3b COIKertLlal Pl'rspl'ctivl'S

Shabecoff~ P. (2000). Earth rising: American c!nvtronrnentalism in the 21st century.

Washington~ DC: Island Press.
Shabecoff, P. (2003). A fierce green fire: The American environmental movement
(Rev. ed.). Washington, DC: Island Press. .
Shaiko, R. G. (1999). Voices and echoes for the environment: Public interest repre-
sentation in the 1990s and beyond. New York: Columbia University Press.
Shanahan, ]., & McComas, K. (1999). Nature stories: Depictions of the environ-
ment and their effects. Cresskill, N]: Hampton Press.
Shannon, C., & Weaver, W. (1949). The mathematical theory of communication.
2
Urbana: University of Illinois Press.
Short, B. (1991). Earth Firstl and the rhetoric of moral confrontation. Communication
Studies, 42, 172-188.
Smith, T. M. (1998). The myth of green marketing: Tending our goats at the edge
Rhetorically
of the apocalypse. Toronto: University of Toronto Press.
Stephan, M. (2002). Environmental information disclosure programs: They work,·
Shaping the Environment
but why? Social Science Quarterly, 83(1): 190-205.
Switzer, ]. V. (1997). Green backlash: The history and politics of environmental
opposition in the U.S. Boulder, CO: Lynne Rienner.
Taubes, G. (1993). The ozone backlash. Science, 260, 1580-1583.
Taylor, B. R. (Ed.). (1995). Ecological resistance movements: The global emergence
of radical and popular environmentalism. Albany: State University of New What could they see but a hideous & desolakwilderness, full of
York Press. tl'ild heasts & wild men?
Torgerson, D. (1999). The promise of green politics: Environmentalism and the -William Bradford, Of Plymouth Plantation, 1620-1647
public sphere. Durham, NC: Duke University Press.
Waddell, C. (1990). The role of pathos in the decision-making process: A study in
the rhetoric of science policy. Quarterly Journal of Speech, 76, 381-401. Here I can be the voice and face of this tree, and for the whole
Waddell, C. (1996). Saving the great lakes: Public participation in environmental jiirest that can't speak for itself.
policy. In C. G. Hemdl & S. C. Brown (Eds.), Green culture: Environmental -Julia "Butterfly" Hill (n.d., para. 2)
rhetoric in contemporary America (pp. 141-165). Madison: University of sitting in Luna, a ~,OOO-year-old redwood tree
Wisconsin Press.
Walker, G. B. (2004). The roadless area initiative as national policy: Is public par-
ticipation an oxymoron? In S. P. Depoe,]. W. Delicath, & M-F. A. Elsenbeer
(Eds.), Communication and public participation in environmental decision ~'''TT riting of settlers' hardships ar Plymourh in 1620, William Bradford
making (pp. 113-135). Albany: State University of New York Press. described the landscape beyond the colony as a "hideous and deso-
Williams, B. A., & Marheny, A. R. (1995). Democracy, dialogue, and environmen- wilderness." With that phrase,he began what environmental historian
tal disputes: The contested languages of social regulation. New Haven: Yale nodcl'iek Nash (2001) called a "tradition of repugnance" for nature (I'. 24).
University Press.
HiN nc,'oUllt of the New England forests also would be the start of a long-
Zagacki, K. (1999). Spatial and temporal images in the biodiversity dispute. !'lInnil1}.: controversy over how to define and shape the meaning of the
Quarterly Journal of Speech, 85, 417-435.
""I,niol1ship between human society and the environment.
111 1'J'J'J, .Julia "Butterfly" Hill voiced quite a different view of humans' rela-
tk.""hip with the environment while she lived for two years high in the
l'I',1I1d1t's of an ancient redwood tree (named Luna) to prevent loggers from
Ultl.in}.: it down. (For more information, see www.circleoflife.org.) Bradford's
Hl1d 1-liII's desire illustrare twO different views of nature, each of which

37
 (~oncl'rttlal 1\'fSpl'CtiV('}l
Figure 2.1 Julia "Butterfly" Hill and Luna
(Photo: Doug Wolens)
has evoked wide-ranging passion, debate, imagination, and angst. Nash
(2001) observed in his classic study, Wilderness and the American Mind that
thnerm wilderness "is so heavily freighted with meaning of a personal:sym-
bolic, and changmg kind as to resist easy definition" (p. 1).
The diverse meanings of wilderness as well as rhe term environment '
remind us that these are powerful and changing ideas the meanings of which
ha~e consequences for our behavior toward them. For example, the desig-
nation of old-growth forests as wilderness under the 1964 Wilderness Act
has had the effect of removing land from the timber base and restricting
commercial development on it. And the charge of environmental racism
applied to the dense concentration of hazardous factories and landfills in
mi~ority neighborhoods has led to a new scrutiny of society's placement of
toXiC wastes. Because differing views of the environment have serious eco-
nomic, he.alth, and social consequences, many people throughout the history
of the Umted States have "battled mightily and often" over the best ways to
define humans' relation to the natural world (Warren, 2003, p. 1).
From a communication perspective, the history of human behavior toward
the natural world is one of competing voices and interests struggling in vari-
ous pub.li~ spher,es to define, shape, redefine, and challenge prevailing social
and polltlcal attItudes about the enviromnent. What the term environment
RhC't.ork,dly Sh,lping tlw Environo1l'l1t 39
~yrnholizl'S ~lt ::lny particul::lf rime: ek:pcnds upon the specific communications
of these differing interests. This chapter briefly traces this history and intro-
d"ces the perspective of rhetorical theory we'll use to desctibe the ongoing
nnt.'l'npts by environmentalists, businesspeople, scientists, journalists, and
ordin"ry citizens to shape our relationships with the natural world.
The first section of this chapter traces the development of the environ-
1lll'llt;ll movement in the United States, to provide historical background.
We'll also look at four major moments in U.S. history, points at which indi-
viduals, cnviromnental groups, and media transformed societal artitudes
ahout the environment.
The second section introduces a rhetorical perspecrive for the study of
cnvil"Onmental communication. A rhetorical perspective focuses on purpose-
1',,1 "nd consequential efforts to influence society's artitudes and behaviors
th rough communication, which includes public debate, protests, news sto-
d,'s, "dvertising, and other modes of symbolic action. The third section of
this chapter extends the scope of rhetoric to include visual media such as
phot(igraphs, art, and film. Just as speeches, reports, or testimony at public
he;lringscan persuade others, so, too, can nonverbal images affect attitudes
itnd hehavior toward nature.
The Environmental Movement in the United States
During the last three decades of the 20th century, the enviromnental move-
I1wnt "ltcred American consciousness and behavior as profoundly as any
movement since the antislavery movementof the 19th century (Sale, 1993).
'1~t the roots of this achievement lay in centuries-old efforts to transform the
between the enviromnent and society by challenging society's
tll!;"e!urscs about human dominion and the conquest of nature.
lmport"nt to transforming prevailing beliefs are antagonisms. In everyday
ItUlgL1~lgC. antagonism means "conflict" or "disagreement." Here, I'm using
term in a more specialized way to denote the recognition of the limit of
1\11 idea, a widely shared viewpoint, or ideology that allows an opposing idea
01' helief system to be voiced (Laclau and Mouffe, 1985). A limit is recog-
nl:t,ed when questioning or criticism reveals a prevailing view to be inade-
qUirtt' or unresponsive to new demands. Recognizing the limit creates an
j\rwllill!!. for a!ternative voices and ideas to redefine what is appropriate or
IWit'~ln this case, the relationship between the enviromnent and society. In
fhr history of the U.S. environmental movement, four major antagonisms
ddll1c recognitions of ideological limits, at which point new voices and
imer,,"s challenged the prevailing views of society:

