of the license. Several human rights NGOs filed a complaint at the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights (IACHR), which conducted an inquiry into the Brazilian government’s treatment of the rights of indigenous peoples. The IACHR issued provisional measures in April, 2011, later modified in July 2011, requesting that the Brazilian government adopt measures to protect indigenous communities’ lives and welfare in the Xingu Basin. The dam is currently under construction, and it is unlikely that the project will be suspended or modified.

The dissent about these policies demands the question: Are petitions, lawsuits and protests enough to improve environmental protection in Brazil? Considering that the Brazilian Constitution is only 24 years old, the magnitude of civic engagement should not be downplayed. Still, any changes in environmental policy will hardly occur overnight, and it is difficult to gauge whether public demonstrations can actually affect change. At the same time, the Forest Code debates, and the President’s move to veto some provisions that would clearly benefit agri-business interests, suggest that the absence of public dissent would have produced a very different, and even more damaging, outcome.

In the end, we must not allow our yearning for progress to jeopardize years of struggle for a healthy environment. That growth is important for developing countries is beyond dispute; the goal is to make sure that “accelerating growth” also entails slowing down deforestation and the loss of species. While Brazil has made undeniable progress toward conservation, the environmental laws on its books still leave much to be desired.

Contest Winner: A Tale of Two Trails

$
0
0

SAGE Magazine is thrilled to award Sarah Maslin’s “A Tale of Two Trails” first prize in our 2013 Environmental Writing Contest. 

Right before the Appalachian Trail crosses the Massachusetts-Connecticut border, it makes a sharp left turn. Then it climbs Bear Mountain, the highest peak in Connecticut, and zigzags in a southwest descent until it hits the town of Salisbury.

I know this because I’m looking down at it. Actually, I’m looking down at Google Maps’ representation of it — on an iPhone, on the side of the trail, where I’m sitting atop Bear Mountain.

The iPhone belongs to Olivia Gomes, an athletic 37-year-old with a big backpack, hiking poles, pigtails, sunglasses and a bandana. She’s walking the entire 2,000-some miles of the trail with her boyfriend, Nicholas Olsen, 32 — dressed the same, no pigtails, a beard — and their dog, Bailey. Gomes and Olsen (trail names: “Hermit” and “Grizz”) are part of a new generation of Appalachian Trail thru-hikers for whom spending six months on the trail no longer means shedding all the comforts of modern civilization.

Hermit and Grizz are among a new generation of hikers embracing technology on the trail.

Last summer, the Appalachian Trail experienced a spike in the number of hikers heading north from Georgia — 2,500 as of November 2012, compared to 1,700 in 2011. The northbound hiker count in 2012 was 65% higher than it was five years ago, causing considerable concern for the trail’s fate if the trend should continue. But statistics on thru-hikers vary unpredictably from year to year, and even back in the 1980s some complained that the trail was too crowded. Given that the A.T. spans over 2,000 miles along the East Coast, it’s hard to imagine several hundred more people changing the hiking experience.

But what if they have iPods and cell phones? In recent years, technology use on the trail has exploded. By now, nearly every thru-hiker carries a mobile phone, and iPads and Kindles make regular appearances in shelters. Gadgets are used for everything from watching Seinfeld to trading stocks, and their sudden ubiquity is causing some longtime lovers of the Appalachian Trail — a 75-year-old “wilderness footpath” traditionally seen as an escape from modern society — to question the value of today’s hiking experience.

A hiker myself, I’m initially surprised to see iPhones in the woods. I assumed that people thru-hiked the Appalachian Trail to get away from technology and crowds. That’s what appeals to me about hiking, and when I hit the trail, I turn off my phone. I figured today’s A.T. thru-hikers would share this mindset. But maybe I was wrong.

***

Gomes and Olsen mainly use their smart-phone to read its maps and to stay in touch with family (Gomes’ daughter is back home in Key West). They also check weather on it, pay bills, and order hiking gear online, which they pick up a few days later at a post office in town. Sometimes at the top of a mountain they’ll pull the phone out to make calls — it’s the only place with service. Recently, they’ve been using Google Images to identify trailside plants to find out if they’re edible. So far, so good — in the three months they’ve been on the trail, neither hiker has been poisoned.

