Conservation Values

By Lois B. Robbins

When Aldo Leopold called for a land ethic, he asked landowners to consider the benefits of their land, not only to themselves, but their community, the natural world, and future generations. In years past, people who held large parcels of land felt a responsibility to return a portion of their land to their human or natural community in reciprocity for their good fortune.

Over the years, conservation values seem to have evolved into something Aldo Leopold might not recognize. Today, as in just about everything else, conservation values appear to be, in large part, market-based. With few exceptions, landowners must either be coerced into conservation through regulations, or enticed by financial benefit.

Other values, have come into play. Individualism, local control, and economic opportunity give impetus today’s conservation movement. Land is valued for its market potential. Decision-makers rarely consider the intrinsic value of nature in and of itself. Property rights are paramount, and no innate obligation to the community is acknowledged. Author Eric Freyfogle* insists, “payment programs tell landowners, loud and clear, that conservation is a voluntary activity, not an expectation of ownership.” Coercion through regulation reinforces the idea that conservation is not so much an obligation as a matter of choice, - a choice that, in the eyes of many, is pre-empted by top-down legal protections.

The carrots of tax incentives and density bonuses often drive conservation. Combined with the stick of punishment for infringement of regulatory protections, economic considerations appear to give primary impetus to conservation.

But on closer examination, the communitarian values that are the foundation of the conservation movement are revealed to be alive and well. Though rare, some people are still motivated to protect their land by a desire to serve their community with no thought of compensation. They would have done so even without tax benefits. In addition, often hidden from view, are the dedicated people who are the engine of conservation. These folks freely give their time and energy as volunteers, educating the public and effectively stewarding the land in their trust. Last year, 37 NOHLC volunteers reported nearly 3,000 hours of uncompensated work on behalf of conservation.

It appears that in the midst of a money-driven society there are still many who feel a reciprocal relationship with their community, the natural world and future generations. There are names for people such as these: Good Samaritans; Good Stewards; Good Ancestors. Aldo Leopold would be pleased.

For further reading on the tension between communitarian and market-based conservation, the following books are recommended:

A Sand County Almanac, by Aldo Leopold
Hands-on Environmentalism, by Brent M. Haglund and Thomas W. Still
The Land We Share: Private Property and The Common Good, by Eric Freyfogle
Why Conservation is Failing and How it Can Regain Ground, by Eric Freyfogle
Cities in the Wilderness: a New Vision of Land Use in America, by Bruce Babbitt
What is a Whole Community: A Letter to Whose Who Care for And Restore the Land, a monograph by Peter Forbes