40 Conceptual Perspectives
1. Preservation and conservation of nature versus exploitation of it
2. Human health versus business and manufacturing activity
3. Environmental justice versus a vision of nature as a place apart from the
places where people live, work, learn, and play
4. Protection of the global commons and communities versus economic
globalization
One important note about histories of the U.S. environmental movement:
Traditional accounts describe the 19th century as an era that focused on pro-
tection of wilderness, and the post-1960s as a period of awakening to concerns
about human health. As Gottlieb (1993b) observed, the problem with this his-
torical divide in recounting the movement is "who is left out and what it fails
to explain" (p. 1). Although I'll follow this standard account to some extent,
I'll also tty to bring in "who is left out," figures such as Alice Hamilton (1943),
who urged a concern for the "dangerous trades" of urban environments as
early as the 1920s. Also, in describing the post-1960s period, I'll highlight
minority citizens' demands for environmental justice, as we~ as new concerns
for the environment under unrestrained economic globalization.
Preservation and Conservation
Versus the Exploitation of Nature
The first serious questioning of the exploitation of the nation's remaining
wild areas began in the late 18th century. This was in sharp contrast to a cen-
turies-old tradition of loathing wilderness and seeking to subdue wild nature.
Puritans such as Michael Wigglesworth (1662) had described the dark forests
as "a waste and howling wilderness" (p. 83, quoted in Nash, 2001, p. 36). And
in his classic essay "The Historical Roots of Our Ecological Crisis," historian
Lynn White, Jr. (1967) noted that Europeans and, later, early American set-
tlers! inherited a specific religious injuncrion to "subdue" nature-a belief that
it was "God's will that man [sic] exploit nature for his proper ends" (p. 1205).
Nevertheless; by the late 18th century the questioning Of this tradition of
repugnance for wild nature had begun. In art, literature, and on the lecture
circuits, voices began to challenge the view of nature as alien or exploitable.
Nash identifies three major sources of these challenges: (1) Romantic ideals
in art and literature, (2) a search for national identity, and (3) transcenden-
talist ideals in writings of Henry David Thoreau and others.
The first source of resistance to aversion toward wilderness carne through
the influence of Romantic and primitivist ideals in art and literature. Nash
(2001) writes that 18th- and early 19th-century English nature poets and aes-
theticians such as William Gilpin "inspired a rhetorical style for articulating
Rhetorically Shnping tilt' Environml.::t1t 41
Innl appreciation of uncivilized natUl·e" (I'. 46). These writers ~nd p~ets,
along with Edmund Burke, Jean-Jacques Rousseau, and ?ther,:arHer wnters,
fostered in American art and literature an ideal of sublimIry m wild nature.
The sublime was an aesthetic category that associated God's influence Wlth
the feelings of awe and exultation that some experienced in the 'presence of
wilderness. "Combined "with the primitivistic idealization of a life closer to
n;!ture, these ideas fed the Romantic movement which had far-reaching impli-
,,!tions for wilderness" (Nash, 2001, p. 44).
A second challenge to the tradition of repugnance toward wilderness was
Ihe young nation's quest for a sense of national identity.. Believing that
Amel·i,a could not match Europe's history and soaring cathedrals, advocates
of a uniquely American identity sought to champion the distinctive char~c­
It.ristics of the American landscape. "Nationalists argued that far from bemg
i1 liability, wilderness was actually an American asset" (Nash, 2001, p. 67).
Writers such as James Fenimore Cooper and artists of the Hudson River
,,,hool such as Thomas Cole celebrated the wonders of the American wilder-
ness by defining a national style in ficrion, poetry, and painting. In his 1835
"I':ssay on American Scenery," Cole argued thatthe new nanon dId not need
1'0 fed inferior to "civilized Europe," for"American scenery ... has features,
nnd glorious ones, unknown to Europe. The most distincti:,e,. and ~erhap~
tlw most impressive, characteristic of American scenery IS· Its wddness
(quoted in Nash, 2001, pp. 80-81).
Finally, the 19th-century emergence of transcendentalism as a major
philosophical petspective proved to be an important impetus for the re-
evalntion of wild nature. "The core of [t]ranscendentalism was the belief that
n correspondence or parallelism existed between the higher realm of spiritual
Irnth and the lower one of material objects.... Natural objects assumed
importance because, if rightly seen, they reflected universal spiritual truth"
(N;lSh, 2001, p. 85). Among those who drew upon transcendentalist beliefs
to ci1<,lIenge older discourses about wilderness was the writer and philosopher
Henry David Thoreau. For Thoreau (1862/1893), wilderness waS more valu-
ahle than urban areas because it more closely embodied the truth of this tran-
Ncendel1tal tealm. He argued that, "in Wildness is the preservanon of the
\III orld," and that there exists "a subtle magnetism in Nature, which, if we
Ilncol1seiously yield to it, will direct us aright" (pp. 251, 265; see also Cox,
J'ISO). By the late 19th century, Thoreau's writings had influenced others to
p''l'sl'rve remnants of the vanishing American wilderness.
John Muir and the Wilderness Preservation Movement
Ily the 1880s, key figures in Californi~ and elsewher: h~d begun to
MgIIl' cxplicitly for the preservatIOn of wIlderness areas. ArlSlng out of
 44 Conn'rtunl Perspel..'tives
The tension between preservation and conservation continues to be central
in current debates about u.s. environmental policies. For example, during the
last 20 years some-but not a11-environmental groups have called for an end
to all commercial logging, mining, and grazing on U.S. public lands. Others
~elieve that better forest management practices are sufficient. Meanwhile,
tImber workers and forest activists in the Pacific Northwest continue to bat-
tle each other over the amount of logging allowed in old-growth forests. (For
another viewpoint, see "The Trouble with Wilderness.")
Another Viewpoint: "The Trouble With Wilderness"
The idea of wilderness has been challenged in recent years from a view-
point other than Pinchot's conservation ethic. Historian William
Cronon (1996) has argued that wilderness "is quite profoundly a
human creation" (p. 69) that diverts attention from the places nearby
where people live and work. Cronon argued, , practices that affect the natural environment and human health. In her elo-
The trouble with wilderness is that it ... represents the false hope of
an escape from responsibility, the illusion·that we can somehow wipe
clean the slate of our past and return to the tabula rasa that suppos-
edly existed before we began to leave our marks on the world....
This, then, is the central paradox: (W]ilderness embodies a dualistic .
vision in which the human is entirely outside the natural. If we allow
ourselves to believe that nature, to be true, must also be wild, then our
very presence in nature represents its fall. The place where we are is
the place where nature is not. (pp. 80-81)
Interestingly, Cronon is arguing not for the elimination of wild areas
but for a questioning of the idea embraced in some understandings of
the term wilderness as a place beyond human presence.
Partly as a result of the perceived failUre of mainstream groups to preserve
more WIld lands, by the early 1980s a split had developed in the movement.
Disillusioned wilderness activists formed the radical group Earth First! to
engage in direct action, physical acts of protests such as road blockades sit-
3
ins, and tree spiking. Other groups, such as the Earth Liberation Front, have
turned to arson and property damage in a controversial move to protect
endangered species and to protest society's material consumption. Still other
Rlwtnrknlly Shnrlng the Environment 45
!!,foups have voiced a mOI"C critical rhetoric, questioning many of society's
core values in the name of "deep ecology" and "eco-feminism." Overall, the
i.,'(llltcll1p()rary movement consists of a broad and diverse range of both voices
i.lnd strategies for the protection of wild nature.
Public Health and the Human Environment
By the 1960s, along with the continued interest in wilderness and forest
i"",es, a second antagonism arrived, which focused on the effects of envi-
"",imentnl pollutants on human health. At a time when environmental stan-
d;l rds fOlo air and water pollution were weak or nonexistent, more and more
\"itizens began to question the effects of unregulated business and manufac-
lurillf; activities. Their concerns included pollution by factories and refiner-
ie", ahandoned toxic waste sites, exposure to pesticides used on agricultural
crops, and radioactive fallout from above-ground nuclear testing.
Traditional accounts of the U.S. environmental movement credit biologist
MId writer Rachel Carson for voicing the first public challenge to business
qu,,"t hook Silent Spring, Carson (1962) wrote, "we are adding a ... new
killd of havoc-the direct killing of birds, mammals, fishes, and indeed,
I',·actically every form of wildlife by chemical insecticides indiscriminately
'I"",yed on the land" (p. 83). Fearful of the consequences for human health
hom iIlsccticides like DDT, she warned that modern agribusiness had
"Mmed itself with the most modern and terrible weapons, and that in turn-
inv. them against the insects it has also turned them against the earth" (p. 262).
(For more. information on the significance of Carson's Silent Spring, see
C""ig Waddell's anthology, And No Birds Sing [2000]).
Environmental writer Kirkpatrick Sale (1993) remarked that, with Rachel
C'"·SllIl·S "angry and uncompromising words, it can be said that the modern
(Hwironmental movement began" (p. 3). Although Silent Spring did prefigure
fl pnpubr movement that prompted new environmental protections, earlier
vniees from the 1880s through the 1920s had warned of dangers to human
hel1lth from poor sanitation and occupational exposures to lead and other
dWll1icals. Trade unions, "sanitarians," reformers from Jane Addams's Hull
11."'"e in Chicago, and public health advocates had warned of hazards to both
wOl'k!'!;,ce and urban life: "contaminated water supplies, inadequate waste and
!i\'lViW· collection disposal, poor ventilation and polluted and smoke-filled air,
liwdl overcrowded neighborhoods and tenements" (Gottlieb (1993a, p. 55).
lll'han environmental historian Robert Gottlieb (1993a) has called atten-
linn parricularly to the influence of Dr. Alice Hamilton, "a powerful envi-
rlll111lcntal advocate in an era when the term had yet to be invented" (p. 51),
 42
these efforts were campaigns to protect coastal forests and spectac
ular
regions of natural scenery such as Yosemite Valley in the Sierra Nevada
Mount ains. Preservationism sought to ban commercial use of these
areas,
to preserve wild forests and other natural areas for appreciation,
study,
and outdoo r recreation. This movem ent also would be one of the
two
major forces of the early 20th century, along with conservationi
sm, to
challenge the rapacious exploit ation of wild nature. (We'll turn to
this
second challenge shortly.)
One of the leaders of the preservation movement was the Scottish immi-
grant John Muir, whose literary essays in the 1870s and 1880s did much
to
arouse national sentiment for preserving Yosemite Valley. Communicati
on
scholar Christine Oravec (1981) has observed that Muir's essays evoked
a t~xnmplc, in managing public forest lands as a source of timber, Pinchot insti-
sublime response from his readers through his description of the rugged
mountains and valleys of the Sierra Nevada. This response on the part
of
readers was characterized by (1) an immediate awareness of a sublime
object
(such as Yosemite Valley), (2) a sense of overwhelming personal insignif
i-
cance and awe in the object's presence, and (3) ultimately a feeling of
spiri-
tual exaltation (p.248 ). Typical of this style was Muir's depiction
of the
2,425-foot Yosemite Falls, the world's fifth highest: "Gray cliffs, wet
black
rock, the white hill of ice, trees, ... and the surging, roaring torrents
escap-
ing down the gorge in front, glorifying all, and proclaiming the triump
h of
Peace and eternal Harmo ny" (Oravec, 1981, p. 249). Muir's influenc
e and
- the support of others such as Rohert Underwood Johnson, editor of the
liter-
ary magazine Century, led to a national campaign to preserve Yosem
ite
Valley. By 1890, these efforts had resulted in the creation of Yosem
ite
National Park by Congress, "the first successful proposal for preservation
of
natural scenery to gain widespread national attention and support" from
the
public (p. 256).
Similarly, aggressive logging in the 1880s of giant redwood trees along
California's coast fueled further interest in the preservation movem
ent.
Laura White and the California Federation of Women's Clubs were among
those who led successful campaigns to protect redwood groves in the
late
19th century (Merchant, 2002). As a result of these early campaigns, groups
dedicated to wilderness and wildlife preservation began to appear:
John
Muir's Sierra Club (1892), the Audub on Society (1905), the Save
the
Redwoods League (1918), the National Parks and Conservation Associ
(1919), the Wilderness Society (1935), and the National Wildlife Federa
ation
tion
(1936). In the 20th century, these groups-launched other preservation
cam-
paigns that challenged exploitation of these wild lands. (For a history
of this
period, see Merchant, 2002, and Warren , 2003.)
Hht'torlcally Shapin}!, tlw Environnwnt 43
(~(}HSerlJari()n and the Efficient
Us~ oj" Natura l Resources
Muir's l,thic of preservation soon dashed with a competing vision
that
!ilDught to managl: Americ a's forests and other natu-ral resourc
es for dficicnt
,Ind sllst;]inahlc lise. Influenced by the philosophy of utilitarianism, the
ide;]
of "the greatest good for the greatest number," some in the early
20th CCJ1-
!lIlT hegan to promote a new conservation ethic. Associa
ted princi~a.ll~ with.
CiHord Pine-hot, President Theodore Roosevelt's chief of the DIV1SlO
l1 01-
J,'t)l'l'stry (now the U.S. Fore;;t Service), the term conservation meant
"the
wise' ,md efficient use of natural resources" (Merchant, 2002, p. 128)..
For
luted;] susmined yield policy, according to which logged timberlands
were
In 11<' reforested after cutting, to ensure future timber supplies
(Hays, 1987;
IVkr,.h;]nt, 2002; for more about Pinchot, see Miller, 2004.)
'I 'he tension between Muir's ethic of preservation and Pinchot's
conserva-
tloll ;] ppro;]ch came to a head in the fierce controversy over the buildin
gof
<I d,IIlI ill Hetch Hetchy Valley in Yosemite Nation
al Park. In 1901, The Oty
ill San Francisco's proposal to dam the river running throug h this valley
as
tJ !iiourcl' for its water sparked a multi-year dispute over
the purpose 0,£ the
parle At the heart of the controversy were two differing views of the
interest (Oravec, 1984). As an ideal, the public interest isa symbolic
"",rI",-, of legitimacy for actions taken in the na'me of the nation's people or
(O\ll\llon good. (We'll return to the idea of symbolic legitimacy later
in
(haptcr.)
The tension between the aesthetic and practical values of Hetch Hetchy
would continue to incite debate long after the dam was approved in
111.\ (Oravec, 1984). Although in the following decades Pinchot's conserv
a-
approach strongly influenced the management of natural resources by
"I!"JHW < such as the Forest Service and
the Bureau of Land Managemenr
preservationists, toO, won significant victories. (Appendix A summa
-
these achievements.) One major accomplishment of preservationists was
N;]tion,,1 Parks Act of 1916, which established a national system of parks
thnl COlltinues to expand today. Other designations of parks, wildlife refuges
,
IJlld wild ilnd scenic rivers would follow throughout the 20th century
.
[)nhnps the preservationists' most significant victory was
th,e 19~4
Wildl"l'l1l'ss Act. The Wilderness Act authorizes Congress to set aSide
wild
ilrl"" ill Ilational forests, national parks, and other strictly managed
public
I~i:\l\ds. to preserve such areas' "primeval character and influence" (Warre
n,
J,Dill, p. 243).
 4b Conl.'crtual P~'rSpl'ctivl'S Rlwtoril'tilly Shaping the Environmt'nt 47