The phone isn’t the only gadget they brought along for their “Walk in the Woods.” They also have Spot, a fist-sized black and orange tracking device that can alert emergency services with the push of a small red button. It’s linked to Gomes’ blog and to her Facebook page, displaying their location every night, and it automatically sends a text-message to her daughter and mother with their daily GPS coordinates.

It’s a nice day on Bear Mountain — sunny and clear enough to see far off into the distance, where patches of orange and red hint that Connecticut’s leaves are just beginning to change. Looking out over the tree line, I can see the woods and pastures that the Appalachian Trail will weave through for 63 miles before heading into New York.

On Google Maps, the trail is just a squiggly grey line that stretches down the East Coast some 2,000 miles — from Katahdin, Maine to Springer Mountain, Georgia.

***

The Appalachian Trail was dreamed up in the 1920s by outdoors enthusiast Benton MacKaye. Mackaye envisioned a single trail running down the whole East Coast, dotted with shelters along the way. In Mackaye’s mind, the trail would serve as an “escape from civilization,” and it was important to him that users “preserve… a certain environment” of solitude and reverence to nature. Without such an environment, Mackaye insisted, the trail’s “whole point is lost.” In order to keep the trail as wild as possible, it was to be built and maintained entirely by volunteers.

The 2,000-plus-mile “wilderness footpath” was completed on August 14, 1937, thanks in large part to the determination of Connecticut judge Arthur Perkins and Washington lawyer Myron H. Avery — along with the labor of 200 or so volunteers, who spent thousands of hours bushwhacking and blazing the trail. In 1937, nobody thought it could be hiked from start to finish.

But in 1948, a stubborn army vet named Earl Shaffer walked from the southernmost trailhead in Georgia to the northernmost trailhead in Maine. It took him just 124 days, and it signaled the start of a trend that has grown increasingly popular ever since. While fewer than fifty thru-hikes were recorded before 1970, more than seven hundred finished the trek in 2011 alone. Four times as many tried, but for one reason or another had to drop out along the way.

***

When Jim Liptack hiked the trail in 1980, he didn’t have a cell phone. He relied on letters and the occasional pay phone in town to let his mother know he was okay (he was twenty; she was worried sick). He also didn’t have an iPod — a common accessory on the trail today. This new trend elicits a “What can ya do?” shrug from Liptack, 52.

“They’re missing out,” he says to me as we hack away at overgrown branches that threaten to strangle the narrow trail. As Overseer of Trails for the Connecticut Chapter of the Appalachian Mountain Club (AMC) — the volunteer organization responsible for sections of the trail in Maine, New Hampshire, Massachusetts, Connecticut, and Pennsylvania — Liptack takes his job seriously, even though he doesn’t get paid. In the thirty years since he completed his thru-hike, most of his weekends from March to November have been spent moving rocks to build staircases, shoveling dirt to create water-bars, clearing brush, and directing work crews.

Our goal today, he tells me after I’ve been outfitted with a pair of heavy metal loppers, is to clean up this section of the A.T. (“Ten Mile Trail”) so that a hiker could walk on it tightrope style, both arms extended, without smacking into anything. Or, as Benton Mackaye once said, our goal is to create a strip of trail with just enough “space for a fat man to get through.”

It’s a warm Wednesday in late September, and in the afternoon we run into a southbound couple at Ten Mile Shelter. Ear-buds dangle from the guy’s shoulder straps — he tells us he’s been listening to an audio book: “The Maze Runner.” Hiking ten to twelve hours a day can be mentally draining, he explains, and the iPod keeps him from getting bored.

When we leave the shelter, Liptack admits that he would never bring an iPod into the woods.

“I like to listen to the sounds of the wind, the birds, the trees,” he says, snatching a dead branch from above his head and hurling it off to the side of the trail.

