environmental campaigns that focus on strictly one species are easily marketable to the public, but it comes at the cost of missing the bigger picture. in theory, saving one species means preserving their environment and all of the organisms with which they interact, but seldom is that how these initiatives play out.

in 1975, greenpeace launched its “save the whales” campaign¹ to help protect these incredible marine creatures. this movement gained such widespread public attention and support that by 1986 a ban on commercial whaling went into effect.² with the work of many activists, policy makers, and both national and international politicians, drastic progress came quickly. but if we’ve already “saved” the whales, why are we still talking about them in 2021, 35 years after the ban on commercial whaling? 

without the threat of commercial whaling to reduce their numbers, many whale populations are doing better today, but they still face a plethora of problems. human induced climate change has been negatively affecting whale migration patterns across the globe, which in turn negatively impacts their mating rituals, access to food, and limits their livable environment. news headlines such as “endangered baby right whale washes up on florida beach,” and “gray whale population drops by quarter off u.s. west coast,” still pop up on a weekly basis, which speaks volumes to their current predicament.

is the “save the whales” campaign to blame for the whales today’s problems? no, not exactly. greenpeace’s activism got the public invigorated and was a crucial stepping stone in helping these creatures, but that’s not enough to ‘save’ them. we also need to protect whales’ environments from pollution and the dangers of boating as well. human actions all alter the natural lives of these grand creatures and they are often not critiqued heavily enough, since these problems are one step removed from the whales themselves. 

although the public may be excited and willing to take additional steps to continue to protect whales, there still remains the challenge of all the other organisms that inhabit this shared aquatic environment. whales are an example of charismatic megafauna, meaning they capture the public’s attention with their size and likeability. the energy put towards whales often drives up the amount of funding, legislation, and protections generated to save these large charismatic creatures. by dedicating so many resources to one specific species, it becomes hard to find the money to run programs to educate the public, lobby congress, or reduce pollution for less cute and cuddly animals. 

so where do we go from here? there’s no need to throw in the towel just yet. get on the internet or to your nearest library and educate yourself about the biodiversity in the region of wherever your favorite megafauna lives. consider donating to organizations that protect habitats on a larger scale rather than just for one animal. it’s okay to remain infatuated with the whales, just remember that they also have their marine friends, and they too deserve protection.

the western world in this context refers to the portion of the world usurped by colonizers, like much of europe and north america, which has generally placed economic vitality above all. it’s astounding that it took until 1970, only 50 years ago, for many people in the americas to start acknowledging the importance of the environment. what was happening before then? those not in the western world, and those whose cultures persisted prior to the time when colonization and globalization usurped their lands (often people of color), generally acted as though every day was “earth day.”

these cultures understand the concept of only taking what is needed from the earth and playing an active role in contributing to their ecosystem’s health. these cultures see the world as common personhood inseparable from the individual, rather than a distinct entity from which resources are to be extracted.

for example, in their daily routine the kashia band of pomo indians, a native american group of california, have traditionally used native species for foods, sustainably use their local natural resources to create tools like baskets, manage the land through controlled fires, and “only take what is needed.”

another ancient culture that still exists today, which also emphasizes living in-sync with the environment, is that of many hindu people. hinduism has at least 90 holidays each year celebrating various aspects of life and nature including changing seasons, certain animal deities, and harvest times demonstrating that some cultures have literally performed a celebration of the earth at least two days a week on average. many hindus today have very modern lifestyles, heavily influenced by the western world, yet still maintain environmentally friendly aspects of their culture like practicing vegetarianism, using herbal remedies, and using zero-waste clay and leaf containers.

in the amazon, studies have shown that 11.8% of amazonian terra firme forests are sustainably-managed anthropogenic forests resulting from the in-tune management practices of indigenous people over more than five millennia. these people gained vast knowledge over time on how to cultivate and sustainably manage forests to suit their needs while maintaining essential biodiversity. within the first century of european colonization, the amerindian population was slashed by 90% and over time the forests and wilderness felt the effects of their new “caretakers” who promoted unsustainable economic development. as such, between 1970 and 2014, we saw a 60% decline in the size of vertebrate populations worldwide, despite the establishment of earth day.

while earth day was certainly not intended to be a green-washing campaign, it has unsurprisingly turned into one. one day a year, the western world gives tribute to the earth but people fail to take enduring action for the earth’s benefit. the result: false hope that sufficient change is occurring, which leads to continued environmental degradation and catastrophes that affects all of us as people.

