If a rusty gravedigger dies in Alabama’s wetlands, should conservatives care?
We might not know it, but we are all environmentalists in Alabama…or at least, we should be. “Environmentalism” is not a dirty word or some practice reserved for liberals, hippies and academics.
Our state has historically depended on the natural world for much of its livelihood. Whether it has been farming, mining iron ore and coal, forestry or Alabama’s seafood industry, Alabama’s success is, and has been, directly connected to its environment.
Sadly, “environmentalism” has become identified with mandates from a distant and impersonal EPA, eroding private property rights and a hostile view toward virtually all human action. The result has been Alabama’s more conservative citizens mistakenly confusing the heavy-handed environmental tactics and extreme political stances with environmentalism itself.
The whole issue comes down to a rusty gravedigger in Alabama’s wetlands.
I read Ben Raines’s interesting account of re-discovering the “lipstick-red” crawfish in a swamp a few miles from his home in south Alabama. The rusty gravedigger found by Raines, previously thought extinct by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, was the first one seen in 20 years.
The liberal regulatory response to such a discovery is predictable. Never mind the fact that the federal government had no idea the species even existed. Use the force of government to restrict, restrain, and prohibit human activity to protect the rusty gravedigger.
Unfortunately, the typical conservative response has been to downplay the issue entirely because “environmentalism” means prioritizing the rusty gravedigger over people, their jobs or their property. After all, why does it matter what happens to the small crawfish in a swamp that few people have reason to visit?
Conservatism has, at its very definitional core, the idea that we as a culture and society should conserve that which we value. Our natural world fits that idea perfectly. Conservatives should value our environmental constitution every bit as much as the Constitution that structures our nation. Our treatment of both has implications for the legacy we will leave to our children and grandchildren.
Rejecting an overreaching liberal regulatory response does not prevent us from considering or caring for the lowly rusty gravedigger. The connections between the crawfish, the wetlands and our state as a whole remain worth our time even if we reject the liberal command-and-control reaction to them.
A number of economic and security-oriented arguments should further motivate conservatives to develop a real environmental ethic, but they all fail to inspire unless our most important motive is our desire to responsibly care for our natural home. Our diverse ecology, our land, our forests and fields should be some of our most prized possessions. That does not mean we should surrender our love of hunting and fishing or stop using our abundant natural resources. We should protect our environment because we want those options available in the future.
Alabamians, for better or worse, pride their independence. We like to do things our way. We need to put that moxie to work in caring for our state instead of having the EPA and liberal activist groups operate as parents asking us to clean up our room. Keeping the rusty gravedigger around might not be a bad place to start.
