Pinchot's Conservation Movement

Did the Conservation Movement of the Early Twentieth Century Successfully Preserve the American Environment? T.H. Watkins argues that the movement did preserve the environment because of Gifford Pinchot’s role with the forest. Watkins states, “President Roosevelt would establish the first federal wildlife refuge” (158), and the forest will be handed to Pinchot’s care. He became the first the nation’s first chief forester and divided land with rangers in charge of each land to make sure laws were followed. Watkins states, “Individual forests were divided up into management units, each with its own ranger or ranger force, and administrative headquarters were established” (159). Roosevelt and Pinchot’s efforts made a huge difference in the forests
Steinberg states, “But what Pinchot and his disciples either failed to fully comprehend or chose to ignore was the complexity and, above all, the interdependency of the forest” (166). Moths were eating trees causing damage to them, so foresters in Blue Mountains tried to exterminate them. They succeeded but the moth’s predators then died of lack of food. Once the moth’s predators were no longer there to eat them, the moths came back and started the process of destroying trees all over again. Dead trees were a food for ants and would help with turning dead wood into soil. Since Pinchot was getting rid of dead trees, this affected the life of ants and the replenishment to the soil. Another problem Pinchot created was trying to control the fires. Steinberg states, “Suppressing fires-a major preoccupation of the Forest Service for the bulk of the twentieth century-proved in the end both misguided and self-defeating. Fires aid the decomposition of forest litter and help recycle nutrients through an ecosystem. Without them, growth slows down” (168). While Pinchot thought he was doing good acts for the forest, he was actually just slowing down the healing process and causing more problems. When it came to the conservation of the wildlife, things went even worse. Trying to conserve specific animals meant killing off other ones. Steinberg states, “In the eyes of the conservation-minded, mountain lions, wolves, coyotes and bobcats, among other species, became the Satans of the animal kingdom” (169). This meant the goal was to catch and kill these animals before it killed their livestock. According to Steinberg, between 1916 and 1928, 40,000 animals were killed in Wyoming and by 1926, no wolves existed in Arizona. Killing these animals led to a huge population in dear and, as Steinberg states, “The deer population crashed, reduced by some 60