As we made our way over paths of gravel, wood, and dirt as we took in the quiet tranquility of nature around us. It is worth examining what we think of when it comes to the idea of wilderness. With growing up in such an urban and industrialized area, any touch of forest that we came across has probably been manicured to appear as such. It brings to mind much the way that humans have domesticated pets (dogs and cats specifically) to a point in which if they were released back into the wild that their mere existence would be invasive to the local ecosystem. That we as humans always and continue to think of ourselves as the center of existence, that everything exists to serve a purpose to us. This mentality is what leads to what we now know as forest or 'wilderness', as it is only brings to mind images of forestry that we can hike through or that borders parks around our neighborhoods. Is this true wildness or forest? As you think more deeply on the topic, you will find that the idea of wilderness to the more industrial areas of the United States is normally manufactured, manicured, or preserved in order for us to witness it. The idea of the wilderness that we examine in our local area is completely different from the generations before us and could evolve to be described differently by those after us. With this idea of humans being the main center point of existence begins to showcase in the way in which we only preserve things for our *own* benefactor. This can be heavily tied to the idea of the individualistic mindset that American's frequently take to the extreme but can also be applied all too often when we are talking about conservation. It feels as though one of the arguments that can be made by those when speaking is that future generations will not get to witness this wilderness or the species that are quickly going extinct. While it is a valid reason, it also showcases this selfish mentality of thinking that it isn't worth fixing until it affects us. What about the species that are dying out and the effects on their ecosystem that bring to the forefront? It's an interesting topic to dwell on and try to come up with potential ways in which we can begin to de-centralize ourselves when it comes to the idea of talking about conservation. It's also worth talking about is the idea brought up in discussion about the selfish mentality of preservation being a resource. While I understand the necessity of monetary gain in some respects when it comes to paying workers and benefiting the forest areas that they are working with. It also brings to mind the mentality that something can't exist within the realm of monetary gain so that it will provide resources for us. Why can't preserved lands simply exist and those that necessitate the upkeep of it be volunteers--or paid through a federal agency because of their integral part within the conservation movement? Obviously, I don't have all the information regarding the antics of how these parks and hiking spots work. Although I think it's important to look into and understand how they are being paid and what the money that is put into them is going to--particularly the money that is coming from those who come to enjoy these places. Since the prices of these types of location can also cause accessibility issues for some from a standpoint of people's abilities to go to them. If they are priced highly, it goes to almost push those who are in lower class standing to be unable to enjoy nature in this manner. This it creates an idea that this manicured version of wilderness exists as a luxury. This is important to showcase as well to open up the discussion to not only preserved parks as a whole and how they are being handled, but as well towards the idea of modern 'wilderness'.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorA place to view my thoughts and stream of consiousness during the walks through the woods. As well as discoveries and memories that tie into the overarching class ideas. Archives
November 2022
Categories |