![]() |
|
Editor's
Note: Twenty-six years ago to the month, three guys went on a road trip
to explore Mexico's wild deserts. The result of that trip changed
wilderness politics forever. Earth First! co-founder Howie Wolke tells
us his story. Earth
First!A Founder’s Story By Howie Wolke Dave
Foreman’s old
Volkswagen bus wobbled on unbalanced tires to the northeast across the
Plains
of San Augustine on It was
April 1980, and in
the dry southwest spring the brown overgrazed rangeland of western Dave was
about to resign
from his job as the Southwest Representative for The Wilderness Society
(disagreements with a new executive director). I had recently quit my
position
as Wyoming Representative for Friends of the Earth, after the
organization had
eliminated my $60 per month funding but asked me to stay on and raise
my own loot.
No thanks. My guiding business was very small back then, and when I
wasn’t
guiding or exploring the wilds on my own, I worked as a political
activist to
protect wild country from the likes of the U.S. Forest Service -- the
very
outfit that I’d once naively hoped to join as a protector of the woods. In a
process called RARE II
(an acronym for the second “Roadless Area Review and Evaluation”), the
Forest
Service had just recommended that most of the unprotected roadless
wildlands
under its jurisdiction, except for a relatively few high altitude
enclaves
(“wilderness on the rocks”), be opened to road building, logging,
mining, and
other kinds of mischief incompatible with our vision of how things
ought to be
on the public’s land. Dave and I
were frustrated
by our movements’ disastrous strategy. In a misbegotten effort to look
“moderate”, the conservation movement had compromised away most
roadless areas
at the outset of the process. It did this by recommending that less
than half
of the remaining endangered national forest wildlands be protected as
Wilderness. Dave had been involved in developing the strategy, though
the
primary architect of the disaster was a Sierra Club pro named Douglas
Scott. I
had been protesting the strategy as a lonely voice in I make
this last point
because some accounts of the Earth First! founding wrongly suggest that
it was
a reaction to the anti-environmental extremism of the Reagan/James Watt
years. The gusty
wind bullied
Dave’s hapless van back and forth across the nearly deserted highway.
Hitler’s
revenge. It was a good thing that Dave and I were engrossed in
discussing a new
idea, or I would have been scared shitless. The new
idea became Earth
First! I don’t remember the exact conversation, but I do remember this:
we
wanted to break from the stuffy mold of mainstream conservation, a mold
I’d
always had trouble conforming to anyway. We wanted to try a new
approach that
would allow us to express our true ideas on wilderness, no punches
pulled. As
the beer trickled down our throats, lubricated our tongues and drowned
our
inhibitions, we began to obliterate roads, demolish dams, reintroduce
extirpated species, and in effect, restore a substantial measure of the
bygone
but not forgotten American wilderness. We were
delineating
multi-million acre Ecological Preserves; at least one in every major
ecological
region of the In the
environmental
movement of 1980, few dared to suggest that much more than a select
group of
the most scenic wildlands should be protected as Wilderness areas.
Re-wilding
was completely beyond the bounds of mainstream discussion. I remember a
conversation with a prominent Yet
despite our movements’
reluctance to hit the throttle, for Dave and me embracing these ideas
was easy,
the natural result of our love of wild country. We were ranting and
raving,
excited, slightly drunk, yet possessing a clarity of vision that
extended far
beyond the Continental Divide rising to the east, beyond the Plains of
San
Augustine. As we approached the tiny town of Perhaps as
important as the
particulars, we wanted to avoid stuffiness, to mix a healthy dose of
humor and
irreverence with a no-compromise approach to wildland conservation. As
I
recall, the platform included sensible proposals such as a ban on
clearcutting
and negative human population growth, and a few more controversial
ones, such
as Wilderness designation for the moon. Those who supported our
platform could
join; those who didn’t could stay in the Sierra Club. As it turned out,
many of
our colleagues were in the latter category. Suddenly, Dave blurted out the words
“Earth First”! I liked it and we
had a name. By then, our ranting had roused Right:
Foreman and cohorts wear cowboy hats in the VW during a Earth First!