who worked in the 1920s to reform the "dangerous trades" of urban

work-
places. With the publication of Industrial Poisons in the United States
(1925)
and her work with the Wome n's Health Bureau, Hamilt on became
"the
country's most powerful and effective voice for exploring rhe environmental
consequences of industrial activity," including the impacts of occupa
tional
hazards on women and minorities in the workplace (Gottlieb, 1993a,
p. 51).
Still, until the 1962 publication of Silent Spring, there was no such thing
as
an environmental movement in the United States in the sense of a "conce
tted,
populous, vocal, influential, active" force (Sale, 1993, p. 6). However,
by the
late 1960s news coverage ofconta minate d food, heavy air pollution in
many
cities, nuclear fallom, oil spills off the coast of Santa Barbara, California,
and
the Cuyahoga River near Cleveland, Ohio, which burst into flames when
its
polluted surface was ignited, had fueled a public outcry for greater protect
ion
of the environment. One result was the National Environmental Policy
Act
(NEPA), signed into law by President Nixon on January 1, 1970. This
would
become the cornerstone of modem environmental law. The act requires
every
federal agency to prepare an environmental impact statement for any project
that would affect the environment. At the end of 1970, by executive
order
President Nixon also created the Environmental Protection Agency·
(com-
monly known as the EPA) to implement and oversee the enforcement of
new
environmental laws such as the Clean Air Act and the Clean Water Act (1970).
By the first Earth Day on April 22, 1970, students, public health worker
s,
new activist groups, and urban workers had coalesced into a recogni
zable
movement to champion environmental controls on industry and govern
-
mental activities. Drawing some 20 million people and involving protest
s, Large banner at an Earth Day Demonstration, c. 1970
teach-ins, and festivals at schools, colleges, and universities throughout Fi~llrc 2.2
the (copydght Getry Images: Earth Day 1970 #3208016)
country, the inaugural Earth Day was one of the largest demonstration
s in
American history. Its events involved "every strata of American
society"
(Flippen, 2003, p. 272). At the same time, new groups arose to address level (enacting new laws). However, by the end of the 1970s, the challen
the ge
relationship between human health and the environment. Among the industrial pollution became manifest at a local level as communlties
earli-
est were the Environmental Defense Fund (1967), Environmental Action became increasingly worried by the chemical contamination of their
(1970), and the Natura l Resources Defense Council (1970). Finally air,
, the drinking water, soil, and school grounds. For example, the small, upsta;e
growing popularity of the "ecology movem ent"-th e term used in the New York community of Love Canal became a symbol of the natIOn
1970s s
for the environmental movem ent-led lawmakers to enact new legislat
ion to widcnin~ consciousness of the hazards of chemicals in their economy. (See
strengrhen protections for air and water quality and to regulate produc I.he hrief description of the Love Canal case in Chapter 1.) Ordina
tion ry citizens
and disposal of toxic chemicals. (These accomplishments are summarized IPit themselves surrounded by what Hays (1987) termed "the toxic
in sea
Appendix B. For more information on the U.S. environmental movem iUOlllld us" (p. 171) and began to organize in hundreds of community-ba
ent s:d
generally, see "Suggested Readings" at the end of this chapter.) HiO"I" to demand cleanup of their neighborhoods and stricter
Whereas the ecology movement championed human health and environ accountabl1-
- ll'Y of I:orporate pollute rs.
mental quality against industrial pollution and underregulated comme I'l"Ompted by the toxic waste scandals at Love Canal and other places
rce,
much of the initial focus of the new environmental groups was at the federal Much ns Times Beach, Missouri, Congress passed the Superfund law of
1980,
 48 Conceptual Pen;pc('tives
which authorized the Environmental Protection Agency to clean up toxic
sites and take action against the responsible parties. Local citizens also took
advantage of new federal laws such as the Clean Water Act to participate in
local decision-making venues, such as state agencies' issuance of air and
water permits for businesses. (We will describe these new guarantees for
public participation more fully in Chapter 3.) . I'ollment"l issues (hazardous waste and pollution) to the mainstream civil rights
Environmental Justice:
"Where We Live, Work, Play, and Learn"
Even as the environmental movement widened its concerns in the 1960s
to include health and environmental quality along with wilderness preserva-
tion, there remained a language of the environment that provided "dis-
jointed and at times contradictory" accounts of humans' place in nature and
assumed a "long-standing separation of the social from the ecological"
(Gottlieb, 2002, p. 5). However, by the 1980s new activists from minority
and low-income communities had begun to challenge the view of nature as
"a place apart" from the environments where people lived and worked dis-
closing a third antagonism in prevailing views of the environment. ' (,'i l111lllunities.
Re-Articulating the Meaning of Environment
Despite some earlier efforts ro bring environmentalists, labor, and civil
rights and religious leaders together to explore common interests in the
1960s and 1970s4, national environmental groups largely failed to recognize
the problems of urban residents and minority communities. For example, soci-
ologist Giovanna Di Chiro (1996) reported that in the mid-1980s residents in
south central Los Angeles who were trying to stop a solid waste incinerator
from being located in their neighborhood discovered that "these issues were
not deemed adequately 'environmental' by local environmental groups such
as the Sierra Club Or the Environmental Defense Fund" (p. 299). Activisrs in
communities of color were particularly vocal in criticizing mainstream envi-
ronmental groups for being "reluctant to address issues of equity and social
justice, within the context of the environment" (Alston, 1990, p. 23).
By the 1980s, residents and activists in some low-income neighborhoods and
communities of color had started to take matters into their own hands. In a his-
torically significant move, they proposed to rearticulate the word environment
to mean the places "where we live, where we work, where we play, and where
we learn" (Lee, 1996, p. 6). A key moment in the launching of this new move-
ment occurred in 1982 with the protests by residents of the largely African
American community of Warren County, North Carolina. Local residents and
Rlwtorh';\lly Shuping the Environtnl'nt 4~)
1c.';Hlcrs of national civil right.s groups tried to halt the state's plans to locate a
lO,ic waste Iundfiil in this nlfal community by sitting in roads to block 6,000
trucks carrying PCB (polychlorinated biphenol)-<:ontaminated soil.' More than
500 protesters wcre arrested in what sociologists Robert Bullard and Beverly
llendri, Wright (1987) called "the first national attempt by blacks to lmk enVl-
"~"I1tb" (p. 32). (For more on the significance of this event as a "story of origin"
in the movement, see Pezzullo, 2001.)
With similar struggles in other parrs of the nation and reports of the heavy
wileentration of hazardous facilities in minority neighborhoods (Lee, 1993;
(:o!c- & foster, 2001), some charged that these communities suffered from
n form of environmental racism. Residents and critics alike began to speak of
Iwing poisoned and "dumped upon,'" and of certain communiti~s. targeted as
"s"crifice zones" (Schueler, 1992, p. 45). Importantly for these crltlcs, the term
"II1'irollmental racism meant not only threats to their health or livelihood from
h;lzardous waste landfills, incinerators, agricultural pesticides, sweatshops,
;llld polluting factories, but also the disproportionate burden that thes: prac-
I i,:es placed on people of color and the workers and reSidents of low-mcome
Defining Environmental Justice
Emerging from these struggles was a pluralistic vision of envir?nmental
iWit ice. For most activists, this term connected the safety and quality of the
Nlvironmcnts where people lived, worked, played, and learned With con-
. for social and economic justice, Residents and movement activists
that environmental justice referred to the basic right of all people to
free of poisons and other hazards. At its core, environmental justice also
n vision of the democratic inclusion of people and communities in the
"",',",,)I1S that affected their health and well-being. Many people criticized
l!h:I!lsloll-makmg processes that failed to provide meaningful participation
those most burdened by environmenral decisions";· they called for
Im'''',cr collaboration among government officials, experts, and the affected
i,IUminunities (Cole & Foster, 2001, p. 16). ,
Tlw demand for environmental justice received significant publicity m
991. when delegates from local communities, along with national leaders of
!Jlvil rif~hts. religious, and environmental groups, convened in Washingron,
I),c., lor the First People of Color Environmental Leadership Summit. For
tl.w fir,t time, the different strands of the emerging movement for environ-
rtwllr,d justice came together to challenge mainstream definitions of environ-
mlJl1li1lism. The delegates to the summit also adopted a powerful set of 16
 :ill (~nnn'f1t\laJ P('rspt'ctiv~'s
"Principles of Environmental Justice" that enumerated a series of rights
including "the fundamental right to political, economic, cultural, and envi:
ronmental self-determination of all peoples" (Proceedings, 1991, p. ~iii). (For
a copy of the "Principles of Environmental Justice," sec http://saepcj.ige.orgf
Principles.hrm!.) .
In 1994, the movement achieved an important political goal when President
Clinton issued an executive order directing each federal agency to "make
achieving environmental justice part of its mission by identifying and address-
ing ... disproportionately high and adverse human health or environmental
effects of its programs, policies, and activities on minority populations and
low-income populations in the United States" (Clinton, 1994, p. 7629). (The
order remains in effect as of this writing.) Nevertheless, the mOVement contin,
ues to face real-world, on-the-ground challenges to building sustainable and
healthy communities. Beyond the disproportionate burden of hazards on com-