we now see the detrimental effects of colonization as the starting point for its even more problematic grandchild: unsustainable economic development. one may argue, “the western world isn’t the one cutting down trees in the amazon and mining in africa,” or “look at how polluted india is.” however, in return we must ask, “what caused this destruction or pollution?” the actual root cause of the destruction and pollution is unsustainable economic development caused by consumer demand in the western world, and with our exponentially increasing appetite for disposable goods that are produced in or use raw materials from those countries.

while the effects of unsustainable economic growth are environmentally detrimental, can we learn lessons through our globalized world from native cultures who are more knowledgeable given their millennia of experience in thriving in-sync with the environment? wouldn’t it make most sense to follow their way of life and their relationships with the earth? while the outlook for environmentalism seems dreary, following the teachings of these other cultures is the solution. these are the people who should be consulted in the conservation movement given their millennia of environmental leadership.

take a moment to think about the top three environmentalists in the media. perhaps people like jane goodall, al gore, rachel carson, david attenborough, or greta thunberg come to mind.

notice, likely none of the people you thought of are non-western or even people of color. upon pondering the idea further, it may even be difficult to come up with the name of a single famous environmental activist who is not from the western world, despite the amount of land historically conserved by non-western people internationally. while these individuals may not be as well-known as jane goodall, they should be.

the western world must put an enduring spotlight on the people of cultures who have had resounding success in environmental conservation since the birth of humanity, often people of color, and learn from them. otherwise, we risk earth day and environmentalism fizzling out as a green-washing fad, without any concrete action taken and — even worse — the destruction of our home planet.

on the reservation, you are constantly reminded of the cultural loss of a harmonious lifestyle with the land. consumerism and acts of violence against the native people from european americans took away more than a lifestyle, leaving trauma and broken human hearts in its wake.

as an european american growing up on tribal lands, i saw glimpses of the mindset that allowed humans to co-exist with animal and plant ecosystems in many of the native traditions.  one example is through hunting; there is a respect for the animal that you are preparing to eat. there is a careful preservation of each part of the animal to be used for leather, antler bone, and meat for food to regalia. i also saw knowledge of local plants and what they offer (or how they can harm) humans. the lifestyle was social, efficient, and sustainable, but none of it sprung out of a desire to be environmentally friendly; native communities simply live this way to survive and enjoy life.

in the city i am constantly exposed to extraneous resources. it is almost laughably easy to find free food, furniture, or even clothes! the major difference is the availability of land for plants and living spaces. there was a huge movement in the lower east side to reclaim urban spaces for community in the late 70’s and 80’s. it sprung partially out of a need for safety and security, and partially for the lack of monetary resources available in the neighborhood. the increase in abandoned land and buildings made it increasingly unsafe for the remaining residents, so there was a movement to take back this land from its absentee “owner” and use it for community good. this was the impetus for local gardens grown on empty lots, squatters refurbishing and making abandoned and broken buildings safe again. the mindset wasn’t out of a need to become environmentally friendly, but these communities started recycling, sourcing their food locally, reusing and re-purposing their waste and the “garbage” of others. they became sustainable and happy from creating a sub-culture and way of life within new york city that didn’t rely on consumerism.

in new york city and on the reservation, i saw that sustainability can grow out of a need; not just an ethical sensibility or a desire to become more efficient. today we see a lot of differences pointed out in the media between rural and urban communities – which may distract us from environmental issues – but why not examine the common sustainable ingenuity arising out of the simple will to survive anywhere?

as an artist these revelations and others like them have inspired my work, but i hope that these communities can inspire more than that. i want to be a part a movement of people who are re-thinking how they fulfill their needs without consumerism. we should be looking to those who had no choice but to develop their own community sans consumerism, or those who had lost faith in consumerism because it could no longer serve their needs. let’s not try to re-invent the wheel, let’s do this together with past generations wisdom to rely on.
 

part of the root of human caused climate change is that we have forgotten what it means to be native. much of the developed world lives as a conqueror might, giving little to no regard for their local surroundings. if contemporary citizens can reconnect with their surroundings and treat their environments from the perspective of being native, we could see a drastic shift in the impacts of each individual. we could save the world. 

—

sources: the native flute clips were adapted from a piece titled, “native american style flute in a” they can be found on www.freesound.org. it was uploaded by, wood_flutes, and is under creative commons license 4.