roadshow in 1981.The founding story of Earth First!, however, wouldn’t be complete without mentioning *Unfortunately,
the wilds of Organ Pipe and Cabeza are now being crushed, eroded and
trashed by
huge troops of illegal migrants plus drug smugglers and border patrol
agents
tearing across the fragile desert in four wheel drive vehicles. But beware! The landscape is Sahara-hot
much of the
year, and largely bone dry with no potable water. The Naturally, all of these attractions
(except for The five of us had gone south of the
border to drink
ungodly quantities of beer, eat fresh shrimp, and climb the red light district of We reached the Pinacate in Dave’s van, no
minor feat
considering that the starter didn’t work, so each attempt at locomotion
required a four man push start, with Dave getting the Next morning, the five of us crossed the
volcanic
rubble discussing the conservation movements’ failure to save much
wilderness,
the recent failure of Dave’s first marriage and the impending failure
of Bart’s
second engagement. We also debated which of the two imposing summits
ahead was
the actual peak (why carry maps anyway?). In deference to By early afternoon we staggered to its
summit: tired,
hot, bloated and hung over. The view was a 360 degree panorama of some
of the
most inhospitable desert on Earth: sand dunes, black lava, giant cacti,
volcanic
cinders and craters, the low but rugged ranges of the Cabeza to the
north, and
barely visible to the southwest, the azure waters of the Atop the summit, Koehler, Foreman and I
continued the
ongoing discussion of wilderness politics, while Some accounts of the Earth First! founding
claim that
as the five of us descended the two peaks, the vision of Earth First!
crystallized. Wrong again. Yes, we continued to discuss wilderness
politics,
reinforcing our belief that the environmental movement had blown RARE
II in a
misguided frenzy to accommodate friends in the Carter Administration.
We also
stopped to photograph giant cacti and to extricate thorns from our
bodies. But
eventually, the conversation degenerated to the usual topics of the
prospects
for a resurgence of Pleistocene glaciation, our hopes for global
economic
collapse, and of course, our love lives. We were in favor of all three.
Nonetheless, this desert foray could be
considered an
essential prelude to the actual inception of Earth First!. Except for
Roselle,
who was new to wilderness politics but a veteran of the anti-war
movement (in
ensuing years he gained lots of experience working for a variety of
environmental groups), we all had at least a few years of public land
conservation, as well as liquid carbohydrate, under our belts. And our
time
together stimulated the consideration of alternatives to traditional
environmental compromise. Thus, although Bart and Ron weren’t
physically with
us in the Plains of San Augustine, their ideas certainly helped to
reinforce
the founding. They weren’t with us because after we left the Pinacate,
we
deposited Bart in Tucson to follow his lower brain to a woman he’d met
earlier
on the trip, and we left Ron in Glenwood, New Mexico to tend a
non-traditional
garden near the house that he and Dave rented together. born, and
*
*
* Far
from the desert sands and petrified lava flows of
the Pinacate, the African lion is the savanna queen, the alpha animal,
the big
cheese: a critter that might eat your slothful posterior. The
lion is a superbly adapted predator, a top trophic level carnivore,
perhaps
with no terrestrial equal on Earth. Ecologically, the lion is a
specialist,
capturing and eating other mammals, including humans, with frightening
efficiency. Thus, the lion’s niche is narrow, targeting mammals. She
eats
little vegetable matter and almost no other kinds of animals. In her
absence,
her prey may overpopulate the range, depleting forage that feeds and
shelters
multitudes of other species, dramatically effecting ecosystem function. On the other hand, the grizzly is a
superbly adapted
omnivore. Ecologically, he is a generalist, eating nearly anything
within
grasp: four-legged mammals, birds, fish, insects, carrion, grass,
forbs,
shrubs, berries, pine nuts, garbage, and occasionally, like the lion,
people
and their pets. Griz is less adept at capturing big prey than is the
lion, but
he survives because he can do so many other things, including
hibernate. Yet
magnificent though he is, the grizzly is less important to the way the
ecosystem functions than is the lion. Rarely does the griz hold prey
populations in check. Though feared by fellow creatures including us,
he’s the
jack of all trades, not just the master of one. This is not to say that
he is
unimportant to ecosystem function, just that he, the generalist,
effects many
things somewhat but few things profoundly. Earth First! was designed to be a lion,
not a bear.