munities is the movement's insistence on the democratic inclusion of peoples
and communities in the decisions affecting their lives, a vision that is still
largely untealized. (We'll describe the origins of tillS movement and its rhetor-
ical effort to redefine environmentalism as environmental justice in more detail
in Chapter 8.)
Global Environmentalism
Over the last two decades, an enthusiastic and diverse movement has been
growing in Countries throughout the world to protect environments in local
communities and the global commons-oceans, climate, and biodiversity.
This movement arises from a variety of sources: activism by local villagers;
management of wildlife sanctuaries by international conservation groups
such as Conservation International and the World Wide Fund for Nanu:e;
publicity and political efforts by Greenpeace and Friends of the Earth; and
large protests by labor unions, farmers, anarchists, and indigenous peoples at
meetmgs of the World Trade Organization in Seattle, Prague, and Cancun.
Together, diverse peoples and organizations arc forming a global environ-
mental movement that is characterized by such actions as these:
In Was~ington, D.C., a group of well-tailored public-interest lawyers and sci-
entists ... sit[sJ down with State department officials to discuss the U.S. nego~
tiating position on a global warming treaty. In the hills of Uttar Pradesh in
India desperately poor villagers wrap their arms ~round trees to protect them
from the logger's ax.... In Botswana, members of the Kalahari Conservation
Society fight to block diversions of the Okavango River, which supports one
of the great remaining wildlife habitats in Africa, from being diverted for use
by a diamond mine.... (Shabecoff, 1996, pp. 60-61)
Rht·tnrinlily Shuping tht' Envirol1l1wl1t 51
These ,1T1J thousands of other adions reflect diverse agendas, and they rely
on different tactics and methods of communication. This sometimes makes it
difficult f() rcc()gnize these actions as a single or unified movement. Neverthe-
less, strLl~~b for environmental quality internationally are fueled by three
different sources of grievance:
I. At the local level, increasing environmental deterioration has threat-
"""d livelihoods and traditional patterns of life. This includes examples such
ilS the erosion of farmland in Asia and in many parts of Africa, foreign
"'ports of trees from village forests in Mexico and India that deplete fuel
",HI foods for these communities, and industrial pollution of urban areas 1U
F.1Stel'11 ELlrope and Russia. In addition, large increases in human population
"restraining natural habitat as well as farmland and water sources that are
nt't'ded to sustain healthy communities.
2. Globally, industrial nations' pollution and high energy use have begun
to d:lmage the earih's commons through increased pollution of oceans,
,brrLlerion of the earth's protective ozone layer, and gradual warming of the
t'nrt"h's climate.
.\. New, international free-trade artangements, such as the North American
""l'" Trade Agreement (NAFTA) and the World Trade Organization, contain
I"f;ill bnguage that potentially undermines participating countries' ability to
1'l1'11[('ct citizens' health, wor.kers' safety, and the environment.
I\dditionally, a major stimulus in the spread of environmentalism ca~e in
tht' 1992 United Nations Conference on Environment and Development (mfor-
rlially called the Earth Summit) in Rio de Janeiro, Brazi!. Representatives from
liitrio"s at the Earth Summit reaffirmed an earlier DeclaratJon of the Umted
Nitri""s Conference on the Human Environment, adopted at Stockholm in
1972. and pledged to work "towards. international agreements which tespect
Ihl' interests of all and protect the integrity of the global environmental and
developmental system." The Rio Declaration had considerable influence in
,"p"(,ildi,,~ concern for environmental values internationally. (For the full text
of th" Ri" Declaration, see www.unep.orgIDocumentsIDcfault.asp?Document
Ilk n&ArticleID=1163.)
R"sistance by local communities and the campaigns of international groups
""j;j;"S' that a fourth antagonism is emerging: a desire to protect the. gl~bal
"",mlllons and the earth's communities from the abuses of globalization.
C;lohnlizntion has b~en defined in varying ways, but here I use the term
In d,,"otl' liberalized rules for corporate investments abroad, movement of man-
IIfnullring-and its pollution-to poorer nations, and multinational trade
 COl1n'pl \l1I1 Pt'rsprdivl'S
<lgreeme~ts that threaten to undermine local rules for workers' safety, health,
and envIronmental protections in many nations. Indeed, environmental and
human rights critics charge that NAFfA and other trade agreementS have "cre-
ated [a] new language for challengers to use against environmental restrictions"
(Andre:vs, 1999, p. 343; see also Esty, 1994, pp. 48-50; and Cox, in press).
EnVIronmental progress also has been made in a number of international
agre~m,ents. Among these are bans on trade in endangered species and new
restrtctlons on "toxic traders," firms that sell hazardous waste materials to
other nations. Recent attempts also have been made to establish standards
for redu~ing chemical pollutants that affect Earth's climate and ozone layer.
(AppendIx C summarizes some of these agreements.)
As we've seen in t~e development of these four antagonisms, the concepts
of nature ,~d the envlro?ment are highly contingent. That is, they are subject
to rede~nttlOn as new VOiCes and interests contest prevailing understandings of
our envIronments. The core of these challenges is a distinctly rhetorical process
ofh~an influe?ce, questioning, and persuasion, and it is this perspective that
we wIll explore to the following section.
A Rhetorical Perspective on the Environment
As ~e've just seen, few words have acquired the same symbolic currency as
enVironment. (Closely related may be ecology and nature.) Literary scholars
Carl G. Herndl and Stuart C. Brown (1996) note that the richness of this term
has nurtured "not one environmental discourse but many" (p. 4). From irs
origin in wilderness preservation campaigns in the 19th century to calls for
environmental justic~ in the 20th century, the environmental movement in the
Unit~d States ~as drawn on a rich variety of languages and symbols to shape
publtc perceptions of nature. Environment now signifies a wide range of con-
cerns, from wilderness, air and water pollution, and toxic wastes to urban
sprawl, global climate change, and the quality of life where people live, work,
play, and learn.
Perhaps due to the diversity of meanings for the word environment some
communication scholars have begun to examine the key role of langua~e and
other symbols in the discursive framing and contestation of environmental
c.oncerns. For example~ Herndl and Brown' (1996) argue somewhat provoca-
tIVely that the term environment is "a concept and an associated set of cul-
tural values that we have constructed through the way we use Janguage, In a
very re~l sense, there is no objective environment in the phenomenal world,
~o envtronm~t ~eparate from the words we use to represent it" (p. 3; empha-
SIS added). ThIS IS not to suggest that there is no material world "out there."
Rh,·lnrl. ally Sh,LpillJo: lilt' Environlllent 53
()f l'OUrSc tlwrc is. I~ut it is through differing symbolic modes that we under-
l'Ill1llll;\Ill! l~l1~agc this world, infuse it with significance, and act toward it.
II rill' cnvironment is something that we know partly through language and
'utili'\' symhols, then different linguistic and symbolic choices constrUct diverse
1111';\Ilin~s fur the worlds we know. As a result, some scholars adopt a rhetor-
intI pcrspc(;tive to study the different ways in which journalists, scientists,
(OI'pur;ttions, environmentalists, and citizens attempt to in~uence our p~r­
n'pliolls and behavior toward the environment. A rhetoncal perspectIve
IO\.'\lses on purposeful and consequential efforts to influence society's a~­
lu~b allli ways of behaving through communication, which includes publtc
lit-hall", protests, news stories, advertising, and other modes of symbolic
ill'lion (Campbell & Huxman, 2003).
III this section, I'll introduce the concepts of rhetoric and its pragmatic
lind I.'onstitutive roles. I'll also describe discourse and symbolic 'legitimacy
hO\lllllaries-the other main, ideas composing the rhetorical perspective that
wc' 'II usc in this book.
The Art of Rhetoric
The study of rhetoric traces its origins to classical Greek philosopher-
It.. Il,hl'rs such as lsocrates (436-338 B.C.E.) and Aristotle (384-322 B.C.E.),
who taught the arts of citizenship to political leaders in democr,a~ic city-
Ilhill's such as Athens. The practice in these city-states was for CltlZens to
Illwak publicly in law courts and the political assemb~~, wh~r~ each citizen
rrl1rl'sl'nted his own interests. (In Athens and other CIties, CIVIC speech was
lilllill'd principally to male, property-owning citizens.) As a result~ com~e­
trl\l:y in public spea,king, debate, and persuasion was vital for conductmg
dvil.' husiness-war and peace, taxes, construction of public monuments,
I'l'0lwrty claims, and so forth. , .
It was during this period that Aristotle summarized the teachmgs in t~e
IHI 01 (;ivic speaking when he defined rhetoric as, "the faculty [power] o~ dIS,:
'lIVl'ril1~ in the particular case what are the avaIlable means of persuasion
(( :lllllwr, 1960, p. 7). This art of rhetoric rested not simply on skillful deliv-
l,"I'Y hilt 011 the ability to discover the resources for persuasion that were
llv"ilahle in a specific situation. Aristotle's focus on the speaker's ability
dr,lws lIur attention to one of the early definitions of rhetoric as a purpose-
1111 (instrumental) choice among the available means of persuasion that a
"pl',lkel' uses in order to accomplish some effect or outcome.
III (:ha pter 1, we defined environmental communication in part as the
I'r;lVoI1lMic and constitutive vehicle for our understanding,of the environme~t
,.'" wl,lI as our 'relationships to the natural world. As I Just noted, rheronc
 (:\lII\.'p tllal 1'\'I'SIW.livl"s Itllt'llIIh .. II\, Sh"l'ill>', IllI' Ellvin'"l 1l1'lll

traditionally has been viewed primarily as pragmatic or instrumentlll il~tivity

that enables individuals to choose from the available means of persuas
ion
to effect a desired outcome. Let me briefly illustrate this pragmatic role
and
then suggest a second .function in which rhetoric may also be viewed
as a
constitutive vehicle.

