A Study in Becoming

an Environmental Activist

by

Rebekah C. Hill

There are people who choose to become active participators in supporting a particular view concerning a controversial issue. They are compelled to leave the sidelines and join the game. Why do some people do this? What do they hope to achieve by their actions? Why do others not choose to become active? Having interviewed an environmental activist, I wish to make some conclusions about why someone might choose to become active in the environmental arena. However, before these conclusions are made, it is important to clarify some of the possible roles of an environmental activist from a historical look at environmental activism.

Over the course of time as societies became more complex, people were able to more freely develop and express ideas. These ideas may have been philosophical, political, or scientific responses to certain trends or observations of the day. Actively promoting these ideas, or activism, is made possible by our complex society and has increased as our technology has increased. There are many different types of activists that promote their position using many different types of communication medium and tactics. The methods chosen may give their activism either a positive or negative perception within society as a whole. Let us take a look at how environmental ideas developed and which methods have been used to actively promote those ideas.

Environmental activism has its roots in conservation and preservation of natural resources. The term "conservation" was first popularized during the Roosevelt Administration (1901-1909) by a forester named Gifford Pinchot. At this time, environmental issues were mainly focused around the wise use of natural resources (Scheffer 3). The Progressive Conservative Movement (1890-1920) was one of the first environmental movements. This particular movement, led by hydrologists, foresters, agrostologists (grass botanists), geologists, and anthropologists, was a scientific movement. They focused on bringing their scientific observations about the environment to the attention of federal policy makers. However, human population growth, air and water pollution, and habitat destruction were not major issues to these early activists (Scheffer 3-4).

In 1866, Ernst Hackel, biologist and philosopher, introduced the term "ecology" in his book General Morphology of Organisms. Ecology, or the study of relationships between organisms and their environment, grew to become a field of science that helped form the basis of the environmental activist movement. Novelist John Steinbeck also defined ecology in his book, Sea of Cortez. He wrote: "Our fingers turned over the stones and we saw life that was like our life. . . .The tide pool stretches both ways, digs back to electrons and leaps space into the universe and fights out of the moment into non-conceptual time. Then ecology has a synonym which is ALL."

The findings of the study of ecology subsequently proliferated the average American home through television and the media, which brought support to the environmental movement from the "common" population. Principles of ecology point out the detrimental effects that the human organism has had on the environment on a global scale (Scheffer 4).

By the 1960’s, ecology had become a household word. Marston Bates, ecologist, was instrumental in voicing his concerns to the public. He insisted that respect for the biosphere must have a place in law and government. He felt all people were entitled to clean and beautiful surroundings and that protection of the environment was non-negotiable. He was very articulate, approaching the task of promoting the ideas of ecology to the public with an almost religious zeal. Professionals like Marston Bates introduced the ideas of ecology to the public, and the general public demanded political improvements associated with the environmental age (Scheffer 5-6).

In 1969, the environmental revolution was triggered by outrage over several environmental catastrophes: the Santa Barbara oil spill, the seizure of 11 tons of DDT contaminated coho salmon in Wisconsin and Minnesota, and the burning of the Cuyahoga River in Cleveland, Ohio. Widespread use of television allowed more people to witness environmental destruction. Also, the use of automobiles allowed people to view destruction first hand on their travels.

The first demonstrators came from many different backgrounds. There were zoologists, poets, engineers, economists, farmers, professionals, students, and the list goes on (Scheffer 6). Students made up a large part of the movement. Between the 1960’s and the 1970’s, college student population increased 50% (from 16.5 million to 24.7 million). In 1960, 13% of people between the ages of 20 and 24 were in college. By 1970, this figure rose to 23%. Also, in 1971, the voting age was lowered from 21 to 18. This created 11 million new voters, all young. The young people getting involved with the movement proved to be influential for several reasons. They were numerous, and they were separated from their elders by both an educational and generational gap (Scheffer 7).

As education increased, some environmentalists used Planet Earth as an icon. To some, environmentalism took on a religious flavor. Students on liberal campuses sought guidance from natural, rather than supernatural, knowledge gleaned from environmental ideas (Scheffer 9). Richard Neuhaus, a Lutheran minister, denounced environmentalism accusing them of being nature worshippers. Only humans were created in the image of God (Scheffer 12).

