Conservation's end: Natural resource development in the age of ecology, 1950-198

In an era of increasing prosperity, resource development agencies found themselves caught within a paradox. Post-war Americans began to clamor for more outdoor recreational opportunities, and developed a new appreciation for the natural world; at the same time, the booming post-war economy generated the need for greater extraction of natural resources. The tension between these conflicting needs transformed the relationship between resource agencies and their various constituencies, particularly environmentalists. This dissertation argues that the relationship between environmentalists and agencies went through four distinct phases. In the immediate post-war period, agencies and environmentalists shared a common understanding of how the nation's natural resources should be used. However, as pressure to extract resources increased in the 1950s, environmentalists and agencies no longer shared the same priorities and began to clash over development plans. In the 1960s, public support for environmentalism forced agencies to adopt the language of their critics to defend their projects. By the 1970s, however, agencies had to accept the scientific legitimacy of environmental critiques on a more fundamental level, and adjust their plans accordingly.;This dissertation establishes this pattern through an examination of two case studies. The first half of the dissertation focuses on environmentalist efforts to protect French Pete, a section of forest in the Willamette National Forest near Eugene, Oregon. Starting in the 1950s, environmentalists used increasing public demands for recreation to challenge the Forest Service's efforts to increase timber production. In the ensuing debate, the agency gradually modified its position on forest usage to reflect changing public environmental values. The second half of the dissertation discusses the efforts of environmentalists to thwart a joint state-federal effort to connect the northern and southern branches of California's State Water Project with a Peripheral Canal. In the 1960s, northern Californians argued that the canal would cause ecological damage; by the late 1970s, the state's Department of Water Resources had accepted their claims.