Rhetoric as a Pragmatic Vehicle

An example of rhetoric's pragmatic role in influencing environmental pol-
icy is the newspaper advertisement that appeared in the June 9, 1966,
edi-
tions of tbe New York Times, the Washington Post, the Los Angeles Times,
and the San Francisco Chronicle. The full-page ad was an important means
of persuasion in a Sierra Cfub campaign opposing plans by the U.S. Bureau
of Reclamation to build dams inside the Grand Canyon to provide eleeuic
-
ity for industries in the Southwest. In what was at the time the "best known
campaign for [preservation] in newspaper history" (Turner, 1991, p.
172),
the ad and letters it prompted to Congress and the president succeed
ed in
blocking the construction of the dams.
The Sierra Club's executive director, David Brower, actually had two dif-
ferent versions of the June 9th ad. In the first version, Brower wrote
a fac-
tuallet ter to the secretary of the interior, Stewart Udall, arguing against
the
dams. In the second version, Sierra Club media consultant Jerry Mande
r
composed a splashier script. Its headline announced, "Now Only You
Can
Save Grand Canyon From Being Flooded ... For Profit" (New York Times,
1966, p. 35). (See Figure 2.3.) This ad included a mock photo of a flooded
Grand Canyon and details of the plan, and it concluded with the emotio
nal
core of the Club's rhetorical strategy: "Remember, with all the comple
xities
of Washington politics ... and the ins and outs of committees and proce-
dures, there is only one simple, incredible issue here: This time it's the Grand
Canyon they want to flood. The Grand Canyon" (Zakin, 1993, p. 165). Advertising for a Canyon, New York Times, June 9, 1966
Brower convinced each newspaper to split its press runs so that he could
determine which version worked better- his open letter to Secretary
Udall
or Mander's harder-hitting version (Zakin, 1993). Writer and editor
Tom
Turner (1991) reported, "Mander's outdrew Brower's by about three to 11101'\' ,wd blistered the IRS. Freedom of [slpeech became an issue along with
two,
as measured by the coupons soliciting donations to the Club that were clipped tUII'o.'r vation. As Brower said later, 'People who didn't know whether or not
and returned to Club headquarters" (p. 171). More importantly, tbe Mande Ilwv IClVl'd the Grand Canyon knew whether they loved the IRS'" (p. 172).
r
version produced a firestorm of media coverage and political reactio
n. nw "lI'rra Club's membership soared. The following year, the Bureau
with-
"Response to the ad was so overwhelming that the ad itself became news" ,1t'l'W II' pl'llpnsal for the two dams in the Grand Canyon. . ,
(Zakin, 1993, p. 165), and it prompted a heavy-handed response .
from 1'\,,' Si"rr<l Club's Grand Canyon ad illustrates rhetonc s pragmatlC
or
President Lyndon B. Johnson's administration. On June 10th, the day III'tl'lllll l'lll"al role, but it also illustrates the power of
after symbolic actions to affect
the ad ran, the [nternal Revenue Service threatened the Sierra Club's t'yrm .. '",yolld the specific intent of an author or speaker. On one hand,
tax- the
exempt status. Turner chronicles what happened next: "The press got lui IIIII ~ ".·~kd by adapting the best means of
the persuasion to achieve its goal. But
 'iIi
the ad itself triggered other rhetorical resources-the action by the IRS and
the subsequent media coverage and public outrage. This resulting, symbolic
drama between a powerful and disliked government agency (the IRS) and a
nature club had effects beyond Mander's intent. In other words, rhetorical
agency also may include the capacity of language and other symbolic forms
to affect perceptions and behavior beyond an author's or speaker's intent.
Rhetoric as a Constitutive Force
Although traditional definitions of rhetoric emphasize its instrumental or
~ragmati.c r~le, recen.t definitions have broadened rhetoric's scope by noting
Its cOnstItutIVe function as well. This is the capacity of symbolic action to
affect or constitute our perceptions of reality itself. For example, rhetorical
scholars have pointed out that rhetoric often constitutes a sense of collective
identity when politicians address U.S. citizens as "Americans" or simply as
"the people" (McGee, 1975).
. The I~t~rary theorist Kenneth Burke makes a similar point about language
10 .descrIbmg the use of teeministic screens, the way in which our language
onents us to see certain things, some aspects of the world and not others.
Burke (1966) proposed that, "if any given terminology is a reflection of real-
itYl,l. by its ve~y nature as a terminology it must be a selection of reality; and
to thIs extent It must function also as a deflection of reality" (p. 45). That is,
our symbolic .or terministic screens powerfully shape or mediate our experi-
ences-what IS selected for notice, what is deflected from notice, and there-
fore how we understand our world. As a result, whenever we speak or write,
we actively participate in constituting our world.
A striking illustration of rhetoric's constitutive role comes from a recent
dispute between environmentalists and the U.S. Department of Commerce
over the meaning of "dolphin safe," which appears on the labels on cans of
tuna fish. Since 1990, the government has prohibited companies from using
"dolphin safe" to label tuna caught by fishing fleets that chase and encircle
dolphins in order to catch tuna. The reason is that dolphins often swim
above schools of tuna and are snared in the fleets' encircling nets when the
tuna is hauled on board. However, in 2002 the Commerce Department ruled
that trapping dolphins while using encirclement nets to catch tuna does not
significantly harm dolphin populations. As a result of this ruling, exporters
of tuna to the United States could use the label "dolphin safe" even though
they fished with controversial nets, as long as their fleets employed observers
on board to certify that they saw no dolphins killed (M., 2003).
In response to the neW rule, Earth Island Institute, Defenders of Wildlife,
and other environmental groups filed a lawsuit to prevent the use of "dolphin
fHIl'llll"intlly Shnpilll{ till' Ellvirmmwnt 57
~i1k" Iahds Oil luna \:;\uJ4ht with l'J1(:ird~mcl1t nets. They argued that, even
with llhscrv(.'rs, these nets "dl·pil·te dolphin populations by separating calves
hom mothers and causing stress-related deaths" (M., 2003, p. 3). Meanwhile,
lIin;! ~:ol1lpilnies like Star Kist realized that it would be "a PR nightmare to
,1I1~I'r Iq~ions of dolphin-loving school kids armed with lunch-pails" by using
till' I'l·laxcJ standards. Therefore, many of these companies pledged to adhere
10 the older, strieter rules for use of the "dolphin safe" label (p. 3).
TIll' point is that, in this and other environmental disputes, the public
I>I'lUlIll'S \.'oncerned as a result of the selective presentation of terms and infor-
IIlatiol\ that name or constitute the issues at hand. German sociologist Klaus
hltT ( IYlJ6) explains that often it is "the methods of communicating [about)
l'l\viromnental conditions and ideas, and not the state of deterioration itself,
whivh l'xplain ... the emergence of a public discourse on the environment"
Ip. !()l)).
Act Locally!
"I )olphin Safe" Labels: How Safe Are Dolphins?
1)0 GlDS of tuna fish in your local grocery stores stili carry the "dolphin
sak" label? What does this label mean today? Does the label mean that
kwcr dolphins die as a result of fishing methods used to catch tuna?
In 2.004, a U.S. District Court judge issued a preliminary injunction
IhM kept the strier "dolphin safe" standard in place until the court can
Iwa r a lawsuit on the issue brought by environmental groups. As I
write this book, that case (Earth Island Institute v. U.S. Commerce
S('m'taryDonald Evans) is still pending.
What is the most recent court ruling in this case, and what does "dol-
phin safe" mean today? Start by checking the websites of two of the
1t'.ldinA plaintiffs in the case, Earth Island Institute (www.earthisland
.IlI'Wlll~wSlnews.cfm) and Defenders of Wildlife (www.defenders.orgl
wi III Ii fclllew/dolphins.html).
I{hl'lorie's constitutive role is particularly important in communication
Ih.1l lI,1I11l'S a state of affairs as an environmental problem. Political scientist
Ikhlll"ah Stone (2002) explains that: "Problems ... are not given, out there
111 1I11' world waiting for smart analysts to come along and define them cor-
'I'~rly. TI1l'Y are created in the minds of citizens by other citizens, leaders,
1II'!t.llIi,.illiollS, and government agencies" (p. 156). Rhetoric's constitutive
 11I\I'tllrklllly Shllpill~ \111' Ellvironllll'llt