Other opposition to the environmental movement came from corporate leaders, land developers, and some economists. They were typically against the government limiting freedom of use of one’s own property (Scheffer 10). Also, some scientists outside of the life sciences, like industrial chemists, oil geologists, and physicists, argued that human inventiveness had always allowed us to overcome nature, therefore it always would. Environmentalists were accused of overdramatizing the situation. The opposition, however, did not stop the growth of the environmental movement (Scheffer 11).

As outlined in the above history, the advance of environmental ideas started with a change in personal attitudes after exposure to ecology and environmental disasters. People with similar attitudes about the environment form organizations, build persuasive arguments, publicize their arguments, and work to promote environmentally aware legislature (Scheffer 113). The main methods of promotion include education, litigation, political action, and land acquisition (Scheffer 117). However, there are many different types of activist groups that use varying tactics to achieve their environmental agenda.

Activists typically form organizations to seek out and convert more supporters. They use literature, television, the radio, and speak in public expressing their views. They raise money, organize activities, have marches, and use funds in ways they think will help promote their group. Some activists are paid. Other activists are unpaid volunteers unable to commit the full day to their activism. Yet other activists choose to promote their ideas by example only. Some activists feel called to physically attack the opposition’s bodies or their property. Some use anger, sympathy, and other emotions as a tool, while some use science. It is easy to see that environmental activism is expressed in many different ways using a variety of approaches.

Environmental activists have to consider what they are willing to compromise and what they are willing to do to stop the opposition. Extremists are not willing to compromise. Some extremists will consider destroying property or causing bodily injury to prevent destruction of the environment. Other environmentalists are vocal, yet are willing to set realistic goals and work with all parties involved to reach a mutual settlement. Still other environmental activists are not outspoken. They may choose to be active through setting an example for the rest of us.

Greenpeace, founded in 1970, is an example of a moderately confrontational environmental group. Following are some examples of how they go about promoting their concerns. They have sailed ships into nuclear test zones in attempts to stop the tests. In 1974 they confronted a Soviet whaling fleet and brought public attention to the destruction of whales. They have led campaigns to protect baby seals by spraying them with non-toxic green dye thereby destroying the value of their pelts (Scheffer 126).

The Scientists’ Institute for Public Information, founded in 1963, is an environmental group that focuses on educating the public. Their magazine, Environment, is one of the most useful journals in the field (Scheffer 129). Yet another organization, the Center for Environmental Intern Progress (CEIP), focuses on getting college students with environmental concerns prepared for the workplace. Typically students with a major in environmental studies have not faired well in the job market. The CEIP advocates the selection of a traditional disciplinary field, such as biology or botany, and then assists graduates with job placement programs (Scheffer 130).

Another approach to environmental activism has been practiced by the radical group, Earth First! Founded in 1971, Earth First! has put metal spikes in trees to destroy the saw blades of lumberjacks. This practice has caused several injuries to workers using the saws. Earth First! has also burned bulldozers and rammed whaling ships. They are considered to be an extremist group and have caused controversy within the environmental circles (Manes 7 & 114). These groups are merely a sample of the array of possible methods of activism.

Now that I have discussed organized environmental activist groups and some of their methods, I would like to attempt to establish why an individual would want to become a part of such a group. How or why does a person develop attitudes that cause him to respond to the environment by being an activist? Vice President Al Gore has been active in promoting his environmental concerns in government for more than twenty years. As written in his book, Earth in the Balance, Vice President Gore’s first lesson about preservation of the environment was taught to him as a child on his family’s farm. He was taught about prevention of soil erosion and how to best use the land without destroying it. Life on the farm taught him how nature works (Gore 2).