We were specialists, focused upon wildlands. And we were aggressive,
working to
be the cutting edge for wilderness, the shock troops, the warriors, the
top
predators of the conservation movement “ecosystem”. We perceived this
to be an
empty niche and filled it. The niche was narrow, but we were lions; we
planned
to make a difference. We would work toward common goals with other
conservation
groups and with other movements, but we weren’t the anti-nuclear,
animal
rights, labor or woman’s movement. We founders were primarily about the
wilds,
and for the first few years EF! reflected our bias. In fact, most of
its early
activists, like Susan Morgan – who came to EF! as another refugee from
The
Wilderness Society to edit the newsletter after Foreman and I put out
the first
few issues – had backgrounds and experience in conservation, not social
change.
Right:
The stone hammer symbolises a want to return to the pre-electric era,
and the monkeywrench, well..... While the modern environmental movement
exploded into
public consciousness with Rachael Carson’s Silent Spring and
with Earth
Day, 1970, wildland conservation was deemed to be less relevant by
left-leaning
urban sophisticates. This was ironic, because Silent Spring was
about
the toxic death of wild creatures. Yet wildland conservation was
subsumed by a
bigger, rapidly growing environmental movement that appeared to have
more
immediate relevance to urban Then came Earth First!, with its
irreverence, humor,
guerilla theater, demonstrations, civil disobedience and its refusal to
condemn
non-violent ecological sabotage (monkey wrenching), all focused upon
the wilds, something rather novel,
especially from the media’s standpoint. So the attention probably
shouldn’t
have been a surprise. One early goal of EF! was to expand the
parameters of
the wilderness debate in order to move the “center” further toward the
wild end
of the spectrum. This would allow the inevitable compromise (imposed by
the
political system) to protect more land, and it would allow groups like
the
Sierra Club and The Wilderness Society to take stronger positions
without
looking “radical”.
Note that in 1980 the idea of protecting
all roadless
wild public lands was considered to be extreme, and most conservation
activists
bought into this thinking. Nowadays, nearly all such folks and even the
government under former President Clinton supported protecting all
national
forest roadless areas, at least from roadbuilding and
industrialization, if not
as statutory Wilderness. Similarly, our proposed removal of dams
was then
considered “whacko”; today this is mainstream. For example, a few years
ago the
Army Corps of Engineers held hearings on the proposed removal of four
dams from
the lower Snake River, and the Sierra Club now supports the removal of
the
West’s greatest monstrosity, Glen Canyon Dam on what used to be the
Colorado
River. Various other dams from None of this is to claim that early Earth
First! is
solely responsible for such shifts in public debate and policy, but by
articulating what others dared not, we certainly played a role in
creating the
shift. Make no mistake about this, however: we promoted dam removal,
wilderness
recovery and other so-called radical ideas not just to expand the
debate and
make the Sierra Club look reasonable, but because we believed very
deeply in
them. A few other thoughts on early Earth First!
are in
order. Although in the early ‘80’s Outside Magazine labeled us
“The Real
Monkey Wrench Gang,” in the beginning there wasn’t much discussion of
monkey
wrenching, other than our refusal to condemn it so long as it was
non-violent
toward life. But that was enough for the media to create a lasting
association
between EF! and ecological sabotage. Dave Foreman’s 1985 publication of
Ecodefense,
A Field Guide to Monkey Wrenching and my own arrest and six month
incarceration in ’85 and ’86 for eco-sabotage did little to allay the
impression. Also, although the founders had read Edward Abbey’s
wonderful
novel, The Monkey Wrench Gang, and Ed’s numerous other literary
voyages
had certainly inspired us, Gang wasn’t a primary impetus in the
founding, despite media reports to the contrary. In addition, there was the redneck thing.