Say what you will about the ethics of using Google Maps to navigate the AT, but it must be nice to never have to refold a giant paper map. It’s always so hard to figure out which way the creases go…

Liptack did a lot of listening that dry summer in 1980. He recalls hearing a faint, constant, rain-like noise, even on sunny days. He eventually discovered that it was the sound of gypsy moth caterpillars munching on leaves.

“That plugged-in hiker wouldn’t have heard any of it,” Liptack says. In fact, in Liptack’s day, a hiker with an iPod probably would have been “shunned,” like the two or three brave souls on the trail in 1980 who dared to carry radios.

Liptack, seeking “total detachment from the world,” often hiked alone. The solitude, the wilderness, and the hiking gave him a profound sense of accomplishment, and an appreciation for the outdoors that has stuck with him for more than thirty years.

“The Appalachian Trail is a big part of my life,” he says, and judging by his AMC hat, his “Trail Volunteer” shirt, and the six or seven colorful patches on his green canvas backpack, each proudly displaying a wilderness achievement, I don’t doubt him one bit.

***

Yeah, you’ll meet some idiots pretending to be Thoreau,” says a 48-year-old Californian who calls himself “Pesky,” “but most of us are constantly going in and out of town.”

It’s early September, and I’ve just driven from New Haven to Salisbury — a sleepy Connecticut town nestled between Route 41 and Route 44, less than a mile from the Appalachian Trail. My plan was to head into the woods, find some thru-hikers, and get a sense of the trail scene as it stands in 2012.  But I quickly discovered that there were hikers right here in town.

I met Pesky outside the library. He plunked his huge backpack down on a bench, pulled out an iPad, held it at arm’s length, and filmed himself chugging a bottle of Coke.

“It’s kind of a tradition,” he said. “I’m the guy who whips out a coke at the top of the mountain and drinks it in front of everyone.” Then he stuck out his hand and introduced himself.

Now he’s educating me about this year’s thru-hikers. We’re seated at a table outside a café — me, Pesky, his buddy “Sticks,” and my friend Ira, who has come along for company on my venture into the woods.

I had thought anyone willing to spend six months on the trail would resemble some kind of mountain man, so I was surprised when the first two thru-hikers I met looked more like grungy actors from an Apple commercial. But according to Pesky (or, as he’s known in the real world, John Kay) and Sticks (Matthew Cook, a lanky 25-year-old from Australia), the Appalachian Trail today is not a wilderness experience.

They tell me about fancy trailside hostels that charge $50-$100 a night, “hiker clans” called “Riff Raff” and “Wolf Pack” that shuttle booze to shelters in the South, and big events like “Trail Days in Damascus,” a three-day music, food, and crafts festival that draws thousands of hikers to a section of the trail that runs right through downtown Damascus, Va.

But if there’s one thing that has changed the thru-hiking experience most “dramatically,” says Pesky, it’s cell phones. Cell phones make getting to town much easier, he says, and in bad weather many hikers opt to call hostels or motels instead of toughing it out and camping. Cell phones also allow hikers to stay in contact with each other on the trail, which leads to rumors and drama. Pesky remembers one instance in which a group of hiker friends got into a fight. The news spread via text messaging, and by the end of the day, thru-hikers twenty miles up the trail knew that “Team Aqua [had] split up!”

Sticks says it struck him as odd at first, and “a little annoying,” to hear fellow hikers at the top of a mountain talking on their cell phones.

“What the fuck did you come out here for?” he remembers thinking. But he’s gotten used to technology on the trail after being around Pesky, who carries two iPods, a solar charger, and an iPad. Pesky uses the iPad to watch “The Office” and “New Girl” in his sleeping bag, and also to trade stocks (the money he makes from US steel and Micron funds the remainder of his thru-hike). He doesn’t carry a cell phone, however, and jokes that he and Sticks must be the only two hikers without one. (I met twelve thru-hikers that weekend, and it sure seemed like he was right.)

On the trail, thru-hiker Pesky uses his iPad to trade stocks and watch TV shows.

