3/29 - Blog 6 - Conservation and Water Conflicts

From: Cristin Williams Date: March 29, 2011 Readings Discussed: Postel & Wolf (2001), Dowie (2005)

Summary Today I read the Postel & Wolf article, as well as the Dowie article. The articles were not directly related, though they definitely have some overlapping themes. The Dowie article was actually a rather enjoyable read. As a visual learner, I appreciated the pictures that accompanied the article. The Dowie article talked about how certain indigenous tribes are being kicked off their traditional lands in favor of environmental conservation. These tribes only seek to continue living as they have for hundreds of years. They live off the land, which may sometimes involve killing endangered animals or cultivating "protected" lands. The tribes see nothing wrong with their existence, and claim that they were the original conservation specialists. Observers have often claimed that these tribes are so in-tune with nature that they are included in the flora and fauna. In an effort to create protected areas and parks, these tribes are being removed (sometimes forcibly) from their lands. This will ultimately result in the dissolution of their unique culture. The tribal people are so used to the forest that when removed from it, they have difficulty developing spatial awareness and can often be seen walking in front of vehicles (unaware to the fact that they are moving fast and can be dangerous!) Worldwide organizations that many claim are the cause of the tribes' problems (UN, WWF, World Bank), are trying to develop resolutions to protect these tribal communities.

On the other hand, the Postel and Wold article focuses instead on drinking water and how it can create conflict. I remember about a year ago I was watching a late night talk show that happened to feature Matt Damon as a guest. After promoting his latest movie and providing witty banter with the host, he did a peculiar thing. He spent roughly 5 minutes of his time discussing something that he thought "really mattered." He discussed the issue of drinking water in Africa, and announced a new project called Water.org that seeks to educate the public and provide drinking water solutions. Listening to Damon speak about this website really got me to start thinking about how severe the water crisis is. The Postel & Wolf article points out that the last time humanity went to war over water was over 4,500 years ago. Today, however, mini water conflicts are breaking out all over the world. Due to overuse, our aquifers, rivers, and lakes are drying up. The Aral Sea has almost completely turned to desert. Humans need water to survive, all people know this. Obtaining clean drinking water, in some regions, has turned into a matter of life and death.

Comparing and Contrasting
As I previously mentioned, the articles are about two different topics: conservation refugees and conflicts over drinking water. However, certain themes within the articles do overlap. Both problems seem to affect poverty-stricken areas. Though I suppose many indigenous tribes would claim that they aren't technically poverty-stricken, due to the fact that they are happy and are living as they have for hundred of years. Nonetheless, areas like Africa, South America and South Asia do seem to have problems with conservation and water conflicts.

Both issues are also of concern to major worldwide organizations like the UN, World Bank, World Wildlife Fund and The Nature Conservancy. These organizations are concerned with aiding poor regions of the world. Providing safe drinking water and establishing protected environmental areas are concepts on the agenda of organizations like the UN.

Reflections/Questions/Puzzles
Firstly, I wonder how we will resolve the problems associated with conservation refugees. Ask any person on the street and they'll probably tell you that creating wildlife and environmental conservation areas seems like a good idea. If you were to ask me, even yesterday, I would have struggled to think of a downside to conservation areas. I think that this issue goes back to an idea I presented in a previous blog post. This idea is human-centric environmental policy. We need to keep bringing our enviro-policy measures back to why they are important to humans. Are we saving the zebras because they look interesting? No, we're saving them because we know they are an important part of the food chain on African savannas. There is a scientific reason why we conserve the things we do. Another interesting concept from the Dowie article is the idea posed by Duke University's John Terborgh. Terborgh stated that "...a park should be a park, and it shouldn’t have any resident people in it." This would mean that pre-existing tribes within a newly created park shouldn't have the right to live there. Terborgh's reasoning is that the tribe may quickly acquire advanced weapons from park visitors with which to hunt in larger numbers.
I'm not sure if I agree with Terborgh. We (new) Americans swiftly exterminated the Native American population without thinking twice. Do we really want to repeat this on other continents?

Where the water crisis is concerned, I think that the solution will lie in advanced technology. If we can find a way to cheaply sterilize water (a way cheaper than boiling), millions of people could drink from local sources. The TED Talk we watched in class showed examples of how people have collected groundwater and rain for centuries. Clearly the human race has the capability to create innovative solutions in times of need. I wonder what types of water collecting and sterilizing equipment is already on the market? How expensive is it? How can we make it cheaper and effectively distribute it to the less-fortunate?