force comes into play in this ability to charact erize a set of facts or
a wndi- 1'17H. p, 10). Il1l'vl'ryday tl~rIl1S. till' 1>SI' is n:~ogllized in references to free
tion in the world one way rather than anothe r and therefo re to name
it as a Ill;ll'kl'ls ;IS lhe sourn' of prosperity and the wise use of natural resourc
problem or not. It is for precisely this reason that questio ns of es to
"how and hlild a stront? econom y and so forth.
why certain environ mental issues become identified as 'proble ms,' .
includi ng . ()Iha discourses may question society's domina
nt discourses and their
contest ation of such claims as problem atic," are such an import ant
part ot 'I'o;lllllpliollS. These alternative ways of speaking, writing, or portray
environ mental com!Uunication itself (Tindall, 1995, p. 49; emphas ing nature
is added) . ill ;11"1, lIlusic, aild photographs illustrate insurgent discourses. These
a~ modes
III n'prcM'nt,uion that challenge society'
s taken-for-gr~nted assu~ptlons and
Domi nant and Insurg ent Discourses f II kr alll'rnatives to prevailing discour
ses. In some ages, msurgent discourses.are
1I11lh.d or absent, whereas in other periods they may be boist~ous
Earlier, I referred to a domina nt discourse that viewed wild nature and Wld~­
"pH'ad. In our own time, insurgent discourses have infiltrat~d
commo dity to be used. The idea of discourse is a very import ant
as a mamstream ~e~la
concep t in ill poplllar films such as Erin Brockovich (2000), alternative ne::'s and
contem porary commu nicatio n theory. It asserts that persuasive ~pmlOn
effects are jllllmais such as Earth Island Journal (www.earthisland.orgleIJoum
present in sources of commu nicatio n that are broade r than any single aVloumal
speech .1'1111), 011 the websites of groups such as Comm on Dreams (www.c
or utteran ce. Instead, a discourse is an overall pattern of speakin g, ommon-
other symbolic action that results from multiple sources. It functio
writing , or dH';\Il1S.org), Trutho ut (www.truthout.org), and Women:s
Voi~s for the Earth
ns to "cir- lwww.womenandenvironment.org), and through muln-medla networ
.culate a cohere nt set of meanings about an import ant topic" (Fiske, ks for
1987, IIl"WS such as the Indepen dent Media Center
(www.indymedia.org), a network
p. 14). Such meanin gs often influence our unders tanding of how
the world 01 1I1orl' than 110 centers in 35 countries (Kidd, 2003, p. 224).
works or should work. For exampl e, Gifford Pincho t's conserv
ation dis- s~ 'llle point to an insurgent discourse emerging in popula rity after Earth
course in the early 20th century helped to justify utilitar ian uses
of nature 1).1)'. 1970, called the New Enviro nmenta l Paradig m (NEP).
The NEP empha-
such as logging, and John Muir's discourse of preserv ation served
to justify a lIi."I's hdiefs and values such as "the inevitability
of 'limits to growth ,': .. the
ban on all comme rcial activities in wilderness areas. We also saw that,
in the illlpllnalll.:c of preserving the 'balanc e of nature, ' and the need to
late 20th century , activists calling for environ mental justice criticiz reJect the
ed the pre- iilllhrop()~entric notion that nature exists solely for human use" (Dunlap &
vailing discourse of environ mental ism that overloo ked the places
where V,m Line, 1978, p. 10; see also Dunlap , Van Liere, Mert~g, &.J~nes, 2000).
people lived, worked , played, and learned. Each of these discour
ses arose. (),III'1" l'xampl es of insurge nt discourses have appear
ed 10 v.;ntlOgs suc~ as
from multipl e sources --speec hes, essays, and other symbolic acts-th 11,1II1 Fllrlich's (1968) The Population Bomb, Rachel Carson s (1962) Stlent
at artic-
ulated a cohere nt view of nature and our relation ships to the environ
ment. .\I"ill,~. and Murray Bookchin's (1990) Remak ing Soci~ty: Path.way~ to a
When a discourse gains a broad or taken-f or-gran ted status in a
(for exampl e, "growt h is good for the econom y") or when its meanin
culture (,'f,','11 htture. These authors approp riated an apocaly
pnc narra~~e h~era~
gs help Iilyl,' 10 warn of impend ing and severe ecological cr~ses. Litera"r
to legitimize certain policies or practices, it can be said to be a domina :' Cf1tl~S~lmmle
nt dis- Killill~sworth and jacquel ine Palmer (1996) explam ed that, m deplctJOg the
course. Often, these discourses are invisible, in the sense that they
express rud III Ihe world as a result of the overweening desire to ~ontrol ~ature, [thes~
natural ized or taken~for-granted assump tions and values about
how the IHllllnr sl have discovered a rhetoric al means of contes
world is or should be organiz ed. Perhap s the best examp le of a ~mg their oppo~ents
domina nt d.lI111S tor the idea of progres s with its ascend ant
narrativ es of huma~ VictOry
environ mental discourse is what biologists Dennis Pirages and Paul
(1974) called the Domin ant Social Paradig m (DSP). Althou gh they
Ehrlich ll\in 11;1 I me" (p. 21). Similarly, suppor ters of deep
ecol~gy ~uc~ as C~rJstoph~r
use the M,IIl('S ( 1990) have criticized society 's "cultur
e of extmct lon and Its pursuit
term paradigm, commu nicatio n scholar s would note that the DSP
is a dis- \11 "shllrr- term affluence at the cost of impove rishing
the environ ment," a
cursive traditio n that has sustain ed attitude s of human domina nce
over ,,,,,hw.ty that risks "the specter of ecological col~a~se" ~p: 24). .
nature. As express ed in literatu re, art, political speeches, adverti . .
sing, pho- As domina nt discourses coalesce around speclhc pohcles and IOstltutlOns,
tograph y, and so forth, the DSP affirms society 's "belief in abunda
It\l'Y 1'0 I' III symbol ic bounda ries that help to legitimate. t~ese ~~Iicies
progres s, our devotio n to growth and prospe rity, our faith in science
nce and
. These
and '1'/II/lolit- legitimacy boundaries serve to safegua rd speCifiC pohcles
an~ pra~­
technol ogy, and our commi tment to a laissez-faire econom y, limited
govern - 11~1''' •• 11Il1 the authori ty of certain groups and institutions. I'll deSCribe thrs
ment plannin g and private proper ty rights" (quoted in Dunlap &
Van Liere, IIn"l n lI11:Cpt next.

Symbolic Legitimacy Boundaries
Throughout this book, we will focus on public debate, media reports, and
other forms ~f communicati~n that seek to shape perceptions and policies
about the envIronment. In an Important sense, the functi()n of such communi-
cation i~ to help estab!i~h-or ,challenge-rhe legitimacy of actions aff~ting
the enVlCorunent. Leglttmacy IS generally defined as the right to exercise
au~h.ority. Yet. such a right is not granted naturally. Instead, recognition of
legtttmacy depends upon a specifically rhetorical process. Communication
scholar Robert Francesconi (1982) defines this rhetorical basis of legitimacy as
"an ~ngoing pr~ess of reason-giving ... which forms the basis of the right to
exerCIse authorIty as weU as the willingness [of audiences] to defer to author-
~ty," (p. 49). Importantly, legitimacy may be claimed by a person or group, but
It IS granted by others-voters, a group's members, or other constituencies.
Fran~esc~ni explained that rhetoric performs "a viral socia-political function
~y brIdgmg the gap between legitimacy as claimed by those who would exer-
CIse authority and legitimacy as believed by those who would obey it" (p. 50).
, On~ of the ~ost persuasive ways to earn legitimacy is to link a policy or
~dea ,WIth cert~n values. Sociologist Talcott Parsons (1958) defined the legit-
ImatIon (grantlDg of legitimacy) as "the appraisal of [an] action in terms of
shared or common values" (p. 201). For example, proposals to protect old-
~rowth for,ests may be seen as more or less legitimate, depending upon pub-
lIc perceptlo~ of the values that are at stake: Is the nation ~xperiencing a
shortage of tImber supply, or is it facing a loss of biodiversity? Detailed
knowledge of how a proposal works, while obviously important, may be
only part of the story of its legitimacy. .
?~e of the m~st rhetorically powerful claims to legitimacy in American
p,olitlcal ~ulture IS that something is just common sense. The term is impre-
Cise, ~ut It gen~rally refers to what people assume to be the views of "every-
?ody -what IS generally agreed to be true. When politicians or others
IDvo~e common sense to advocate the use of natural resources to spur eco-
nomic growth, they also implicitly draw on the discourse of the Dominant
Socia! Paradigm, noted earlier. .
. The. claim to be talking from common senSe has become a source of legit-
Imacy In recent deba~~s over Western wildfires and ways to safeguard nearby
hom~s, and ~ommunJtles from these fires. For example, the George W. Bush
a,dmInlstrat,on called its proposal to thin Western forests (that is, to selec-
tively. log trees) to pr~vent wildfires the Healthy Forests Initiative. Rolling
out hiS proposal, PreSident Bush told a crowd in Portland, Oregon:
We need to make our forests healthy by using some common sense. . , . We've
got to understand that it makes sense to clear brush. We've got to make
{II
,,'m,'-It UIo,h's Sl'USl' to l'lll'lIl1r;,~,' pl'ul,k' [.(1 Ill:lke sure th,a the forests not
Duly art' healthy frum dise;lsl', hut are healthy from fire, .•. This is just com-
11//1" .~l·I1SI·. ~ (White House. 2002, emphasis added.)
Till' Prcsidcnt sought rhetorically to justify his proposal for sele'-"'tive log-
~\'Il~ of the forests-described as dearing brush-in terms of values that h~s
1,.. Il'I\l'rs presumably shared about the caution or care they take around their
IIWIl hOl1lt·s, summed up as common sense.
Ikl'ause legitimacy is rhetorically constituted, it is also open to question
,lIul ,,:hallcnge. An appeal to common sense is usually an effective means of
M.lillill~ Icgitimacy, since it purports merely to describe things "as they really
MI', .. Ilowever, part of its power is that it also may mask other meanings or
.1hl'l'Ilatives. For example, envirorunental groups challenged the common
Iol'Il'" of logging old-growth trees-part of the President's plan---as well as
I" w.. lI. thus beginning a public debate over the legitimacy of the President's
I k.dlhy Forests plan. .
Politit:"! scientist Charles Schulzke (2000) ob$erves that the outcome
III ,ll'I-\UI1\Cnts between parties over legitimacy turns only partly ()n facts.
hlu,llIy important are symbolic legitimacy boundaries. Schulzke defines
111....(' as rhe symbolic associations that politicians, business, and the public
llll.,d, to a proposal, policy, or person. Symbolic legitimacy boundaries
~lt-lilll' a particular policy, idea, or instituti()n as reasonable, appropriate, or
ISHTlllahle. They also help to establish a presumption of normalcy that
!."lIll" from being in the political center. For example, Paul Ehrlich (2002),
1I1l' Hilll-\ Professor of Population Studies at Stanford University, attempted to
hl\.;Ih' l~l1vironmentalconcerns inside the symbolic boundaries of science and
rt"IINlIfl when he declared, "There is little dispute within the knowledgeable
I4;lrtllifil: (;ommunity today about the global ecological situation" (p. 31).
(hI 1hl' other hand, the symbolic associations that make up a legitimacy
bUlllld'lFy also name what or who is unreasonable, unwise, or unacceptable.
Fur !"Sample. when conservative radio commentator Rush Limbaugh called
IIl\'irolll1lcntalists "wackos ff and "dunderheaded alarmists and prophets
"I duulll" in his best-selling book The Way Things Ought to Be (1992,
rp, I ~ '-I S7), he was portraying those who worried about such matters
II IIII' U/,lIllC layer as outside the symbolic boundaries of common sense. As
• \ Ol ...l·qucnce, symbolic legitimacy boundaries tell us "what or who is
InduLlnl or excluded in a category," says Stone (2002). They "define people
III ',IlId ulilof a conflict or place them on different sides" (po 34).
1\.. with legitimacy itself, symbolic legitimacy boundaries are not granted
ltUII!lll.lIil'ally hut are· constituted in the rhetorical struggle that makes up
1'lIhl" L1l·hatc and controversy in our modern-day agora, or public sphere.
\tllll" (!H02) says that, in these struggles to create public support, "symbols,
 62
Rhrlorl. lilly ShllplllK Ih .. Ellvirllllllll'lll Ii]

