Jenna Itwaru is a student at the University of Buffalo concerned about the Trump administration's focus on consumption of the country's natural resources/Courtesy of Jenna Itwaru
On January 20th, 2025, the executive order titled “Unleashing American Energy” was released, shattering perceptions of federal interest in land and water protections. On February 14th, thousands of workers in the National Park Service, Bureau of Land Management, and the US Department of Agriculture were fired, resulting in uncertainty around park operations and management of federal lands.
On March 5th, NPS visitation records were suppressed, and diminished the knowledge needed for widespread celebration of the parks’ increasing success. On March 20th, a new executive order called for immediate action to increase funding for and decrease regulations limiting mineral projects in the United States.
We don’t have time to catch our breath as we face these forced changes. While it’s important to inventory the stable resources within our country’s borders, we need to take a step back and explore sustainable options before causing irreversible harm to the ones we have.
Many citizens are demonstrating resistance to these orders not only for sustaining the longevity of our resources, but to also consider the historical vision of environmental leaders of the nation’s past for our beautiful irreplaceable landscapes.
On March 1st, a protest organized by the ‘Resistance Rangers’ group gathered about 12,921 participants that demonstrated their concern for these recent events. The Resistance Rangers group is made up of more than 1,000 off-duty park rangers who organized a day of protest at about 179 parks. This is a great example of outdoor influencers using their platforms to bring awareness to the strong emotional impact on the community.
Many of us have deep connections to natural spaces, whether we are aware of it or not. To explore this further, I surveyed undergraduate students from my university on their thoughts about the natural spaces local to them. Everyone I spoke to expressed deep concern for the environments they grew up in, as well as fear for the impacts of climate change and changing policies on our future.
I also spoke to Cathy Rayhill from the nonprofit organization CRED4GI that deals with policies, conservation, development, and the unique environment of Grand Island, NY. This town has consistently experienced pressure of economic development that doesn’t consider the impact on the natural land. She shared an anecdote that resonated with me because of how much it captured the sentiments expressed by others I spoke to, “My father used to say many years ago, he said the next world war is not going to be fought over land, it’s going to be fought over natural resources.”
The fight for resources is already underway as we have recently learned from news outlets such as The New York Times about President Trump’s proposed mineral deal with Ukraine as a fair payment for the war aid that the United States has provided. These materials are vital to high-tech industries, and there aren’t any current known substitutes for them. The value of these resources is already being interpreted as valuable enough to be traded for war aid.
This emphasizes our accelerated journey towards a disastrous future surrounding the conservation and use of our valuable resources as the scarcity becomes more of an issue. Rayhill emphasizes the importance of my generation, Gen Z, being at the forefront of making advancements towards a sustainable future. She expresses the hope that we don’t give up and continue to be enthusiastic about building a balanced future for our nation, pushing for federal support in this movement to maintain many of our natural resources. It became clear that we must lead the research work and utilize our advanced technologies to build innovative practices.
As emphasized in my conversations, people in the United States are greatly impacted by the protective policies that shaped their experience with wilderness and park spaces.
Theodore Roosevelt, here in Yosemite with John Muir, was one of the most conservation-minded presidents/Library of Congress
For example, Theodore Roosevelt established the National Conservation Commission in 1908 to discuss the conservation of the nation’s natural resources. I investigated the archival history of the U.S. Forest Service to establish some important events that helped shape protective policies that are in place today. The Commission outlines the tasks of the states and the nation to take part in conservation efforts because, at the time, logging was on the rise nationwide. After considering its negative impacts, rules were made to reduce waste and improve methods.
Two of the most important things discussed in the document are education and substitution. It is important to educate farmers, landowners, and loggers about their impacts. Responsibility is placed on the federal government to provide the money and resources needed to train state and private forest owners on how to conserve their forests. The importance of substitutes is also configured, which means exploring alternative building materials other than wood. This helps replace the need for excessive logging because of available substitutes such as stone, brick, steel, and concrete. These materials are less expensive, more sustainable, and better equipped for building structures.
Overall, the Commission emphasizes the importance of using federal powers to reform the procedures in the nation that are environmentally damaging. However, today’s current administration is abusing the federal power it has over the public spaces that hold such valuable resources. Reflecting on the establishment of environmental services will help bring to light the fundamental value of why lands were originally placed under federal ownership, throwing into relief how in the past few months we as a nation are deviating from existing protections. As we advocate to hold our current administration accountable, we must remember these original and historical policies that have been proven, time and time again, to hold importance.