As I listen to Pesky and Sticks talk about technology, drunk hikers, Lord of the Rings movie nights, and internet-based trail rumors, the Appalachian Trail begins to sound more like a college campus than a “wilderness footpath.” Later that week, after watching several Youtube videos of intoxicated thru-hikers, I find a thread on an A.T. forum, Whiteblaze.net, asking if the trail is really just “One big frat party?” It’s not the first time I’ve heard that phrase.

“It’s nature’s frat party,” Pesky says with a smirk, sensing my surprise when he mentions rampant drug and alcohol use on the trail in the South.

But wait a minute — what about Jim Liptack, what about his nature and his solitude? What about Benton Mackaye’s “escape from civilization”? What about the National Geographic article from 1987, in which Noel Grove wrote that Appalachian Trail “hikers revert to lives of simplicity, denying themselves modern comfort, seeking purification in an uncorrupted world”? What about my own stressed-out-college-student fantasies of dropping everything to hike the A.T., my dreams of escaping the deadlines and the emails, of spending days (weeks? months?) without seeing another human face, of learning to fend for myself in the woods and feeling eternal oneness with the spirit of the trees?

I ask Pesky and Sticks.

“Now that’s just hokey,” Pesky laughs.

“It’s a misconception,” says Sticks. “You need to blaze your own trail somewhere else if you want that.” While Sticks has walked hundreds of miles in remote Australia, navigating with only map and compass, he says that the Appalachian Trail is a far different experience — one that’s more crowded and less wild. “The more you walk, the less you care about nature,” he says. He recently bought a Kindle.

When I scribble this down, a slow grin comes across Pesky’s face.

“On the Appalachian Trail,” he says, “we’re mollycoddled the whole way.”

***

Harper’s Ferry, West Virginia is known as the “psychological halfway point of the trail,” though the actual halfway marker is about 75 miles north. The Appalachian Trail Conservancy shares a building downtown with the Harper’s Ferry Visitor Center. It’s a two-story building, built of native stone, where staff have been photographing thru-hikers since 1979. The Conservancy began in the early days of the trail as a yearly conference devoted to preservation and management, but nowadays it also keeps records on hikers and publishes a bimonthly magazine called “Journeys” about all things A.T.

Laurie Potteiger has worked at the Conservancy headquarters for 25 years, starting the spring after she became a “2,000-miler.” Potteiger attributes this year’s increased hiker population to a mild winter, a poor economy, and a National Geographic film about the A.T. that recently became available on Netflix, raising interest in the trail. In the past, she says, books like Ed Garvey’s 1971 “Appalachian Hiker” and Bill Bryson’s “A Walk in the Woods” had similar effects. But the jump this summer was unexpected.

“We really felt it here,” she says. “We were printing [halfway-point picture] postcards all day long.” The ATC started selling personalized postcards to hikers a few years ago.

The effects of increased hiker traffic were felt on the trail, too. A conference call Potteiger conducted with trail managers fielded reports of “considerably more trash,” and more graffiti in shelters that “could be tracked to thru-hikers.” AMC ridge-runners in Connecticut said that they collected more than 700 gallons of garbage from the trail.

In previous years, graffiti and trash were usually blamed on people who used the shelters for the day or the weekend. Thru-hikers, familiar with outdoor ethics, tended to be more respectful. Potteiger wonders if this year’s 2,500 hikers included a greater percentage with “no outdoors experience whatsoever.”

Not everybody is thrilled by the trail’s new party-friendly atmosphere. This photo was posted to an AT discussion board.

To respond to the trash issues, the Conservancy launched a new “Leave No Trace” initiative, replacing old signs with new ones tailored to different kinds of settings. But Potteiger readily acknowledges that more efforts may be necessary to manage the crowds, especially if hiker counts continue to rise.

“It’s definitely something we’ll be talking about over the winter,” she says.

The new strategy for addressing crowds seems to be to build more campsites, Potteiger tells me. While shelters are expensive and require extensive planning, campsites are much easier to construct. They are also closer to the “primitive experience that the trail is supposed to provide,” she says, explaining that “one of the original purposes of the trail was to provide solitude and contemplation.”

