Best regards, Andrew Stewart
Begin forwarded message: > From: H-Net Staff via H-REVIEW <[email protected]> > Date: March 24, 2021 at 4:30:26 PM EDT > To: [email protected] > Cc: H-Net Staff <[email protected]> > Subject: H-Net Review [H-Environment]: Standish on Smith, 'The Conservation > Constitution: The Conservation Movement and Constitutional Change, 1870-1930' > Reply-To: [email protected] > > Kimberly K. Smith. The Conservation Constitution: The Conservation > Movement and Constitutional Change, 1870-1930. Lawrence University > Press of Kansas, 2019. 320 pp. $39.95 (cloth), ISBN > 978-0-7006-2844-5. > > Reviewed by Sierra Standish (University of Colorado Boulder) > Published on H-Environment (March, 2021) > Commissioned by Daniella McCahey > > Scholars of US environmental history must take a long, good look at > the Progressive Era. This is when the modern apparatus of government > resource agencies and environmental regulations took shape, setting > the stage for a successive wave of essential environmental laws in > the 1960s and 70s. Shelves groan under the weight of monographs that > investigate the legal battles, implementation, and social dynamics of > Progressive-Era conservation. Nonetheless, political scientist > Kimberly K. Smith gestures toward a yet-missing piece of the story, > asking how, exactly, the United States legal establishment ever came > to agree that the government ought to have a major role in > environmental management. After all, mid-nineteenth century concepts > of constitutionality upheld private property and states' > rights--priorities seemingly at odds with top-down environmental > management. Furthermore, the US Constitution grants no explicit > authority to the federal government to protect natural resources. > Smith's _The Conservation Constitution: The Conservation Movement and > Constitutional Change, 1870-1930 _offers a methodical, clear-eyed > examination of how and why judges increasingly came to side with the > notion that conservation measures embodied several legitimate state > interests, thus helping create what Smith calls the "green state." > > The "Conservation Constitution" is that unwritten set of > interpretations expressed in case law that solidified federal- and > state-level authority to manage natural resources. According to > Smith, this momentous doctrinal shift unfolded over about sixty > years--a time span that easily exceeds most definitions of the > Progressive Era yet illustrates the quite gradually changing nature > of perspective emanating from the bench. In the courts, Smith shows, > conservationists distinguished themselves from other reformers of the > age: while activists advocating welfare reform and business > regulation also challenged property rights and states' rights, the > courts provided far more support to conservation measures than other > Progressive-Era campaigns. Despite their reasonably consistent > success, conservationists themselves did not comprise a unified, > cohesive effort. Not surprisingly, their legal triumphs were > disparate, and it would be "misleading to claim that any single > doctrine was decisive in explaining the source of conservation policy > in the courts" (p. 254). Rather, a whole raft of judicial decisions > buoyed the Conservation Constitution. The history sweeps through a > diverse series of efforts by lawyers, administrators, and politicians > to change the government's relationship to nature. Smith organizes > the narrative into ten chapters, successively dealing with the > evolving legal status of wildlife, forests, and pollution control. > She addresses each of these three topics first at the state > level--typically, the earliest site of management--and then at the > federal level. Along the way, Smith introduces and explains important > legal concepts, enabling nonspecialists to follow the ins and outs of > judicial rationale. > > This political-environmental history takes a long view. Smith's story > contains court cases that played out in the early nineteenth century, > even though the doctrinal shift really began soon after the Civil > War; by 1930, it had become "common sense" to assign environmental > management to the federal government. Smith credits the transition to > the rise in the perceived authority of science, particularly ecology > and ecological understandings of natural systems. Agencies that > demonstrated their bureaucratic and scientific competency won the > deference of judges. On this score, the United States Department of > Agriculture (USDA) proved itself particularly adept while the > Department of the Interior merited a mixed score and remained under > closer supervision of Congress. For example, in the 1911 decision > _United States v. Grimaud_, the Supreme Court ruled to support USDA > efforts to enforce grazing permits--the fruit of endeavors by chief > forester Gifford Pinchot and his legal team to redefine regulation as > an administrative, not legislative power. Previous attempts by the > Department of the Interior to prosecute permit violators had proved > less innovative and, subsequently, less successful. In writing the > court opinion for _Grimaud_, Justice Lamar noted the USDA's > particularly persuasive science underpinning its environmental > regulations: adequately protected forests represented complex systems > that were central to maintaining water flow, clearly a public good. > > As a synthetic narrative of pivotal environmental cases and their > collective meaning during the Progressive Era, _The Conservation > Constitution _materially contributes to both legal and environmental > history. Smith locates the book squarely in a scholarly genealogy > that descends from Samuel Hays's 1959 _Conservation and the Gospel of > Efficiency_. Although some readers will notice the relative absence > of titles from the last twenty years or so, Smith's undertaking > handily complements environmental historians' recent attention to the > "environmental management state"--a subject that, argues historian > Adam Rome, "deserves to join the national-security state and the > welfare state as a central concern of political historians."[1] Smith > acknowledges the most significant hole in the story: the > appropriation of Native American lands in the name of conservation. > Also missing is the impact of the criminalization of traditional land > uses like hunting, fishing, and timber cutting upon local peoples. > Works like Louis Warren's _The Hunter's Game: Poachers and > Conservationists in Twentieth-Century America_ (1999) and Karl > Jacoby's _Crimes Against Nature: Squatters, Poachers, Thieves and the > Hidden History of American Conservation_ (2001) shed light upon a > different set of actors in the political struggle around > conservation--suggesting other ways to investigate why judges > increasingly vested prosecutorial powers in the hands of agency > administrators. > > _The Conservation Constitution_ maintains crystal clear prose and > careful presentation--this makes for an approachable, sensitive, and > very useful resource for anyone interested in the legal tactics of > the conservation movement or the judicial underpinnings of the > environmental management state. > > Citation: Sierra Standish. Review of Smith, Kimberly K., _The > Conservation Constitution: The Conservation Movement and > Constitutional Change, 1870-1930_. H-Environment, H-Net Reviews. > March, 2021. > URL: https://www.h-net.org/reviews/showrev.php?id=54956 > > This work is licensed under a Creative Commons > Attribution-Noncommercial-No Derivative Works 3.0 United States > License. > > -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- Groups.io Links: You receive all messages sent to this group. View/Reply Online (#7494): https://groups.io/g/marxmail/message/7494 Mute This Topic: https://groups.io/mt/81588301/21656 -=-=- POSTING RULES & NOTES #1 YOU MUST clip all extraneous text when replying to a message. #2 This mail-list, like most, is publicly & permanently archived. #3 Subscribe and post under an alias if #2 is a concern. -=-=- Group Owner: [email protected] Unsubscribe: https://groups.io/g/marxmail/leave/8674936/21656/1316126222/xyzzy [[email protected]] -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