While we
made a big deal about human diversity within our movement – and we did
have a
great diversity of white middle class gringos – we founder types
cultivated the
beer-guzzling redneck image. This was partly because it was at least
slightly
true; also, it was to counter the tendency for social change and
environmental
groups to lose focus and drift into general left wing politics. By the
way,
Foreman has always been a Republican at heart, the G.O.P’s
anti-environmentalism notwithstanding. But beyond the desire to block leftist
drift, the
redneck thing was a spoof to mind-fuck environmental opponents who
loved to
typecast us greens as wimpy, ivory-tower, intellectual nerds. As
increasing
numbers of relatively humorless leftist ideologues (a redundancy?)
joined EF!,
the mind fuck was lost; they just didn’t get it, and were offended or
intimidated or both. Looking back, as young males suffering from
testosterone
poisoning, we too, sometimes forgot the mind-fuck and played the
redneck role
too seriously. And yes, we drank way too
much. There was also the anarchist thing, which
evolved
from our refusal to have a formal structure: a movement not an
organization, no
officers, leadership by example and initiative, and so forth. Whether or not this was a good idea is water
under the bridge, but by the time Foreman and I quit EF! in 1990,
ideological
anarchy appeared to be deeply imbedded in the group’s fabric (and gawd
help us
all if as individuals we fail to have at least a little anarchist
within). As the Reagan years (ignorance is bliss)
dragged on,
Earth First! grew beyond my wildest dreams, largely thanks to Dave
Foreman’s
tireless full time efforts in the early ‘80’s. But with growth and
publicity,
our ability to steer the ship diminished. Unintentionally, we’d created
a
vehicle for the counter-culture. EF! had become a vehicle for leftist,
anarchist, anarchist-leftist, anti-hunting eco-feminists for gay social
justice
and new age woo-woo conductors of cosmic energy. To say the least, I
began to
feel out of place. In 1985’s rendezvous in the shimmering aspens of Nonetheless, sometimes I still enjoyed
counter-cultural diversity. For example, at the ’87 rendezvous under
the big
ponderosas of the Back to weird. At the ’88 rendezvous in
northeast In March 1989 Ed Abbey died, and a
generation of
wilderness lovers lost the creator of a thousand inspirations to defend
wild
country, dignity and freedom.
On top of all the discord, the media
became obsessed
with tree spiking, a controversial monkey wrenching technique designed
to stop
timber sales. Then, in the spring of 1990, a bomb exploded in
California EF!
activist Judy Bari’s car, severely injuring her and slightly injuring
her
friend Darryl Cherney. Both were leaders of the social activist
contingent, and
the horrifying event created yet another diversion (the bomber was
never
discovered; a few years later Judy died of cancer). All the media
wanted to
discuss, it seemed, were tree spikes, car bombs and anarchy. For me, it
became
increasingly difficult to promote wilderness under the Earth First!
banner. I began to sense the end of a wild ride.
We of the
old guard still wished to be lions. Perhaps, though, we were dinosaurs,
clinging to an idea that, for better or worse (worse in my mind), our
movement
had moved far beyond. With lots of fanfare, Foreman publicly quit EF! in 1990; I quietly left later that year. Too
much baggage, too many diversions, adios mi amigos y amigas. I have no regrets about my decade with
Earth First!
Some bitterness, yes, but no regrets. Today’s EF! is an entirely
different
animal from the early wilderness lion, but whatever it is, it’s alive
and
kicking. At least for a while, it spawned numerous effective wildland
groups
and proved to be a fine training ground for young activists. Perhaps
most
important, early EF! succeeded in changing the parameters of the
wildland
debate, making possible initiatives and successful campaigns that back
in 1980
we barely dreamed possible. And even though it lost its original focus
upon the
wilds, EF!’s newer incarnation continues to peer off the edge of life’s
mesa of
wild thought, into the unknown, far beyond what convention now defines
as the
limits of acceptable discourse. All in all, not a bad legacy for five
pickled
wilderness fanatics staggering across the Mexican desert. Or, more
specifically, for three such fanatics in a creaky German box rolling
across
*
*
* Ronald
Reagan once asserted, in all seriousness, that
trees are a major source of air pollution. This was pre-Alzheimers. Such statements, though widely ridiculed,
indicate
that we live in a society horribly estranged from nature. For the most
part,
its leaders can’t tell the difference between a redwood and a porcupine
(or
between a lawyer and a quail). In today’s political climate, one that
is
dominated by global corporate powers and their elected and appointed
toadies
who have little contact with the natural world, the Orwellian nightmare
of
“doublespeak” is here, and has been since long before 1984. Trees cause
pollution. Abortion foes are “pro-life”. Politicians who enact massive
corporate subsidies are “conservative”. Those who work to protect and
conserve
the planet are “radicals”. Civilian casualties are “collateral damage”.
