Environmental Ethics and Coastal Dunes in Western Lower Michigan: Developing a Rationale for Ecosystem Preservation

Abstract

The management of shoreline dune systems in the Great Lakes has long been contested. Some parties have viewed them as a consumable resource, while others have argued for their preservation. These differences arise out of con-trasting views about both the value of the dunes as well as which kind of value overrides which. Some of their value has been seen as residing in their geomorphic uniqueness, an interpretation based on older (largely qualitative) field studies that suggest they are fossil landscape features. Recent findings indicate, however, that most dunes arise from episodic, ongoing processes. Contradictory management implications of this new research can flow either from the heightened empirical uncertainty it has created (which gestures toward preservation) by undermining the prevailing views of dune development and chronology, or from diminished-value arguments it has stimulated (which lessen constraints on consumptive use) by calling into question older views about the geomorphic uniqueness of the dunes. Faced with such a dilemma, for practical guidance on the management of special places we turn to environmental ethics literature, where we find that long-standing disputes about where value in the environment is seated provide little further guidance. Accordingly, we propose that the ethical principle of respecting what others value out of respect for them be applied in such matters. This principle is consistent with both moral intuition and widespread practice, and its application in environmental policy would bypass some of the recalcitrant questions left open by other analyses of environmental value. With certain qualifications, this view then supports preservation of special places like lakeshore dunes regardless of the signal from empirical certainty or uncertainty or disagreement about just why valued places are valuable in the first place.

Key Words:

• environmental ethics
• uniqueness
• sand dunes
• geomorphology

Acknowledgments

We express our sincere thanks to Walter Loope of the United States Geological Survey for his contribution to this paper. He served not only as an early collaborator in the empirical end of this work but also as a contributor to and philosophical sounding board for an initial version of the manuscript. In addition, we would like to acknowledge NSF grant # ATM 9809322, which provided important financial support for many of the radiocarbon dates obtained in the empirical research that led to this paper. Finally, we are also indebted to Bruce Rhoads and an anonymous reviewer, whose critical comments on an earlier version of this manuscript helped to significantly strengthen the final draft.

Notes

1. Naturally, the various regulatory bodies within the Michigan state government, in particular individuals within the Michigan Department of Environmental Quality (MDEQ), are caught in the middle of these conflicting claims. On the conservation side, the state established the Sand Dune Protection Act in 1976, which was later modified to include the designation critical dunes (Michigan State Legislature 1994) to identify the most sensitive landscapes. Despite passage of this legislation, the amount of industrial sand extracted increased from 1.45 million tons in 1978 to 2.8 million tons in 2000 (Michigan Department of Environmental Quality, 2002a). One of us (Arbogast) was recently involved in a permit dispute that illustrates the seemingly schizophrenic nature of coastal dune management in Michigan. In this case, the plaintiffs desired to build a home on the crest of ∼60-m high critical dune, one that would offer for them a beautiful view of Lake Michigan. These individuals had previously obtained a permit for a driveway that extended from the primary access road to the base of the dune. Prior to submitting the permit request for the house, which they were told would be approved (even though it would destabilize the most sensitive part of the dune), they had to apply for a variance to extend the driveway from the dune base up the steep (>35°) slope to the crest. Given that the slope of the dune exceeded that allowed for development in the critical dune legislation, the variance was denied. Thus, the case evolved such that the plaintiffs could build a driveway into the critical dunes, could theoretically be allowed to destabilize the sensitive dune crest to build a home, but could not build a connecting driveway that would preclude a lengthy and arduous walk from their automobile to the house.