Who can afford sustainability?
Guest post by summer program student Kaelyn King -
Upon reflecting on the second half of this course, I find myself considering the conflicting values of the American Prairie Reserve (APR) and the Ranchers’ Stewardship Alliance (RSA). Coming into this experience, I was very excited to learn about the efforts made by APR to buy up private lands in order to preserve the prairie ecosystem of Montana. However, following our discussions with representatives from APR, RSA, The Nature Conservancy (TNC), and the World Wildlife Foundation (WWF), I feel that the strategy employed by APR to preserve Montana landscapes and wildlife may be effective for environmental conservation but is directly harming the ranching community of Montana. Moreover, considering that ranching is one of the primary contributors to the Montana economy, I assumed that organizations aiming to preserve natural ecosystems would similarly work to bolster the economy through cattle ranching, especially considering that the livelihoods of people involved in this industry are directly dependent on the health and availability of grazing land. In actuality, APR retires the land previously used for ranching and cattle grazing, and based on my understanding, purchasing and retiring these ranches from Montana residents has financially harmed many of the residents of rural central and Eastern Montana. In comparison, RSA aims to use monetary conservation incentives to support the preservation of the prairie landscape and wildlife while also helping to increase the socioeconomic status of the ranching community. Additionally, these incentives help to keep prairie land in the hands of native, generational ranching families instead of private companies and organizations with very little connection to the land or physical presence in the community.
As someone who does not come from a ranching background or a rural community, I never truly understood how important it is for established community members to not only have an active role in environmental conservation but also to maintain ownership over the land. Following this experience, I have come to understand that leaving land in the hands of ranchers in Montana is crucial for both environmental sustainability and economic stability. Ranchers have a deep-rooted understanding of the land they manage, employing sustainable grazing practices that maintain soil health, preserve biodiversity, and support wildlife habitats– even if they are doing this unknowingly. In fact, during our conversation with Martin, a leader at the RSA, I thought it was interesting to hear that ranchers were more likely to engage with conservation incentives if they were not presented as a method to achieve environmental sustainability, but rather a way to increase their income. This concept reminded me of the idea that environmental sustainability is usually framed in a way that is inaccessible to lower socioeconomic classes, guilt trips those who are unable to afford “sustainable” alternatives to popular products, and overall creates a divide between the modern idea of “sustainability” and working class Americans.
I feel that the conflict between ranchers and the typical presentation of what “sustainability” is and how it should be achieved is mirrored in the hostility between the American Prairie Reservation and the Ranchers’ Stewardship Alliance. On one hand, APR is able to operate due to significant investments from companies and private donors in order to buy up land and implement passive rewilding (more or less). On the other hand, RSA aims to pay ranchers to incorporate sustainable ranching practices into their operation– which many ranchers are already doing unknowingly. Essentially, from my perspective, RSA’s main priority is the ranching communities in Montana and views environmental conservation as a benefit of a thriving community and economy. Meanwhile, APR’s main goal is prairie conservation without directly considering how it impacts native Montana residents. (I will say that I am not totally convinced that APR’s main goal is conservation based on their bison understocking practices and very limited grazing– but I will save the rest of that for my final paper).
Overall, writing this paper has been quite frustrating in that I feel I have not even started to scratch the surface of this deep and complex conflict between the values of RSA and APR– in fact, I may have even conveyed the nature of these conflicts completely incorrectly in this paper. To be quite honest, the only thing that I can say with 100% certainty in this paper is that I don’t want my future career to have an “invisible wall” or “safety net” between me and the community who lives in or is affected by whatever region or resource I am focusing on conserving. Instead, I hope to be an environmentalist and a leader that is able to balance the needs of nature and communities and be a physical presence in the community that I am impacting. Additionally, I hope to shape the public’s image of conservation so that it is not a commodity that can be bought by only the top 1%, but rather feasible actions and changes that are possible for anyone.
Finally, I truly believe that environments cannot be conserved without support from the local community, especially in a place where the economy is so heavily and directly dependent on natural resources.