A
butchered, hacked up eroded forest isn’t a timber sale, it’s a “fuel
reduction
project” or a “regeneration cut”. And I’m the Pope. We now live in the age of euphemisms,
intended to
sanitize ugly realities so that those with vested interests in
maintaining them
will face minimal opposition. Whatever happened to honest English?
What’s
disheartening is that the euphemistic verbal assault has been so widely
accepted by so many with so little question. Our thought processes are
trained
by language; eventually the language we accept represents to a great
extent the
way we think (if we’re not, like, real careful). So gradually, citizens
come to
accept erstwhile absurdities as “reality”. If we don’t quite buy into
trees as
polluters, we do come to accept abortion rights foes as “pro-life”,
Dick Cheney
as “conservative”, and a denuded road-scarred mountain as “scientific
multiple
use management”. Orwell spins in his grave as we sit
hapless in the
glare of computer screens and televisions, learning that electronic
flares are
“pages” and “files” or that life is a sit-com. And that saving the
planet’s
environment is just another socio-political issue to be weighed against
various
socio-economic tradeoffs. What a crock! Any profound progress that we might make
toward a
sustainable future rich in wild evolving life presupposes not only a
drastic
halt to human population growth and human-created carbon emissions, but
also a
quantum leap in human consciousness regarding our place in the
biosphere. And
we won’t get there by watching the Discovery Channel or by “surfing”
the web.
Society’s ideas regarding the natural world and humans as a part of it
are
contorted, warped. It shows in the terminology. And I don’t think much
can change
if we rely only upon nightly news and the internet, books and seminars,
symposiums and debates, letters and lobbyists, litigation and new laws. We need perspective. We need action based
upon that
perspective. And we need new heroes, new stories, new dreams. So, in addition to continuing to utilize
all of the
standard and essential educational and political channels, we’d better,
somehow, re-acquaint our people and our leaders with the natural world.
Let’s
get folks out of those cubicle fluorescent offices and into the
sunlight, away
from the corrupting power of the body politic and the almighty dollar,
beyond
the mind-numbing drone of incessant commercialism and euphemistic
doublespeak
and virtual reality. Let’s help folks to rise above the lowest common
denominator of crappy pop culture and get them out into the wilds,
where true
power and hope grow in the wind, rain and sun; in the big rocks over
yonder
beneath the old growth, in the blue waters beyond the living desert, in
the
waving prairie grasses, and deep within the untrammeled mountains where
lives
the untainted freedom to clearly think and act like real human animal
beings.
This will help to keep us sane enough to carry on, and to maintain a
sense of
humor and perspective in a world where few things are as they’re
generally
perceived. We can start with our kids, if it’s too
late for too
many adults. Get them outside, for christsakes! Feed them real
food, not McYucchs, so their bodies and brains work properly, and
expose them
to the real world, the one that’s still worth saving. I often think of the mountain wind atop
unnamed
summits deep in the pungent conifer wilds of the Salmon-Selway divide,
and high
upon the tundra expanses of the Absaroka plateaus. That’s what keeps me
going,
stubborn and perhaps politically unrealistic at times, but in the end
credible
in that my wild ideas are grounded in an environment that’s been alive
and
evolving for three and a half billion years. For what could be more credible, more
reasonable than
protecting and restoring whatever still remains of wild nature (all of
it!),
the one environment in which we know, through the experience of
history, that
the grand journey of all known life can flourish for thousands of
millennia? We
might not have articulated it in 1980, but deep in our guts we knew
that our
“radicalism” was really the most credible, the most sensible of
perspectives,
and we learned this directly from the wilderness. From their
home north of |
![]()
![]()
![]() ![]() Support Eco-Media
|