Chapter 4 Two Faces of American Environmentalism

Chapter in Brief
Supplementary Information
Related Links

Chapter in Brief

This chapter is based upon a research report prepared by the Bureau of the Applied Research in Anthropology (BARA) entitled, Exploring Environmental Values and Policy in the United States: Case Studies in Arizona and Louisiana 2001.

Case #1: The small town of Grand Bois, Louisiana, which was sickened by the oilfield waste deposited in a nearby pit.

Case #2: Civano, on the outskirts of Tucson, Arizona, which was originally conceived as a solar village demonstration project, a vision that evolved over time first into a model of sustainable development and then into a model of traditional urban design known as "new urbanism." The evolution of this desert community and its eventual realization takes place over several decades amidst widespread concern and public debate over urban sprawl and resource scarcity, and environmental sensitivity.

As the title of the chapter indicates, the United States cases represent the principle cleavage within environmentalism in the United States: the environmental justice movement and its concern with fair distribution of resources and toxic burdens, and the mainstream environmental agenda's concern with resource preservation. The cases are thematically linked by the country's addiction to cheap energy supplies. The struggle of the Houma Indian and Cajun community to make sense of their allegiances to their fellow community members, their long commitment to the land sustained over generations, and to the industry that has come to sustain them, is representative of many instances of environmental injustice in resource-dependent rural areas in the United States. The situation of the residents of Grand Bois contrasts with the affluent and mobile families who moved to Civano, a high profile state- and city-financed housing experiment that aimed to be a national model of sustainable development. A growth area of the United States, the region had to contend with the multiple threats that population growth and urban sprawl brought to a water scarce and ecologically sensitive region. While Civano residents were originally drawn to the development for its promise of community and energy efficiency, they soon became aware of and committed to the conservation goals of the project.

Supplementary Information

NOTE: Unless otherwise indicated, the following notes and suggested resources were supplied by the chapter authors or the editor.

General

Three Aspects of the American Context: Private Property, States' Rights, and Environmental Justice (download in PDF) This description of the American context draws heavily from the BARA Report.

Louisiana

Environmental Justice in Grand Bois

For a detailed account of the Grand Bois residents' fight for environmental justice, including court testimony, see Chapter Five, "Media Savvy Cajuns and Houma Indians: Fighting an Oilfield Waste Dump in Grand Bois," in J. Timmons Roberts and Melissa M. Toffolon-Weiss, Chronicles from the Environmental Justice Frontline. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2001.
For a personal account of the Grand Bois community’s fight against the oil industry, see the interview with Clarice Friloux, chair, Grand Bois Citizens’ Committee in Human Rights Dialogue.
For a cross-sectional analysis of the 50 US states, which concludes that greater power inequality leads to greater environmental degradation, see J. K. Boyce, A. R. Klemer, P. H. Templet, and C.E. Willis "Power Distribution, the Environment and Public Health: A State Level Analysis," Ecological Economics 29.1. (1999): 127-140.
For a convincing argument about the importance of citizens and experts cooperation in the fight for environmental justice, based on case studies in Louisiana, see Barbara L. Allen, Uneasy Alchemy: Citizens and Experts in the Louisiana Chemical Corridor Disputes. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 2003.
In 1997 CBS televised an investigative report "Ed Bradley on Assignment: Town Under Siege," which brought national attention to Grand Bois and the dangers of oilfield waste. A transcript is available through CBS.

Louisiana Oilfield Waste Exclusion

For discussions on oilfield waste exclusion see

Michael M. Gibson and David P. Young, "Oil and Gas Exemptions under RCRA and CERCLA: Are They Still 'Safe Harbors' Eleven Years Later?" South Texas Law Review 32 (1991): 361-395
Daniel L. McKay, "RCRA's Oil Field Wastes Exemption and CERCLA's Petroleum Exclusion: Are They Justified?" Journal of Energy, Natural Resources, & Environmental Law 15 (1995).
U.S. EPA Archive [NRFRAP] Sites, EPA IDLAD980501522.

Power Distribution among Environmental Jurisdiction agencies within the Louisiana State Government

For an analysis of the environmental politics in Louisiana see J K Boyce, A. R. Klemer, and P. H. Templet, "Power Distribution, the Environment and Public Health: A State Level Analysis," Ecological Economics 29: 127-140.

