Pros And Cons Of Hech Hetchy

The Hetch Hetchy Project controversy brought into sharp relief the difference between conservation and preservation. The area where the Hetch Hetchy project was to take place was an established part of a national park and therefore off limits for human use. John Muir believed that nature was an example of the power of god and creation, and that the use of nature through management was an act of defamation. Muir believed that wilderness needed to be preserved from use by humans and that management would destroy it. Subsequently, the proposal to create a water source on a piece of national park land was the first step toward the destruction of all wild places protected by the national parks. On the other hand, Gifford Pinchot believed that the proper use of nature by humans, or conservation, was the best means of preserving the natural world through

Between these two powerful men was President Roosevelt, who from an emotional point of view agreed with Muir that the wildness of nature was a wonder to humans and must in part be preserved, but realistically he aligned with Pinchot because humans themselves live in nature and must subsequently use natural resources. These two viewpoints came into conflict when the Hetch Hetchy project was proposed to create a water supply above San Francisco. Ultimately, Muir lost in his long battle to protect Hetch Hetchy, but what was established was that to infringe upon the resources of the national parks was simply not worth the money and time because of the long legal battle that would occur. Pinchot’s legacy was the creation of managed wilderness lands that could be used by humans in their survival. Ultimately, the difference between preservation and conservation was highlight by the