Also at home, he remembered his mother’s response to Rachel Carson’s book, Silent Spring. The book portrayed the abuses of DDT and pesticide use. Discussing issues like this with his mother made an impression on young Al Gore. Later in life he witnessed the careless use of Agent Orange during the Vietnam War. Yet another chemical was used without any foresight given to future environmental ramifications (Gore 3). When he attended college, he was first presented with the global environmental threats we as humans have created. A particularly influential figure in molding Vice President Gore’s ideas was Professor Roger Revelle. Revelle was the first person to ever monitor carbon dioxide levels in the atmosphere. He shared his measurements with his students and was instrumental in forming a foundation for the theory of global warming (Gore 4).

Vice President Gore was brought up in an atmosphere of environmental awareness. His parents openly discussed their environmental concerns with him at a young age. He was educated on the subject, and went on to act on his knowledge. Vice President Gore is committed to devising a plan to address issues such as the earth’s ecology, human population, technology for sustainability, and environmental education.

In continuing to research the reasons why an individual environmental activist chooses to get involved, I interviewed a conservative activist who advocates action within the boundaries of the law and uses collaborative efforts with government and community members to attain his goals.

On Friday, February 20th, 1998, I met Mr. Michael Simonik at his office at the Conservancy of Southwest Florida. He is the Environmental Policy Director, an environmental activist. He is a young man in his thirties. He grew up in Cleveland, Ohio. Living in the inner-city, he was not exposed to environmental issues. Although he was aware that Lake Eerie was dead, he accepted it and never gave it much thought. However, he enjoyed having pets while growing up. In caring for his animals, he learned to take responsibility for them and to respect them. His parents did not share his enthusiasm for animals and did not allow the pets in the house. However, his love and fascination with his pets would soon develop and grow to encompass much more.

During his junior and senior year in high school, he had an opportunity to volunteer to participate in a wildlife rescue and rehabilitation program on a farm outside the city. It was a program coordinated to give inner-city kids a chance to experience wildlife. A college professor who encouraged the volunteers to learn about and experience wildlife owned the farm. At the time, Mr. Simonik’s love for his pets made him think he wanted to become a veterinarian. The experience at the volunteer program affirmed and encouraged this direction.

It was not until he went to college at Ohio State University in Columbus that he become interested in the environment as a whole. While taking a course called "Introduction to Man and the Environment," his limited understanding of animals as pets broadened to include animals in the wild. He was introduced to the idea that when considering how to protect endangered species, one must also consider how their habitat can be protected. The focus of his thinking shifted from a primary interest in just animals to an all-encompassing interest in ecosystems as a whole.

While taking the same course, he discovered that there were actually careers available in natural resource protection and wildlife management. It was possible to be paid to do something you love! He started to get more involved. His professor encouraged him and some classmates to form an extracurricular environmental group. His experiences from childhood coupled with his extracurricular college activities and increasing knowledge about environmental issues helped him choose Wildlife Management as a major. He was a diligent student and took pride in learning that science provided a foundation for protecting the environment.

Soon after he graduated, he was to leave for a two-year enrollment in the Peace Corps. During the six months between college and the Peace Corps, he was an intern with the Conservancy of Southwest Florida in Naples doing wildlife rehabilitation. He soon left for the Peace Corps and traveled to Morocco, Africa. There he was involved with setting up the first wildlife education center in the capital. He worked with the national park services in the capacity of a wildlife biologist performing wildlife management and monitoring of endangered species.

When his two years were up, he returned to Naples and worked for the Collier family as a wildlife biologist analyzing agricultural lands. He soon left for graduate school at Indiana University and earned a master’s degree in Environmental Policy. He then returned to Florida and worked for several different organizations. For a short time, he did some consulting. He moved on to become an Extension Agent for Charlotte County. Then, for about a year, he was a part of the faculty at the University of Florida. Next, he worked for the Charlotte Harbor Environmental Center as the Environmental Lands Manager. He did all this before returning to the Conservancy. At the time of our interview, he had been at the Conservancy for a little over two years.

As the Director of Environmental Policy, one of Mr. Simonik’s main focuses is evaluating land development and its effect on the unique environment in southwest Florida. However, the most important conservation tool available to Mr. Simonik is the ability to purchase land. The Conservancy has access to state granted P2000 money (Preservation 2000) for use in purchasing environmentally sensitive areas. Once purchased, the land is held in public ownership and is left in its natural state. Buying the land is his priority. When the developers beat the Conservancy to it, Mr. Simonik does his best to make sure it is developed in the most equitable way for both man and nature.