stories, metaphors, and labels are all weapons in the armamentarium (to use
~lIrVl'yors into Wl'Stl'fIl territories. I{lll'(oril.'all:ritil:s Kevin DeLuca and Anne
a met~phor) ... : By conveying images of good and bad, right and wrong,
11l'IlI0 (2000) h:lve arglled that 1:\I1osl:apc photographers such as Carleton
suffermg and relIef, these devices are instruments in the struggle over public
Wal kins, Charles Weed, and William Henry Jackson were among the first to
pol~cy" (p. 156). (In Chapter 9, we will examine the rhetorical struggle over portray rhe West to many people who lived in eastern cities and. towns.
an I~portant symbolic legitimacy boundary in environmental policy-the
I'holographs of Yosemite Valley, Yellowstone, the Rocky Mountams, and
publIc's respect for scientific knowledge.)
Ihl' (;r,lno Canyon not only popularized these sites but, as they became
hroadly available in the media, "were factors in building public support for
prl'sl'I'ving the areas" (p. 245). . .
Visual Rhetorics: Portraying Nature
With slKh popularization, however, came an embedded OrIentatIOn and an
Idl'ologil:al disposition toward nature and human relationships with the land.
A~ I noted earlier in this chapter, rhetoric is not limited to speech or writing. ( )11 tlH' one hand, the paintings of the Hudson River school aided in consti-
Vlsua~ rep~esentati~ns of the en:vironment have been prominent in shaping tilt ing n<llural areas as pristine and as objects of the sublime. Yet, rhetorical
AmerIcans perceptIOns at least smce the early 18th and 19th centuries in oil
_dlOlars Gregory Clark, Michael Halloran, and Allison Woodford (1996)
paintings and photographs of the American West. Since then, visu;1 por-
h,IVl' argued that such portrayals of wilderness depicted nature as separate
trayals of nature have ranged from popular Hollywood films such as The
Irolll hllman culture; the viewpoint of paintings distanced the human observer
D~y After Tomorrow (2004) and television ads of SUVs driving in forests, hI-' vil'wing the landscape from above, or in control of nature. They concluded
to Image events of Greenpeace activists placing themselves between whalers'
harpoons and whales (DeLuca, 1999). tl;,II, alrhough expressing a reverence for the land, such depictions functioned
"r1ll'loricllly to fuel a process of conquest" (p. 274).
Recently, rhetorical scholars have begun to look closely at the rhetorical
Morl' recently, DeLuca and Demo (2000) have argued that what was left
significance of visual symbols in culture generally. For example, Robert
Ill/I of landscape photographs of the West may be as important as what was
Ha~iman a~d John Louis Lucaites (2002) argue that the famous photograph ll/dnded. They gave the example of early photos of Yosemite Valley taken in
of fIve marInes and navy soldiers raising the American flag on Iwo Jima in
flU' I HhOs by the photographer Carleton Watkins. DeLuca and Demo wrote
1945 is symbolically powerful and illustrates the fact that visual media are
thill, when Watkins portrayed Yosemite Valley as wilderness devoid of human
"particularly good at activating aesthetic norms that can shape audience
II'MIlS, Ill' also helped to construct a national myth of pristine nature that was
acceptance of political beliefs and historical narratives" (p. 366). Other schol-
hlll'llIfl/1. In a critique of the implicit rhetoric of such scenes, they argued that
ars have looked at the importance of visual symbols in post-<:old-war images
rht' "ahility of whites to rhapsodize about Yosemite as paradise, the original
of nuclear devastation and waste (Taylor, 2003); the Vietnam War photo-
',iinkn of Eden, depended on the forced removal and forgetting of the indige-
grap~ of a young ~irl running down a road, screaming in pain from napalm nUllS inhabitants of the area for the past 3,500 years" (p. 254). Writer Rebecca
(HarIman & LucaItes, 2003); and the cultural significance of monuments and
Inlni( (llJ92) has pointed out, "The West wasn't empty, it was emptied-
popular films such as Saving Private Ryan that· remember World .War II
UtC'nllly by expeditions like the Mariposa Battalion [which killed and/or relo-
(Biesecker, 2002). Hence, I believe it's important to end our discussion of a
tidlrd 111(' native inhabitants of Yosemite Valley in the 1850s], and figuratively
rhetorical perspective by describing the function of visual rhetorics of the
by IIII' ''llhlime images of a virgin paradise created by so many painters, poets,
environment, that is, the role that visual images and representations of nature
~uHI phlltographers" (p. 56, quoted in DeLuca & Demo, p. 256).
play in influencing public attitudes toward the environment.
Wlll'thel' or not one agrees with DeLuca's and Demo's claim about the
htlPild of Watkins's photos, it is important to note that these and other
Refiguring Wilderness in Art and Photographs ImdKt's (Iftl'n played pivotal roles in shaping perceptions of natural areas,
Ilfhhlll~l'ITO species, and (with recent visual awareness of the impacts of pol-
Earlier, we saw that 18th- and 19th-century artists such as Thomas Cole
lutlllll ,llld toxic waste) peoples and human communities. As DeLuca and
Albert Bierstadt, and the Hudson River school painters were a significan;
nt'''''' (lOOO) argue, these visual portrayals often are "enmeshed in a turbu-
source of the public's awareness of the American West. Equally important
were the artists and photographers who followed military expeditions and
',ul ~lrl',1I11 of multiple and conflictual discourses that shape what these
IlttMlll'S Illl'all in particular contexts"; indeed, in many ways such pictures
 (i~

"the \:(JIltext ill whkh a politks tnkes plact.'-thcy arc crc:ating a

ClJIIstillth'
reality" (p. 242). 'Vl'r SI'I'II alld IS Sll !"~lIlllll' 'Illd I I Ilill 1Il,1t1y
' ')• t:."Iks" v'111eys
k Rand lakesf
"LJl1l1am~~ Pe,~,
11I11;1l1l<" '
:11'1' slill witlwl1l 11'11 ill'S. " Thl" III'W vl'rsion says, omanzo
A striking example ,of. the capacity of photos to construct a context in ilvll.lIl11l.lills." , , ,Shortly aher rhe Ifailedl vote, the Smlt SUlllan, .. sent a
which politics take place occurred in 2003 during a Congressional debate 'kll.,!' 1.1 thl' puhlisher, sayil1g rhat the Smithsonian no longer had any connec-
about the opening'of the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge to oil driliing. 111'11101\-1 ... Itllll'rjl.'C's work. (p. A20)

Photography and Controversy , Afler attorneys for the museum InSIS , 'ted that he remove
' " all mention ld hof the
Over the Arctic Natiol)al Wildlife Refuge k B '
'.lllil hsollian frol\l hiS nOO , anetjee sp
' L oke to reporters. I was to t ff
at hmyd
work W;lS just too pohtlca " I" (Bal'Iey, 2003. ,p. 16) '. In fact ' dmuseum
' . sta
'''We doa
In October 2000,a 33-year-old physicist named Subhankar Banerjee, a l,hil'lwd that his photos and their captions constituted a vockac y. 'A d
native of Calcutta, Iridia, cashed his savings and left his job at the Boeing ' IInl l'llga~c: in advocacy, sal
' 'd R an d a II Kremer
, '" ' a museum 03 spo A20).
esman, 11
Company in Seattle, Washington, to begin a two-year project to photograph !o1l"H' of the captions bordered on advocacy (Egan, ~O , p. h
the seasons and the biodiversity of Alaska's Arctic National Wildlife Refuge. III Olll.' important sense, Kremer's criticism of Banetjee's pho~gra~ sLwas
His project, which 'took him on a 4,000-mile journey by foot, kayak, and ulrn'cl. Photographs may be powerful, rhetorical statements an , as e ~ca
snowmobile through the wildlife refuge in winter as well as summer, culmi- , I I)· (2000) argued they can constitute a context for understanding
l1110 .' , d b c ptions that encourage a
nated in a collection of stunning photographs that were published in his IIIId IlId~mcnt. EspeCIally when accompame
,Ill<
y a b I' that
book Arctic National Wildlife Refuge: Seasons ofLife and Land (2003). (For \ II'lIl'lIhr meaning, photos can em b 0 d y a rnge a0 . f sym 0 IC resources , ,
a sample of the photographs and description of Banerjee's project, see www
.wwbphoto.com.)
~:I~l.litl :,r challenge prevailing viewpoints. observbersSom~ ~elt t~at Ba~et}~~:
I I . ()f Alaska's wilderness had this potential. A 00
I' III us revIewer
"S ' or ,
Banerjee hoped that his book of photographs would educate the public "/.II1I'{ il' lackson Hole, Wyoming, observed of ~hese photos, ome~lm~s PIC-
about threats to the future of Alaska's remote refuge. The Smithsonian IlIi'I's h;lV~' a chance to change history by creatln~ a larger understanding of
Museum in Washington, D.C., had scheduled a major exhibition of Banerjee's j\ ~ .. hil'l'I, thus enlightening the public and bringing greater awareness to an
photos for spring 2003. However, the young scientist-photographer sud- i""III''' (Review, 2003). .. ' . "W
denly found his photos and the Smithsonian exhibit caught in the midst of a ' Holh Carlton Watkins' 19th-century photogra~hs of t~e . pnstlne ~st
political controversy. During a March 18, 2003, debate in the U.S. Senate i1nd ~lIhhankar Banerjee's scenes of Alaska's wil~lIfe ~~d md,g~n~us:~7:~:
about oil drilling in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge, Senator Barbara Iwl ) III constitute a context of meaning and ImpliCItly em 0 y p
Boxer of California urged every senator to visit Banerjee's exhibit at the '11'I~;III1S of discourses, As a result, visual media's ability to al~fectdcon~ebxtds
of
Smithsonian "before calling the refuge a frozen wasteland" (Egan, 2003, , . exemp lify well what I ear IeI' escn e as
\Il1dl'l'slallding and appreCIation
p. A20). The vote to open the refuge to oil drilling later failed by four tl)l' Ulllsiitutive role of rhetorical agency.
votes-52 to 48, (As I write, another effort is being made in 2.005 to open
the refuge to oil drilling.)
Although Banerjee's photos were certainly not the only influence on the
COlldusion
Senate's vote, the controversy over the photos caused a political firestorm
and helped to create a COntext for debate over the refuge itself. Washington
I h"1 till'centuries, people have described their relations to'ltdhe envi~~}~:ne,n~
Post writer Timothy Egan (2003) reported that Banerjee had been told by 'I ' .. II d'fferent ways-"a hideous & desolate WI erness, pns
the Smithsonian that "the museum had been pressured to cancel or sharply III I 1,11I1<ltIL,1 Y I I " d a "natural
revise the exhibit" (p, A20). Documents from the museum give an idea of the
lill"" .. "lL' places where we live, work, play, and earn, ~n f I" I
changes. Egan reported, il;~lllll'l'"
." tor human use. These mea nings have been the subjectf 0 po Itlca Th
lld •. llt·, ;In, imagination, advertising, scientific res~arch, ,and .a~asy. h e
dll' III i•• 11 shaping of the environment and our re/atton to It reml~ s us tat,
For a picture of the Romanzof Mountains, the original caption quoted
Wllolll'\'I'r dse they may be, nature and environment are powerful Ideas whose
Mr, Banerjee as saying, uThe refuge has the most heautiful landscape I have
1l1",HIIIlI',S ;In: always being defined and contested.
 hI

,
III the first sectioll of this chapter ,
described four historical periods in
Wt' III 11.1 III rl', i\S Wt' 11)(' p!lOIIlI',I"'lp IIS II I .,, "PIl~
saw ill " ,ti c:" West <md scenes of
n .. ' . _
,\1 .I",'s wildlife 'llltllwcll,!l-s, viSIl;lll'lldorics may Impart an Ideolog
which individuals and groups challenged prevailing definitions of
ronmen t. We
the envi-
called these periods of questioning and challenge antagonisms, .
. .IS \. . '".. . . .
I'llsil illn toward spt'I.:ilK tkhlllllOl.1~ ot natllle .
ical.
d h b help to constitute
an t ere y
diS
\
which reveall imirs of the prevailing views of society: IIIl' l'Olllexl ill which political deCISIons take place.

