Wrangling the Frontal Lobe
Post by Clemson student Luther Bells
Human behavior is shaped by far more than individual choice. It is a culmination of communication, culture, experience, and environment. Here in Big Sky Country, no single factor explains the values that guide the sustainability efforts of the Great Plains or define the ranchers, cowboys, and townsfolk who call this landscape home. Instead, these behaviors and beliefs are forged through generations of lived experience, oral history traditions, evolving technology, and ongoing exchanges of knowledge, creating a unique relationship between people, place, and stewardship.
In Montana, as in other places in the U.S., perceptions and first impressions play a pivotal role in decision-making. When talking to stewards, state officials, or community members, we, as students, are actively picking their brains to see what they think about controversial issues and the reasoning behind their management plans. The basis of their reasoning comes from trust. Either trust in what they have done for generations, those they get their information from, or in new science and technology. The number one thing that prevents this bond from establishing is disrespect, which can either occur intentionally or unintentionally. So how might we avoid this mishap to continue conserving and sustaining the American Prairie? Well, one approach given by Kelly Beavers from the Montana Grazing Lands Coalition is to lead with genuine curiosity. To understand each other and promote sustainability, we must ask questions, especially regarding management plans and practices, but we must ask with the intent not to prove someone wrong but to gain a new perspective. This intentionality can make the difference between a collaboration and a burned bridge. One of the various methods to get this new perspective is through dialogues, and a popular outlet is podcasts.
Podcasts have skyrocketed in recent years in terms of media consumption, with drivers using them during "windshield time" and influencing every aspect of culture. During our time here, we had a chance to meet with Matt Henningsen and Ryan Bramlette from the Land Investors Podcast. After powerful conversations with the gentleman regarding the impact and importance of their show in promoting and informing the landscape, I questioned again what the modern cowboy is, but this time in terms of the principles of its accepted evolution. The ideal of saving the American Cowboy can be seen as a threat that fuels growth and innovation amongst the varying organizations and entities. Through our discussions of the changes in the cowboy, I came to the realization that the issue isn't the cowboy evolving or changing, but rather who has control over the cowboy's evolution. It seems that the differing 20% (from the 80-20 rule, or Pareto Principle) that brews the actual disagreement is the identity crisis of the cowboy in terms of do I, the cowboy, rancher, or herdsmen, get to say that I changed because of my conception thought process and free will, or did I change because of an outside force. It seems that the discontent can be pinpointed to an issue of pride and the attempt to satisfy the notion of independent action and influence.
Another issue concerning the communication and dissemination of science to bring different communities together is politics. The question I asked was, "How can we keep science and practices apolitical" in efforts to keep sustainability at the forefront of decision-making? However, the sad truth is that even today, the word "science" seems to be a political statement. How might this translate to the ranchers of Montana? As a nation, we should begin thinking about how we can make the different ways of knowing apolitical. Yes, the scientific method is important with its checks and balances and peer-reviewed articles. Still, it is foolish to dismiss the documentation and lineage of experienced ranchers and native communities. This dismalness of their heritage, history, and success is the disrespect that breeds distrust in communities. Yet again, a key part of science is the social aspect; it is crucial to integrate the community rather than treat them as subjects.
So, when describing the landscape's sustainability, what are we trying to sustain? Yes, the Narrowleaf Purple Coneflower (Echinacea angustifolia) and Montana Blue-eyed Grass (Sisyrinchium montanum) are topics of focus for environmental stewardship; however, sustainability in these prairies also means protecting culture and ideals. And with that, I think it is important to leave you with a couple of questions that should guide your future conservation efforts, conversations, and interactions.
1. How can we adopt the mindset of an adaptive legacy?
2. How can we adapt the scientific method and accept different ways of knowing?
3. What place does culture have in science and management?