“But how realistic is that kind of experience these days?” I ask her, mentioning all the cell phones I saw on the trail and the stories I heard about partying. Potteiger concedes that there’s been an apparent “cultural shift” in recent years, and she tells me about a picture that alarmed her on Facebook. It depicted a party at a campsite on the trail, with an illegal fire, beer cans, and more than 29 thru-hikers.

“We’re seeing visual evidence like that more and more,” she says.

As for cell phones, Potteiger remembers the first time the staff at Harper’s Ferry heard reports of hikers text-messaging between shelters.

“It blew our minds,” she says. While a survey conducted from 2003-2004 found that less than 15% of hikers carried cell phones, these days Potteiger guesses that only 5 or 10 percent do not have them. Increasing reports of technology on the trail led the Conservancy to create a committee to examine the trend.

Potteiger makes no effort to deny that the Appalachian Trail is changing. However, she is wary of what she calls a “doomsday mindset,” which she says is old news in A.T. history.  In the 1980s, she heard similar complaints: the trail was getting too crowded, there was too much partying, the prevalence of “yellow blazing” (using cars to get ahead) meant that people weren’t taking hiking seriously enough.

Twenty years later, the rhetoric is still the same. But now, instead of cars, it’s cell-phones.

“You’d think the trail would be ruined by now,” Potteiger says. According to her, it’s not.

***

I hang up the phone marveling at Potteiger’s laissez-faire attitude towards the trail. How is it, I wonder, that a thru-hiker from 1987 can acknowledge the A.T.’s  “original purpose” as a place of wilderness and solitude, admit (without a hint of anger or nostalgia) that today’s gadget-heavy trail has strayed from this purpose, and nevertheless insist that the Appalachian Trail will survive for decades to come?

After hearing Potteiger caution against overly pessimistic views of the trail, I begin to regret turning my nose up at tech-savvy outdoorsmen like Pesky. I suddenly feel foolish for fearing that the A.T. will no longer exist by the time I get around to hiking it. After all, who am I to judge? I’ve walked less than 50 miles of the trail. I sense there’s something I don’t yet understand about the A.T., something that might explain Potteiger’s lack of concern.

If the 75-year-old footpath is no longer a place of wilderness and solitude, I wonder, what is the value of today’s Appalachian Trail?

***

After leaving Pesky and Sticks at the café, where they are using their tablets to friend each other on Facebook, Ira and I drive out to “the boondocks” — the Housatonic State Forest, fifteen minutes outside of Salisbury — for dinner at the Bearded Woods Hiker Hostel.

I’d seen rumors on Whiteblaze.net that this new hostel in Connecticut was taking in thru-hikers, and, curious about the alternative to camping, I decide to check it out. As towns near the Appalachian Trail have started catering to rising hiker populations, the number of hostels along the trail has grown. No doubt their business is aided by the internet and cell phones — Bearded Woods is more than ten miles from the trail, but it offers trailside pick-up if you call ahead.

When I call the number listed online, a gruff voice answers: “Yello, this is Hudson.” I explain that I’m interested in seeing the hostel, and he insists that I come for dinner that night. If I want to learn about the hostel, I have to meet “Big Lu.”

“Big Lu” turns out to be LuciAnn Young, 46 years old and 4’10” tall, a business analyst from New York. ‘Hudson,’ 41, is her husband Patrick Young, a furniture maker from the Hudson Valley. He hiked the A.T. in 2008 and only responds to his trail name — if you forget and call him by his real name, he’ll reply, “Who’s Pat?”

Two hikers from Virginia, “Rhyno” and “Adventure Girl,” are seated at the table when we arrive. Rhyno stayed at Bearded Woods for several nights on his hike up to Maine, and on his drive back down with his girlfriend, Adventure Girl, he decided to stop by the hostel to introduce her to Hudson and Big Lu.

We eat on their candlelit screen porch, surrounded by the sound of crickets. As Big Lu hustles in and out of the kitchen, returning each time with a heaping plate of food, I realize what Pesky meant when he said that today’s hikers are “mollycoddled.” For $50 a night, including two home-cooked meals, laundry service, internet, and transportation, Bearded Woods to a hiker would resemble a five-star hotel. If this is roughin’ it, I think to myself, Paris Hilton could hike the Appalachian Trail.