He is currently working with the Army Corps of Engineers doing an 18 month environmental impact study relating to the growth and development of Lee and Collier Counties. They are working together to determine the best plan for growth management. When human development comes into an environmentally sensitive area, there will be cumulative and secondary effects that need to be evaluated before the development is allowed to take place. Mr. Simonik is committed to preserving as much as the natural habitat as possible.

Mr. Simonik is not an extremist or a purist. One cannot realistically expect to be able to stop growth and development. If he were to sit down at the negotiating table with a proposal for all developers to not be allowed to develop any more land in southwest Florida, his goal would not be achieved. The development would continue unrestricted, and his activism would show no results. However, he chooses to work with the developers in planning communities. All of the factors are openly discussed and considered. In the end, the developers typically conform to the Conservancy’s viewpoint. Mr. Simonik’s goal is to take all of the data and use it to create a better human environment within the natural environment.

Mr. Simonik spends a lot of time with the developers and the County Commissioners reviewing site plans. He considers his relationship with the developers to be a very positive working relationship. Preservation of the natural habitat has positive benefits for all parties involved. We have already established that preservation of natural resources is one of the goals for the Environmental Policy Unit, but what about the developers? As it turns out, when developers integrate nature’s surroundings into their development plans, it becomes yet another commodity. Consumers want environmental amenities like nature trails and scenic views. By working with the Conservancy, developers increase the marketable value of their investment.

Despite his positive working relationship with the developers, there are rural areas that are much more environmentally sensitive that need more protection. One of Mr. Simonik’s greatest successes was to convince the County Commissioners to set high preservation standards for developing lands in these rural areas. Developers must preserve a minimum of 50% of the land on a site or mitigate for other lands to compensate for any destruction done in excess of 50%.

Primarily a minority of vocal private landowners in Collier County opposed his actions. They express concerns about losing private property rights. They have been known to vigorously oppose decisions that the Conservancy, the developers, the Commissioners, and the Civic Council have made in agreement. For these people, it is too much to ask that they be a part of a common goal to promote the well being of the human and natural environment. To them, accepting a request to not pollute their property means a loss of individual rights. "Don’t tell me I can’t pollute on my property! It’s my damn property!" Mr. Simonik mimics their sentiment. In disagreements, these landowners demand compensation for any request made by the Conservancy or the Commissioners.

Mr. Simonik is committed to a collaborative effort with developers and the County Commissioners in minimizing the negative effects of development. When dealing with private landowners, he is not willing to compromise his position. He has studied and considered all of the scientific information about the environment. Using his knowledge, he attempts to make the best decision where both people and natural ecosystems can both be sustained.

The environment is linked to our economy. We need to protect it for economic reasons as well as aesthetic and emotional reasons. The environment provides jobs, food, and entertainment. It generates revenue. Mr. Simonik has found that it is more expensive to destroy the environment than to preserve it or to develop it using his environmentally conscious practices. For him it is an issue of quality of life. We are interconnected. If my neighbor decides to dump oil in his back yard, when it rains, it will pollute my yard too. The pollution will eventually contaminate our estuaries and affect fish populations, which will hurt the fishing industry. The environment is worth conserving for more reasons than one.

In addition to the methods of growth management and land acquisition, Mr. Simonik is also on 34 committees. He is the vice-chairman of a Naples Bay committee appointed by the City of Naples Council. Over the next two years, they will have to make recommendations to the city on how to clean up the bay. He also speaks at civic association meetings and rotaries to attempt to educate others about the issues and the scientific basis of his argument. People in the community rely on Mr. Simonik and the Environmental Policy Department to review the information and state their position based on the scientific evidence. He uses his education, experience, and expertise to help others make decisions in their daily lives.

Outside of work, Mr. Simonik tries to practice what he preaches. He only plants native species in his yard; he practices water and energy conservation; and he recycles. However, since he is active in the environmental arena all day while at work, he uses his time off work as a break from his vocal environmentalism. As with religion, Mr. Simonik feels it would be inappropriate to push his views on others. In his private life, he gives others a chance to learn by his example. In contrast, he uses the time he has at work to be vocal and actively pursue his environmental agenda.