Environmental Groups represented at the National Audubon Society Meeting, Washington D.C., October 1990

Oil and gas waste regulation has escaped the classification as a hazardous material, despite scientific evidence of its harm to the environment. Oilfield waste's non-hazardous status also kept it off the radar screen of environmental justice groups for many years. The incident at Grand Bois helped to change that. When in 1990 twenty groups convened in Washington D.C. to create the National Citizens' network on Oil and Gas Wastes, it was an extremely important step in getting corporations to be accountable for the oilfield waste they produce.Those groups included:

Environmental Defense Fund
Louisiana Attorney General's Office
Mineral Policy Center
Wyoming Outdoor Council
Western Colorado Congress
National Audubon Society
Oklahoma Audubon Council
Citizens Concerned About Injection Wells/Friends of Cache Creek (California)
National Wildlife Federation
Ohioans for Safe Water
Friends Insist Stop Toxic wastes (Texas)
Alaska Center for the Environment
Southwest Research and Information Center (New Mexico)
Perry (Ohio) Area Neighborhood Association
Friends of the Earth
Subra Company (Louisiana)
San Juan (Colorado) Citizens Alliance

Arizona

Water Problems and Debates in Central Arizona

The reclaimed water system in Tucson is a shadow system to the potable water piped through the city, capturing used water, re-treating it, and piping it back to different locations around Tucson. This differs from gray water systems that practice on-site collection and reutilization of wastewater. Private gray water systems are governed by city health ordinances because improperly maintained gray water systems can foster mosquitoes and harmful bacteria.

For more on Arizona's struggle to supply water to the desert see Water Transfers in the West: Efficiency, Equity, and the Environment, Committee on Western Water Management, Water Science and Technology Board, Commission on Engineering and Technical Systems, Board on Agriculture (Washington, D.C.: National Academy Press, 1992), especially chapter 9, "Central Arizona: The Endless Search for New Supplies to Water the Desert."

The Arizona Navajo and Hopi Water Dispute

The 1966 coal lease with Peabody Coal included a stipulation that if the company's slurry endangered underground water supplies, Peabody would have to find an alternative water source. The Navajo and Hopi have been claiming that more than 4,400 acre-feet per year 1.3 billion gallons per year of water drawn by Peabody Coal is causing the Navajo aquifer to drop precipitously and that, therefore, Peabody should find an alternative water source. Their case rests on the 1908 decision in Winters v. United States (207 US 64), where the Supreme Court recognized Indian water rights.

For more on the Native American's water conflicts see Bill Weinberg, "Water Wars," Native Americans: Hemispheric Journal of Indigenous Issues xvii, no. 2 (2002): 1619.

The Sonoran Desert Conservation Plan

The concept for a Sonoran Desert Conservation Plan emerged in1992 when Pima County attempted to codify conservation goals in its land use planning. The first significant steps to implement the plan were taken only in 1998, when the controversies over the inclusion of the pygmy owl on the Endangered Species List made clear the need for a plan for the county that would balance the interests of conservation and development.

Over the next several years Pima county developed an ambitious land use and conservation plan, covering nearly two million acres, that brings together various separate natural resource planning and protection activities. In May 2004, voters approved a $174.3 million “open space” bond with two thirds to be spent on implementing the plan. The Multiple Species Conservation Plan, which covers the conservation goals of the overall SDCP, will be submitted to the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service in 2006 as part of an application for a federal permit under Section 10 of the Endangered Species Act. Under the plan a proposed 35 species and their habitats will receive federal protection.

For more on the Sonoran Desert Conservation Plan controversy in 2001, when a regional land-use plan for Pima proposed to incorporate the environmental goals of SDCP, see Tony Davis, "State, county at odds over desert plan," Arizona Daily Star, 22 April 2001.
The draft plan and various reports can be accessed through the Pima county’s website and through the Coalition for Sonoran Desert Protection website.
For an overview of the SDCP and a look at the politics of the planning process, see Keith Kloor’s article “Score One for the Desert,” Audubon Magazine, May 2005

Chapter 4 Two Faces of American Environmentalism

Ethics Empowered

Sign up for news & events

Contact