As a nature enthusiast, how do you view the situation where some of your objectively scientific conservation appeals are misunderstood by others as "extreme environmentalism"?

Nature Talk
1

I’ve actually been pondering this question for quite a while, as a highly controversial issue recently emerged in my country. I feel it could serve as a great starting point for my post on this forum.

The issue revolves around the Mount Tai razor-wire fencing. To give a brief overview: the management of the Mount Tai scenic area in Shandong province installed 135 kilometers of razor wire fencing along the forest edges of undeveloped areas. This has sparked widespread controversy on the Chinese internet. Supporters, mostly locals from Shandong, argue that the fencing is necessary to deter unruly outdoor enthusiasts from engaging in uncivilized behaviors (like starting fires or littering) and to prevent outdoor accidents. On the other hand, opponents argue that the fencing obstructs wildlife migration and compromises the integrity of the natural environment.

As a wildlife enthusiast, this backlash caught me off guard. In domestic internet forums where environmental awareness is generally moderate, it’s quite rare to see such a large-scale conservation appeal, especially one focused on small and medium-sized wildlife. Surprisingly, this very appeal is often dismissed by fencing supporters who label it as “extreme environmentalism,” “outsiders preaching from afar,” or “taking the moral high ground.” Some even resort to regional discrimination and personal attacks…

This is actually a common phenomenon on environmental forums. For instance, in the recent Spoon-billed Sandpiper G228 incident, a planned coastal highway threatened the bird’s tidal flat habitat in Beihai. (The Spoon-billed Sandpiper is a critically endangered species, with a conservative global population estimate of fewer than 443 individuals). Birdwatchers have been persistently advocating for the construction route to be pushed inland by at least one kilometer. However, some individuals have capitalized on this by eating “bird blood buns” (a Chinese internet slang meaning profiting off or exploiting a tragedy), posting sarcastic, anti-conservation remarks in the style of teenage melodrama, such as: “There are still 443 Spoon-billed Sandpipers left in the world, but I’m literally the only one of my kind. Why isn’t anyone protecting me?” I believe this kind of youth trend-following is another way of dismissing wildlife conservation as “extreme environmentalism.”

I previously brought up the issue of excessive foraging on the iNaturalist forum. Under videos showing massive, “bucket-filling” coastal foraging hauls, voices urging restraint in harvesting intertidal seafood are often mocked by netizens and labeled as “saintly do-gooders” (or “holier-than-thou”).

Given this, I’m very curious: since most members of the iNaturalist forum come from European and American countries, where modern wildlife conservation systems and histories are generally more mature and long-standing than in China, you likely face similar clashes between conservationists and opposing viewpoints. My country is just beginning to show these early signs. I’m really interested to know: as nature enthusiasts, how do you personally handle being misunderstood as an “extreme environmentalist”?

2

There are two things we can say about humans: we are social creatures, and we are tribal creatures.

One effect of being tribal is to demonize “The Other”. Sometimes called “the out group” in social psychology. It happens on both sides.

It has nothing to do with actually being wrong or right. All it means is, “You have a different opinion, and you are therefore stupid, or crazy, or a terrible person, or most likely all of the above!”

3

Tribalism is an inherent human nature. However, if we are completely immersed in a polarized atmosphere that tolerates no dissent or diverse perspectives, let alone concerns over public opinion manipulation or ideological stances, human society as a whole will inevitably become trapped in an ‘information cocoon.’ Over time, we will gradually drift away from civilization and progress. After all, from the perspective of both humanity and nature, polarization is fundamentally detrimental to development. Labeling dissent as extremism is a form of terrorism.

4

In our street we have The Green Garden, and I am sure most of our neighbours – gravel / mown lawn / token tree think we are extreme

image
image700×700 132 KB

5

I live in Italy, so I can only speak from my reality here where this sort of situation is a regular occurrence. The short answer for me on a personal level is… very badly :face_with_raised_eyebrow: . But that’s not very helpful, so the longer answer is by trying to make a clear difference between “environmentalism” and “ecology”. In other words, environmentalism (whether extreme or not) can be many things, with nuances that range from a more emotional and/or animalist approach to a more scientific ecological approach. That leaves it open to a myriad of interpretations and a myriad of criticisms. Ecology on the other hand is based on science and fact (OK, that’s also open to a myriad of interpretations, but let’s keep it simple here :wink:) and so tends to represent more solid ground on which to fight one’s case. Does it work? Not always, in fact not often. But it helps me personally feel that there is some sense in how I think and what I do, over and above just a feeling of distress at people’s disregard for, and abuse of, nature.