After weeks on the trail, a bed at Bearded Woods seems like the lap of luxury.

I notice Hudson’s framed picture of Mt. Katahdin and the collection of animal skins he found in the woods: mink, bobcat, weasel, lynx, beaver, raccoon. I gather that he sees himself as a true outdoorsman, so I’m curious to hear his thoughts on today’s Appalachian Trail. Do hostels prevent people from camping and discovering nature? Are iPods and cell phones ruining the thru-hiking experience?

Hudson shakes his head.

“It’s not about the hike,” he says. “It’s about the people.” Big Lu, Rhyno, and Adventure Girl nod. Hudson’s fellow hikers, the owners of hostels he stayed at, and the folks who gave him a ride or a bite to eat in town — they are what he remembers about his thru-hike, not the trees or the flowers. The value of the Appalachian Trail today is largely social, he tells me, and cell phones and hostels can’t change that. In many ways, technology facilitates friendships — Rhyno and Adventure Girl wouldn’t be here if it weren’t for cell phones. If I hadn’t stumbled upon Bearded Woods on the web, Ira and I wouldn’t either.

Hudson affectionately calls the trail “the world’s longest small town” because of the community that surrounds it. In fact, the Appalachian Trail has long been known as a “people’s trail,” due to the wide network of supporters it attracts and the lifelong bonds it instills between hikers.  In 1987, Noel Grove wrote about “trail magic,” a phrase used by thru-hikers to describe little acts of kindness performed by total strangers. It’s still a common saying today, and Hudson credits it for inspiring him to open a hiker hostel.

The A.T. community made an impact on Hudson’s life and he wanted to be a part of it. Upon reaching Katahdin in 2008, he began to look for property in Connecticut near the Appalachian Trail.  After transforming the damp basement of an abandoned house into a cozy den of bunkbeds that sleeps ten to twelve, Hudson and Big Lu opened Bearded Woods this past May. Hudson hiked to all the shelters in Connecticut to drop off flyers with information about the hostel. When he discovered a week later that they had been removed, he returned to the shelters to leave more.

This time, he got a phone call from an AMC representative.

“You gotta get rid of your flyers,” the representative said. “No advertising in shelters.”

Hudson was offended — he saw his flyers as a service to hikers, not as “advertisements.” Besides, he says, hikers leave things for each other in the shelters all the time: train schedules, restaurant menus, maps, Bibles.

“How come the AMC doesn’t call up Metro North and tell them to remove their train schedules?” he says. Nevertheless, he hiked back in and removed the flyers. Word of the hostel spread on the trail and on the internet, and by the middle of the summer, when Rhyno visited, Bearded Woods had guests every night.

***

It’s funny that one of the AMC committee members who got Hudson so worked up happens to be the only man in the state who can match his obsession with the Appalachian Trail.

Jim Liptack chuckles when I ask him if the Connecticut AMC has ever had any problems with people posting things in shelters.

“Yeah, funny you ask,” he says, “the Bearded Woods guy left a whole bunch of flyers in all the shelters earlier this summer.”

“Oh, really?” I ask.

“We had to ask him to take them down,” Liptack continues. “There’s a law against advertisements on National Park land.” Roughly 60% of the Appalachian Trail sits on land that belongs to either the Parks Service or the Forest Service, he explains. If the AMC allowed hostel owners to put up flyers, sooner or later McDonald’s would be vying for ad space.

I ask Liptack if he’s bothered by commercialized hostels like Bearded Woods, or by stories of the partying that takes place on the trail in the South. Surely the experience has changed since he thru-hiked in 1980. Have these changes been for the worse?

“It’s more socially oriented,” he says, confirming what I heard from Hudson. But that’s a natural consequence of the growing popularity of the trail, he says, which is a good thing. It means more people are getting out there.