Being a paid environmentalist does not belittle his activism. His main concern is not the fact that he is paid. It just happens that he is paid to do work that he feels strongly about. If he were concerned about the salary, he would be working in the private sector making at least $20,000 more a year. Many people with environmental concerns within the community have non-activist careers. They choose to make donations to the Conservancy to fund the salaries of those who work full-time being activists. It is as if community members with typical careers donate money to the Conservancy, thereby becoming active vicariously through the actions of individuals such as Michael Simonik. He accepts the responsibility given to him by the community and works wholeheartedly to reach his environmental goals.

Mr. Simonik has a fascination and a respect of the environment based in science rather than on emotion. He does feel a philosophical connection to the environment and appreciates the wonders of nature. He is working to make sure they continue to exist because nature increases the quality of his life. If the southwest coast of Florida were covered with concrete and high-rises, we, as humans, would be able to survive. The question is: what would be the quality of that life? We are complex creatures who need more than just food and water to survive. Nature fills a void and provides a sanctuary from our man-made environment. Living with nature gives Mr. Simonik a sense of completeness and happiness. He says, "I want to save the bay, and the fishes, and the birds and that, because it’s what I need to survive."

In considering the life of Mr. Simonik, I would like to draw some conclusions about factors that contribute to one’s environmentalism. It seems to me that the most influential factor that causes one to become active about an issue is exposure and education. Once one is exposed, it is up to the individual to assimilate the information into their understanding about their existence. They may choose to become involved with an issue based on an emotional response or an intellectual response. In Mr. Simonik’s case, he was exposed to animals as a child and the animals evoked an emotional response. He loved his pets and developed an appreciation and respect for them as a life enriching force.

For Mr. Simonik, love of domesticated animals provided a base for him to be open to education and other experiences involving animals. His desire to be informed continued the rest of his life. Education, in my opinion, is the best tool for any activist. The politics of activism involve determining ways to bring people to see your side of the issue. When one is knowledgeable, information can be promoted in a logical manner. Due to our diverse cultural and moral backgrounds, using emotion as a tool for promotion may fail. For example, issues such as abortion still have many supporters on both sides. Due to the emotional nature of the issue, it is extremely difficult to sway someone to the opposing viewpoint. Environmentalism, on the other hand, has an increasing number of followers. Since science can be used as a method to promote environmentalism, activists have seen success in winning support. If a person knows the facts, it is much easier to make a logical decision. This is why awareness programs and education are so important to the environmental movement. They show results. I think Mr. Simonik’s education played a key role in molding his attitudes regarding the environment.

Consider the following decision tree as a representation of the main contributing factors of why one may consider responding to the environment by becoming an activist.

Documenting a pattern for human behavior or decisions can be a challenging task. Being individuals, we all have a unique perspective, personality, and growth experience that all contribute to decision making. This can make it difficult to come up with a model that will be true for all people. I believe the decision tree I have outlined will hold true for most people. However, there will always be exceptions.

Environmental activism does not arise from one sole factor. There are many contributing factors that lead to activism. Some of us may be more prone to be receptive to different types of stimulation. For example, there are those who are very emotional about their environmentalism. To these people, education may not be as strong of a factor. However, others, like Mr. Simonik, use a philosophical base and build on that base with education. Learning more about environmentalism fuels both intellect and emotional views. It is difficult to distinguish which reaction ultimately causes activism. Whether intellectual understanding or emotional understanding of the issue forms the primary foundation for action, the other is likely involved to some extent for each activist.

The main issue in environmental activism is quality of life. Whether one uses scientific data or gut emotional feeling to make the decision, people get involved because they want to make a difference. Mr. Simonik works to preserve the quality of life we have here in Southwest Florida. Al Gore is working towards sustainability of natural resources that affect our quality of life on a global level. They both act for the common good of both man and the environment. Their experiences as children and their education have helped them make decisions to work towards preserving the quality of life for both their generation and for generations to come.

Bibliography