6

I sympathise and understand your situation. During my working life I have been a forester, environmental investigator and an ecologist. My life long interest has been in conservation and responsible management. I guess I have a middle of the road viewpoint. I am passionate about protecting species and ecosystems but also recognise the need to exploit natural resources if it can be done in a sustainable manner. As the saying goes, the trouble with being in the middle of the road is that you get sideswiped by traffic going both directions. In my retirement my main interest is in managing a property with about 100 hectares of bushland in a pretty much undisturbed condition located in Queensland Australia . Most of the surrounding properties have been cleared and that land is used for grazing. The fact that I have chosen to retain my property in its natural condition, and because of my work background, some of my neighbours view me some suspicion assuming I might be a radical greenie. Actually I couldn’t legally clear the land even if I did want to. A few years ago I met one the neighbours near our joint boundary. In conservation he said, in what I thought was a somewhat accusatory tone, “I saw two dingoes coming out of your place a few days ago”. I resisted the impulse to reply “That probably would have been Trixie and Rex”. Instead I said, “Okay if you would like to lay some baits in my place once you get approval, I would be okay with that”. He replied that he already had dropped baits on my land, although obviously without government approval. Good thing I don’t own a dog. On the other side of the ledger, I was speaking to a lovely lady at a social function a few months ago. We were discussing weeds and I mentioned that I was in the process of trying to control an infestation of an invasive weed on my land. Further in the discussion I revealed I was spot spraying with herbicide to kill the said weeds. I was then on a the receiving end of a lecture re the harmful affects of herbicides. I tried to explain that the targeted application of herbicide would have much less impact on the environment than letting an invasive species run riot and there was no way I would be able to manually remove that amount of weeds. I also cop criticism for sometimes doing a bit of selective logging on the land. My argument is that I also pay the same local government rates as my neighbours. In spite of all this I am still an optimist. During my lifetime I have seen the develop of a much higher awareness of environmental issues and a willingness for people to voice concern over destructive practices. I am sure as time progresses more people will understand the processes for achieving environment outcomes instead of simply protesting. I know that ecological awareness is growing around the world and hope that you see a change in the attitude of more people in your country in the near future,

7

I view this clash as being really about the “myth of progress”, not about someone’s support for nature being “extreme”. Members of industrialised societies generally believe the future can and must bring ever more complex technology, higher consumption and an economy that grows exponentially without limit, even though this scenario is impossible on a finite planet. Fragile egos rest on a demonstration that one’s nation-state or generation or class is better than others in terms of this “progress”. When you suggest putting limits on the destruction of nature, the crisis becomes existential for anyone who has not yet questioned the “progress” myth. If you can’t be “better” than grandpa or country X or your next-door neighbour, where now is the meaning of life? This is where the anger comes from.

8

Did Trixie and Rex survive your neighbour ? How creepy to chuck poison at your neighbour, without even a warning.

9

Ha ha! Hard to keep tabs on dingoes but I am pleased to report that the neighbour has acquired two donkeys which he assures me are very effective in protecting his livestock from dingoes, so I am hoping he stops dropping baits.

10

The post gives an interesting situation, but every country has its challenges.
Obviously humans can be passionate creatures regarding this or that, and that leads to conflict. Some people are uninterested and don’t get involved, so you often only hear the passionate ones as the loudest sound.
More generally, the problem is that people are not trained from childhood up in the principles and practice of listening, consultation and compromise, as a result there is much more of this conflict than there needs to be.
And of course humans have grown too big for the planet, forcing these collisions.
In terms of the particular situation, an example of a compromise would be to have the fence but with entrance points for animals with information sign, cameras that detect people going in, but arrange planned excursions into the area too so it is not entirely restricted. That way everyone wins.

11

Donkeys or Anatolian sheepdogs against Cape leopards here. (Better than the illegal traps or poison – if the farmer is ethical)

12

I don’t recall being called an extremist. I am sometimes called a purist as though that is something to avoid. To answer your question, my reaction to an insult of that type would depend on who was saying it. If they are speaking from a position of sympathy for the environment but ignorance of ecology, e.g. “you should get rid of the sheep and let nature take over”, I might try to explain my viewpoint and hope to change their opinion. If I think they are attacking me because they have a material interest in damaging the environment, e.g. property developer or dog walker with a self-entitlement complex, I wouldn’t waste my time discussing the issue because I’d know they were not going to change their position regardless of the facts. If it was coming from a fellow conservationist, I hope I would listen to their argument and be open to the possibility that I am wrong and ought to alter my position.

13

It might help to remember that a lot of what you’re seeing there is likely more of a “vocal minority” situation than a widespread belief. The people who learn about some kind of conservation effort and quietly think “oh, that’s good” are far less visible than the people who kick up a fit about it, so all we see is the fit.

14

Something that applies to quite a few things. Being quietly satisfied/in agreement is never as visible as disagreeing.

15

Thank you for your explanation! I’ve read about the Spoon-billed Sandpipers, and am sad to learn about the proposed highway. On the west coast of the USA, where I live, more and more overpasses are being built to successfully protect mammals crossing dangerous highways. However, in many ways things are polarized and politicized, not as “mature” as you might think. For example, protection of wolves, cougars, and bears is quite controversial! There’s a huge hunting culture here, along with all the guns, and many bird species are also targeted. I guess I handle it by having friends who are also environmentalists, and by volunteering for local environmental organizations in many different ways. And I write endless letters to my legislators and sign endless petitions to protect ecosystems.

16

China’s most significant issue lies in the fact that infrastructure developers often lack mature environmental assessment awareness or design considerations when planning projects, viewing such measures as a pure waste of time and resources. For instance, practices like painting patterns on wind turbines to prevent bird strikes, or building wildlife crossings on highways, are still in their infancy here; the vast majority of our infrastructure lacks such compassionate, eco-friendly designs.

Furthermore, the public’s awareness of wildlife and plant conservation is highly underdeveloped. Destructive foraging and beachcombing are rampant. From wild vegetables and fruits to intertidal species, there is a prevailing mindset that these resources are free and that harvesting them for consumption is a way to get something for nothing. (This is precisely why beachcombing tourists in your country, as well as in other developed Western nations, are predominantly Asian. Moreover, guides and tutorials for this kind of foraging are incredibly popular on our social media platforms, with locations both domestically and internationally being openly shared and exposed.)

17

You can see this most clearly when young people make a joke out of treating life so carelessly, posting “emo” angst-filled captions like, “There are only 443 Spoon-billed Sandpipers left globally, and I’m the last one. Why is nobody protecting me?” Honestly, I think playing on this tired meme just for clicks is a prime example of how little people actually care about protecting wild animals and plants.