I remind him of his own quiet thru-hike, and his reflections on the importance of wilderness and solitude. After all, that was the trail’s founding purpose, right? Hasn’t today’s trail, with its cell phones and crowds, lost some of its original value?

Despite my prodding, Liptack is ambivalent. Like fellow old-timer Laurie Potteiger, he remains optimistic about today’s A.T., and while he acknowledges a shift in trail culture, he refuses to mourn the loss of yesterday’s technology-free trail. In an attempt to explain his attitude — or perhaps to put an end to my questions — Liptack tells me about a philosophy that has characterized the trail from the start.

The philosophy is best described by the trail saying “Hike Your Own Hike.” It’s a handy tool for ending arguments between opinionated outdoorsmen — on the trail, in shelters, and on online forums like Whiteblaze.net, where it’s abbreviated as “HYOH.”

According to Liptack, the freedom to hike one’s own hike is an important value of the trail. If your ideal hike is a gadget-free quest for nature and solitude, so be it. But if you want to walk with twenty-five friends and listen to Madonna, that’s okay, too.

Besides, Liptack says, “eventually, the batteries run out.” At that point, hikers have no choice but to listen to the wind and the trees.

His point is that even with technology’s distractions — and even if the Appalachian Trail is no longer “wilderness” — thru-hikers experience a whole lot more “nature” than your average American does. I joke that they might be getting more human interaction, too.

“You may be right,” Liptack says.

In fact, I realize, maybe that’s part of the reason why so many people are flocking to the Appalachian Trail. The largest demographic of thru-hikers is typically college students and twenty-somethings, a group that nowadays you’d be more likely to find on a computer than on a trail. Nevertheless, the A.T. saw more hikers in the summer of 2012 than ever before. For a generation that’s criticized for being too self-centered and consumed by technology, perhaps today’s Appalachian Trail still constitutes a kind of “back to basics” — not necessarily back to nature, but back to people.

These days, the social aspect of the trail is what lures people, more so than the “solitude.” What matters for today’s hikers is not the chance to get away from society, but the opportunity to enter a new society — the Appalachian Trail community, where people call each other special names, share in the mutual suffering of hiking hundreds of miles, and where, as one 22-year-old thru-hiker called “Smoked Nutz” told me, “you can be your best self.”

We live in a world full of smart phones and iPads, so of course these gadgets have found their way onto the Appalachian Trail. But an A.T. that prioritizes community can’t be ruined by technology or crowds. Such a trail may even have a place for the occasional frat party.

Hudson’s “small town” is getting bigger, and the Appalachian Trail community is becoming more visible, with thru-hiking blogs and websites like Whiteblaze.net, where every aspect of the trail is dissected and debated. Whiteblaze, which calls itself “A Community of Appalachian Trail Enthusiasts,” has over 40,000 members and 70,000 threads.

The most frequently visited pages on Whiteblaze are the “Thru-Hiker Registries”: long lists of past, present and future hikers, displaying their trail names, their start dates, and a few phrases expressing their excitement to get on the trail (“The bug started a couple years ago and has taken over my life!!! I am so excited to get out there and do this!!!!”). Last September, though they still had months to wait before the snow melted in Georgia, “Class of 2013” hopefuls were already discussing their plans.

***

With this community in mind, I buy a pumpkin pie before heading up Bear Mountain. If we encounter an aggressive hiking clan, I tell Ira, I’ll befriend them with a slice. Then they’ll break out the beer and the projector screen, and we’ll watch Seinfeld atop the mountain. I’ll offer to recycle their beer cans. I won’t turn up my nose.

But when we reach the top, it’s quiet. I stake out a sunny rock beside the trail to wait for the crowd. Some picnickers pass by with their dogs, and some day-hikers in fanny-packs cheer at the summit.

It’s late in the hiking season, and I’ve been told we were lucky to run into thru-hikers in town. Most of the northbounders are further north by now, and the southbounders are further south. Even in the middle of July, I realize, it would be rare to see a crowd in Connecticut. The big wave of hiker traffic starts in Georgia, thinning out over 2,000 miles of trail.

