I studied geography in grad school. One of the basic premises of geography is that maps can show graphical concepts and ideas that might not be obvious with other forms of communication.
The map of roads in Greater Yellowstone serves as a powerful tool, revealing a reality that many fail to grasp. Despite the protection of vast roadless landscapes such as Yellowstone National Park, the Wind River Range, Beartooth Mountains, and other smaller wildlands, the ecosystem beyond these large public preserves is marred by a network of roads and human land uses, stretching from cities to ranches.
Roads have numerous impacts on ecosystem function and integrity. An excellent review of the ecological problems of increasing road density is Trombulak and Frissell’s reivew.
Many human practices on private land are fundmenally at odds with preserving ecosystem integrity. Ag is the biggest impact on landscape integity usually involving the replacement of native vegetation with a single species of plant over thousands of acres.Photo George Wuerthner
Even with the best protection, the wildlands’ heart of the ecosystem may not survive intact if the future condition of the lower elevation lands (in private hands) is ignored.
While I have criticism for some of the public agency policy decisions, the future of the Greater Yellowstone Ecosystem will be determined by how we deal with private lands. Can the ecosystem’s wildlife adjust to a doubling population and consequent increasing recreational use of public lands? Can the watersheds survive with more sediment and pesticide run-off? Can natural processes like wildlife survive as a significant ecological force if homes are built up every valley and ridge?
Rural subdivsion near Ennis, Montana. Roads and human activity degrades ecosystem integrity. Photo George Wuerthner
So what is to be done? First, not every acre of land has equal ecological value or function. More than 20 years ago, some colleagues and I completed a biological assessment of the ecosystem’s biological hot spots and rated them on their vulnerability to degradation. As a first step, revising and updating such a survey can be useful in identifying the lands that are critical to preserving ecosystem function.
But identifying these lands doesn’t buy you any protection unless you take the second step and work to protect these landscapes. One of the best ways to do this is through regional zoning and planning.
Oregon has state-wide zoning that requires all communities to designate urban growth boundaries. No major urban development can occur outside of the boundary. While this does not specifically protect wildlife, it does reduce the human footprint on the landscape.
Critical wildlife corridors and lands should be acquired and added to the public domain. While plenty of destructive activities can and do occur on public lands, there is at least the potential for public discussion of how lands should be managed.
Bear management area in Yellowstone, marked by the claws of a grizzly. Photo George Wuerthner
Seasonal closures can be effective. Yellowstone Park has large parts of its landscape closed to human entry as part of Bear Management Units or for other reasons, like reducing disturbance of wolf dens or eagle nests. Similarly, the Montana Department of Fish, Wildlife, and Parks will close wildlife winter areas to human intrusions.
The road map of Greater Yellowstone shows us the problem. Other maps, such as those delineating wildlife migration corridors, big game winter range, critical watersheds, and so forth, can show us how to mitigate the problem.
It is time to recognize that what happens on the private lands of the ecosystem will determine the functional viability of the public lands they surround.
Comments
Thanks again George for keeping us focused on what is needed to preserve and protect entire ecosystems, and not just Public Lands. Unfortunately, using the State of Oregon as an example of good land-use zoning rules is not a great example. Oregon falls far short of anything really meaningful. Designating “Urban Growth Boundaries” would be excellent if they were made PERMANENT. However in Oregon, once cities grow out to the Urban Growth Boundary with urban-sprawl, the cities simply move the Urban Growth Boundary a few miles farther out and urban-sprawl continues until that new area is filled up, and then the process of the cities moving the Urban Growth Boundary happens again – and again. A few cities in Oregon have voted to keep their Urban Growth Boundaries in place, however, not enough have taken this positive action.
An exponentially large amount of land is in private hands compared to how much is under federal government management. Therefore, George could not be more correct about having to protect lands in private hands if we’re going to accomplish anything significantly positive for the natural environment.
The private lands problem is rooted in the immoral idea that humans can own land. As a traditional Native once said, you can’t own the land; if anything the land owns you. The whole attitude of land ownership is environmentally and spiritually harmful, and that’s the root of this problem. So long as people are mentally and spiritually unevolved, they’ll continue to think that they can own land and do whatever they want to it and the nonhumans who live there. THAT’s what needs to be reversed if we’re ever going to fix any of this mess that humans created.
An exponentially large amount of land is in private hands compared to how much is under federal government management. Therefore, George could not be more correct about having to protect lands in private hands if we’re going to accomplish anything significantly positive for the natural environment.
The private lands problem is rooted in the immoral idea that humans can own land. As a traditional Native once said, you can’t own the land; if anything the land owns you. The whole attitude of land ownership is environmentally and spiritually harmful, and that’s the root of this problem. So long as people are mentally and spiritually unevolved, they’ll continue to think that they can own land and do whatever they want to it and the nonhumans who live there. THAT’s what needs to be reversed if we’re ever going to fix any of this mess that humans created.
A comment from JudithAnn Anderson
The roads proliferation problem has been explored for decades in Britain. It is sometimes called corridor studies.. and patches. Unroading is also difficult. It can aggravate the problem and actually reduce patch sizes. More roads increases populations in the species that frequent edges such as deer and you can see where opposition comes from. erasing a road off a new map doesn’t destroy its existence on old maps. The terrain changes along the alignment. Such as invasive species, drainage, and different minerals, mineral and chemicals spills or planned or unplanned application. Heights of plants allowed. Compaction issues etc etc. “Corridor Ecology” texts exist.