In one particular area of interest, I researched documents explaining federal Recreation Impact Management. In a dialogue from 1971 between John V. Krutilla, Director of the Natural Environments Program, and Mr. Housley, the Director of Recreation for the U.S. Forest Service, Krutilla shares research that presents economic models to explain that there is a gain received from the preservation—versus the development—of a natural region. This economic research was used to develop a model that explains whether Hells Canyon in Oregon would benefit more from preservation or development, ultimately showing that preservation was in the greater interest of the American people. Krutilla is also the author of “Conservation Reconsidered,” published in 1967 in the American Economic Review, in which he discusses the existential value of natural spaces, the quantitative analysis of irreversible impacts, and the technological process impacts to natural conservation.
Hell's Canyon on the Idaho-Oregon border/Dsdugan, public domain
In his research, Krutilla presents an economic justification of preserving natural landscapes and argues that, “[e]xtractive industries, including land and water resource development, are responsible for the most serious impact on the visual character of the landscape, and by modifying the ecological characterizes, reduce the biological diversity typically found in the natural environment.”
In other words, there are irreversible effects on irreplaceable assets because of the process of converting the natural environment into usable resources. While this might provide an immediate purpose and economic value, this “development” value diminishes over time as technological processes introduce other resources of similar value over time. The supply of resources diminishes to nothing since they are extracted until nothing is left.
Krutilla proves that the long-term economic value of development declines over time. Destruction of the natural space also ruins the economic and utility value of the beautiful landscape that is important for recreation.
On the other side, the economic value of preserved land wouldn’t diminish over time in the same fashion because outdoor recreation provides great economic benefit. If the land is conserved, the economic recreation benefit is directly tied to the amount of people that enjoy the space. As mentioned before, time spent in public natural spaces has been on the rise.
You can find substitutes for the resources, but you cannot replace or recreate the natural beauty of an unbuilt space. By preserving these areas, the economic benefit received from aesthetics, leisure in the area, and demand for recreational enjoyment will increase—drawing more and more people to the experience—and will continue to provide benefits in the long run. More importantly, the clean air and water that we get to benefit from are central, and the ability for ecosystems to thrive is invaluable.
Educating American citizens about the economic and recreational history of environmental protections will help urge our current generation to advocate and work towards a more sustainable future that similarly values conserving balance of our shared environments. Learning the history of why policies were put in place, such as the need for efficient logging methods, limiting the waste of timber caused often by outdated clear-cut methods, and preventing the depletion of wood, will help put into perspective the reasons that today’s threatened resources must not be targeted the same way. The protection of unique areas ensures that natural value will prevail and that citizens of the country can continue to enjoy the areas they feel personally connected to.
The policy of conservation is perhaps the most typical example of the general policies which this Government has made peculiarly its own during the opening years of the present century. The function of our Government is to insure to all its citizens, now and hereafter, their rights to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. If we of this generation destroy the resources from which our children would otherwise derive their livelihood, we reduce the capacity of our land to support a population, and so either degrade the standard of living or deprive the coming generations of their right to life on this continent. -- President Theodore Roosevelt in the 1909 Report Of The National Conservation Commission
As the historical documents show, funds and regulations are supposed to keep federally managed land protected while allowing recreation. There’s been a consistent increase in visits to national parks and outdoor spaces as more people place importance on spending their leisure time in parks, whether it's local to them or across the nation—something shared in the reflections that my peers shared in my interviews. The federal protections on land become irrelevant when the way the land is managed shifts away from this common, longstanding interest.
While today everything seems to be centered around increasing economic development and control, extraction and exploitation of our natural lands will only have a short-term positive impact until we deplete ourselves of our resources. Instead, as the experts shared more than a half century ago, investing time and money into the exploration of sustainable resources and methods will save us from irreversible destruction. We could innovatively learn to attribute scientific data to policies that will prevent destruction and learn from the history of environmental movements.
It’s up to our current generation of outdoor influencers and prospective college graduates in environmental studies and related areas to elevate the conversations about our future in sustainability and resources. Through conversations with professionals and laypeople, it’s evident that many want to see a continuation of historical American efforts to improve environmental practices.
Alongside such a rapid changing climate, we also need to do more. Many countries across the world have been implementing long-term plans to practice sustainability going into the future. Singapore is practicing the ‘Singapore Green Plan 2030’ to achieve net-zero emissions by 2050. China, India, Costa Rica, and Australia all have similar country-wide environmental policies in place to reach similar future goals.
While the United States has The United States’ Sustainability Plan, these other countries are putting a lot more investment into research and implementation of practices that will contribute to a better future. The United States is not quite as far when it comes to thinking about issues ahead of time, as this county regularly practices dealing with problems as they come up instead. By means of protests, research, and education we can bring attention to how achievable it is to reach a balanced management of the environment in our country as well. Instead of rushing to ‘unleash America’s energy’ as stated by some recent orders, we should instead move towards finding power in sustainable advancements that will put us in the lead of a better future.
Support Essential Coverage of Essential Places