A couple hours pass. I’m beginning to think we might not see any thru-hikers at all, when a loud bark echoes from the other side of the mountain. A few minutes later, a black and white dog rounds the bend, followed by two thru-hikers who introduce themselves as “Hermit” and “Grizz.”

Hermit and Grizz (real names: Olivia Gomes and Nicholas Olsen, the tech-savvy hikers from Key West I mentioned earlier) eagerly accept my offer of pumpkin pie. By the time they’ve scarfed down two slices apiece, we’re deep into a discussion about the changing culture of the Appalachian Trail.

Sunrise at Bear Mountain.

Despite their matching bandanas and their mutual reliance on Gomes’ iPhone, the two hikers say they’re “like Yin and Yang” when it comes to how they perceive the trail.

For Olsen, its value lies largely in the A.T. community. A self-proclaimed “social butterfly,” he had a blast partying until dawn at “Trail Days in Damascus,” where his new thru-hiker friends christened him “Grizz” because of his untamed beard and wild antics. Gomes, on the other hand, chose the A.T. to get away from Florida’s crowds, and her shyness and “No Shelters policy” quickly earned her the trail name “Hermit.”

The couple has somehow made thru-hiking together work, with a little bickering, a lot of give and take, and frequent invocations of “Hike Your Own Hike!”

Nevertheless, even Olsen, the Social Butterfly, occasionally gets sick of crowds, and he says he prefers catching dinner with his collapsible fishing rod to eating at a restaurant in town. And Gomes, the Hermit, despite “wish[ing] sometimes that the trail were more wild,” realizes she’s no Thoreau. To prove it, she leans over to show me her iPhone map of the trail.

Olsen raises his eyebrows. “I’m surprised she’s talking so much to you,” he says.

“Must be the pie,” I say.

Ira and I end up camping that night at the same site as Gomes and Olsen, a couple miles farther south on the trail towards Salisbury. It gets dark quickly in the woods, and after setting up our tent and eating some Clif Bars on a nearby boulder, we climb into our sleeping bags and begin to doze off, listening to the wind in the trees.

Before falling asleep, I pull my iPhone out from under my head. I forgot to look something up on the internet earlier, and I have to set my alarm. I find out on Google that the sun will rise at 6:35 am tomorrow. I set my alarm for 6:15. It’s supposed to be a beautiful morning, and I don’t want to miss it.

 

Just Enough: Fishing for Happiness in Southern Thailand

$
0
0
In a remote corner of Thailand, a Muslim community draws both sustenance and meaning from the sea. Will overfishing and societal pressures cost the people of Dato their livelihoods?

NATURE–CULTURE–ACTION!

$
0
0
Nature vs. culture. Wild vs. civilized. Country vs. city. These binaries, time and again, have been shown to be false dichotomies. But many groups and organizations still consider protected areas, for example, to be one without people in it. But counter-examples are starting to find their way into the streets and the public view.

An Interview with Patagonia’s Director of Environmental Strategy Jill Dumain

$
0
0
SAGE sat down with Jill Dumain, Patagonia's Director of Environmental Strategy, to find out what makes the company unique and to get some advice.

Beef, Banality, and Economics

$
0
0
Economists compare the benefits of beef with the environmental costs of cattle ranching and delve into the surprising science of cow pee.

Climate and the Coast: The Seaweed in Your Sandals

$
0
0
You've probably eaten seaweed, used it for walking, or taken it along with your morning vitamins.

Bringing Conservation Benefits to Local Communities

$
0
0
A gathering of conservationists and community members in Vietnam works towards striking a balance in sharing the benefits of forest conservation.

Who is Watching the Land? Wendell Berry and the Resettling of America

$
0
0
The agrarian prophet discusses food, farming, and why he has hope.

A Gurgle Beneath the Roar: The Grand Canyon’s Hidden Water

$
0
0
When it comes to water in the arid landscape, Laurel Hamers says we should be concerned about more than just the Colorado.

Salmon People

$
0
0
Who will the Salmon People of the Pacific Northwest be when there aren't any salmon?
Viewing all 65 articles
Browse latest View live




Latest Images