Loving it to death: land use conflict, outdoor recreation and the contradictions of wilderness in Southeast Utah, USA

ABSTRACT

Different cultural valuations of landscapes often underlie land use conflict. How do place-based experiences inform cultural values regarding landscapes? Further, how do such values shape conflicts over land use and land management? This paper draws from ethnographic fieldwork and interviews with recreational land users (primarily rock climbers), land managers, ranchers, and others in the Indian Creek area of Bears Ears National Monument in Southeast Utah to address these questions. The findings presented center on the following paradox: recreational users value the landscape as a vestige of wilderness values while simultaneously experiencing and contributing to socio-ecological dynamics that either impinge upon or unravel the basis of these values. We argue that discourses of sacredness, stewardship, authenticity, and ‘local ethics’ relieve some friction, but nonetheless build a common narrative that the landscape is being ‘loved to death.’ Two conclusions follow. First, land use conflicts can be generally understood as having cultural roots developed through embodied engagement with landscapes. Second, as land managers regulate outdoor recreation in multi-use settings, policies should engage the contradictory social pressures (namely wilderness ethics vs. high-impact consumption) that define outdoor recreation culture.

KEYWORDS:

• Land management
• outdoor recreation
• valuation
• land use conflict
• Utah
• public lands
• Bears Ears National Monument

Acknowledgements

The authors acknowledge initial financial support from the American Alpine Club, the generous time given by all research participants, and insight from former colleagues at the US Geological Survey and the University of California-Davis. We appreciate thorough and insightful criticism from Justine Law, two anonymous reviewers, and editorial guidance from Mark Stoddart.

Disclosure statement

The authors report no conflicts of interest.

Supplementary material

Supplemental data for this article can be accessed here.

Notes

1. Hopi Tribe v. Donald J. Trump, 17-cv-2590 (D.D.C. 2017).

2. Natural Resources Defense Council v. Trump, 17-cv-02606 (D.C.C. 2017).

3. Plans, preparatory documents, record of consultation, and formal deliberation regarding BENM from 2017 to 2020 can be obtained at https://eplanning.blm.gov/eplanning-ui/project/94460/570.

4. Source: https://dreaminvertical.wordpress.com/tag/indian-creek/. To ‘on-sight’ a climbing route is to climb it unrehearsed and without falling. It is a marker of status among climbers and an element of ‘traditional’ (or ‘trad’) climbing ethics.

Additional information

Funding

This work was supported by a Research Grant from the American Alpine Club.

Notes on contributors

Zeke Baker

Zeke Baker is Assistant Professor of Sociology at Sonoma State University. Using historical methods and fieldwork, he studies the politics of environmental knowledge, drawing from environmental sociology, political sociology, and the sociology of science.

Stephen E. Fick

Stephen E. Fick is an ecologist who develops tools and datasets for evidence-based decision making. His areas of specialization include environmental modeling, data science, spatial ecology, and restoration ecology.