1. The late 19th- and early 20th-ce ntury questioning of nature as

repug-
nant by advocates wishing to preserve the wilderness and others who KO'TE RMS
artic-
ulated an ethic of conservation or efficient use of naturnl resources. i\"la)/,unislll: Itel:ognition of the limIt. "d -d I shared viewpoi nt, or an
of an .1 ea, a WI e y . d
2. The growth of an ecology movem ent in the 1960s and 19705, which hk"I.,gy that allows an opposin g idea or behef system to be vOIce.
criticized a system of poorly regulated industrial behavi or that contrib . I l h some cnvirull lncntal writers to w.lrn
uted /\I'''l'aly plic Ilarnllivc: A IIterar~ sty c, use( . \,. " f the en,l of the world as
to human health problems from chemical contam ination and other ,.1 lI11pl'lllling ami severe ecological Crises;
forms evo es a sense 0
of air and water pollution. This movem ent built upon efforts of 1920s .1 "".'111 of the overwee ning desire to control
envi- : nature.
ronmen tal health pioneers such as Alice Hamilt on.
( I "'II II un sense: What people assume to be ..
the views of "everyb ody," or what is
•
3. A commu nity-ba sed movement for environ mental justice in the I ?80s I,pll....llly .lgn:ed to be true; a source of legitima cy.
that challenged mainstream views of nature as "a place apart" from the ,
places t llllwrva tlon:
. The tern' used by early-20 th-centu ry forester Gifford Pinchot to mean
where people work, live, learn, and play.
,I... I\"is,' ;11ll1 dfident use of natuml resource s. '
4, A growin g, multinational movem ent to protect local commu nities Ilin.,'1 action: Physical acts of protest such as road blockad
and es, sit-ins, and tree spiking.
the global commo ns in the face of some forms of globali zation.
., " in' or other symboli c action that results from
I,)"nllir sc: t\ pattern of speaklll g, .Wllt g, ... I. oherent set of meaning s about
[n the second section, we developed a rhetorical perspective by looking 11,"1111'1,' l'oOlln;cs. Discour se function s to CIlI,;U ate a c
at
the idea of rhetorical agency: pragma tic and constitutive efforts by tlll IIl1porrilllt ropic.
different
forces to influence society's attitude s and behaviors throug h the . .., " d ' OlUse that has g'lined brmld or taken-fo r-grante d statns
distinctly I ),,"1I1li1l 1l discours e. A ISC.
human modes of commu nicatio n available to us-per suasio n, public I'
ill ,I llllt III·l'. for example , the belief that grow~, IS goo d for the econom y' its meall-
debate, ,
narrati ve, art, and other modes of symbolic action. ItlV.' 1",lp III Ic~itimize certain policies or practlce s.
Related to this sense of rhetorical agency are two other conccp ts--disc ·
ourse '
. '1 I> d'gm (DSP)' A domina nt dIscurSlve d' . n of several cell-
tra ItlO
and symbolic legitimacy boundaries. Discourses are the recurring pattern JhUllillal11 Socia ara I . ' ,
s of " " d' - des of human domllla nce over n(ltllre. The OSP (lffirms
,
speech or systems of representation that circulate a cohere nt set of meanin 111110"" 111;11 \1;15 sust,lIne ,lwtU . f' h ' h I y limited governm ent,
gs; hdid in econom ic growth and Its alt
1K1..... ' I"S In tec no og ,
they may achieve a domina nt status in society when they coalesce around
par- l'i101IHIV ;lll' property .
ticular viewpoints and natumlize a way of hehaving toward the environ
ment.
We called these particular p.ltterns of speech domina nt discourses.
During
""lilt "illllllllit: The 1992 United Nations Confere nce on Environ ment and
some periods, other voices arise that question and challenge these discour J'ln,'I"I'"H"l1t in Rio de Janeiro, Brazil.
ses;
such insurgent discO£trses present an alternative vision or point of view.
Closely related to the work of domina nt discourses are symbolic legitima ''''III~\I.,"It'l1 I;lsslImp
fiJI
~1'111 t
, . . ',. Modes of represen tation
Iscourse.
rions and offer alternat
that challeng e society' s taken-
., d'. .,
cy ives to prevallm g Iscourses.
boundaries. These are the symbolic associa tions-w ords, metaphors,
images,
and other sources of meani ng-tha t encourage perceptions of a policy, \'1I\lilll ll ;lI'Y: i\ right to exercise authorit y.
idea, or .
institution as reasonable, appropriate, or acceptable. Much of the
to ~:~~;:~ea:l1:ve::II~
rhetorical N"llclllill Ellvil'Ollmental Policy Act: Require s ,every federal agency
work of an insurgent discourse is its challenge to these symbolic associa t Ild invite public commen t on any pro)
tions. 111111111111.,1 illll~;ld statem~~ a . I. I Presiden t Nixon 011 January 1, 1970,
finally, we explored some of the ways in which visual rhetorics such ,*llt" 11\1' l'IIVlronment. Signet! lI1to ,\\~ 'y
as art
and photog raphs embod y symbolic resources that can shape our percept 1'011 1'1\ I', II ... l'llrncrs tonc of modern elwirolllllenral law,
ions
 New Environmcntlll Paradigm (NE1)): An insurgent discourse emcrgin , . 'I' I 'I Wl"I'I' " hil,dll'r ITaim
g ill popular ity, 1,,"lIsn' mIcilia
' I"ISIlI.,I'Jl ,r·1
, .'1 l:(II'I'l."!lI I'lillII'll',"
II Ih'll , I·~IS"
,' " , '" Ill'
after Earth Day, 1970, which emphasizes beliefs and values such ' I, ,,' Illwl'r 11111' Ill' IlHlll'!'ii llllh)l'dS , II\dlltllll~ 11:111111:,
as "the inevitabil- "I'mil lo ' I 11111 I .1111 •
ity of 'limits to growth, ' ... the importa nce of preserving the 'balance ,
of nature,' and, TIl~I' "I'ikinlo\: TIll' I'r;I~liLI' of lIrivill~ n1l'tal or pl;lst it: spi~l's 01: nails il:~(1 trees
the need to reject the anthrop ocentric notion that nature exists 111 an
llse." (Dunlap & Van Liere, 1978, p. 10).
solely for human '~I".I lh'l' is sdwtlulc d to be IOlmcll, to dist:llur;,j.\c till' t:ulllllg of the trees.

Preservationism: The movem ent to ban commercial use of wildern 1111li'ilri;\lIislll: ""l"III'y
~
tll',lt the aim of al:tion should be the greatest good for thc
ess areas and to:,
preserve wild forests and other natural areas for apprecia rion, study, 1o\.. ·.IIe·'1 11IUllhl'r.
and outdoor
recreati on. Vi'II,.1 rheloric Thl" l'apacily of visual ima~es and represen tations
to influencc puh-
Principles of Environmental Justice: Sixteen principles adopted by delegate
III .III,llllks toward ohjcl:ts such as the envIronment.
s at the First:
Nationa l People of Color Environmental Leadership Summit in 1991
that enumeratedi
a series of rights, including "the fundamental right to political, econom
ic, cultural, and:· DISCUSSION QUESTIONS
environmental self-determination of all peoples."
.
I, Is willlcrness merely a symboli c constru ction? h' t}
Public interest: The symbolic marker of legitimacy for actions that Does t IS mat er.
are taken in the i
name of the nation's people or the commo n good. . 'I h'storia n William Cronon that wilderness represents the
!. 1l0l\·ou agree Will I '
.. "l~l' hOI)C of an escape from responsibility, the illusion that wlc can " .
Rhetori c: The faculty (power) of discovering the available means of , , ... rt:tlllkll.
persuasion in the, , db f
particul ar case. '" Ihl' t,llmla rasa that suppose dly e,xlste e ore w~ began
.
to eave our mar s
f om civiliziltillll
1. rid"} Docs the idea of Wilderness as a P ace apart r
"II I II WO •
,
Rhetori cal perspective: A fOCllS on purposeful and consequential efforts bl
dival your attentio n from everyda y pro ems, 0 r docs this idea proVide a
to influence ': '}
society's attitude s and ways of behavin g through commu nication , which
includes pub- ,,,urn' 0 t· rcnewal or a challeng e to civiliza tion's shortcomlOgs,
lic debate, protests, news stories, advertising, and other modes of symboli
c action. . \'} H
\, !lOlI'S rheroric constItu te rea Ity. ow.} 1s it possible to "know" somethi ng
Rio Declara tion: A docume nt adopted by representatives at the E.1fth ",i,h"m the aid of language?
Summit that ,:
reaffirmed an earlier Declara tion of the United Nations Confere nce
on the Human " . b
.1, I)" 1'lIvironmental problem s eXist efore sonleone names them as problem s?
Environ ment, adopted at Stockho lm in 1972, and pledged to work
"toward s inter- ' I' pl' is the burning of hospital biochemical wastes an accepra ble CIS ' 'k
nationa l' agreemenrs which respect the interests of all and protect 'OII'I'X:lm ,c... b ' hborhoo ds} How do you explain the fact that
the integrity of the' tnl' those hvmg 10 near y nelg
global environ mental and develop mental system. " .
nnt ,'vcrybo dy agrees on which things are problem s?
Sublime: An aesthetic category that associates God's influence with
the feelings of awe would you characte rize the domina nt discours e or prevaihlin g vie.wpo~
['md exultati on that some experience in the presence of wilderness.
" Illlw
~t
:,hour the environ ment to d aye' D 0 you k no w of ,any who are c a llengll1g t IS
Sublime response: Term used to denote (1) the immedi ate awarene I'il'wpoint?
ss of a sublime
object (such as Yosemite Valley), (2) a sense of overwhelming persona
l insignificance I hhl:r than the "dolphi n safe" label on tu.na ca~s, what o\h~r p~:~~~c
and awe in its presence, and (3) ultimately a feeling of spiriru,ll exaltati
on. '
II,
' labels attestin g to their envlron menta Imp.
~:,;;;:;
'Il I.:arry,
"I' ,;I1011 .
Superfund: Legislation enacted in 1980 authoriz ing the Environ "Ill';Ikl'rs? Clothes from swearshops?
mental Protection
Agency to clean up toxic sites and hold the responsible parties ,lccllUnr . ' h ' II to constru ct an ideological orientat ion
able for the costs. .., I)" visual media function r etonca Y . ' d ' f the different visual
Symbolic legitimacy bounda ries: The symboli c associat ions that politicia I. ,w;\l'lln ature or the environ ment? Bramst onn to I entl Y I
ns, business, . MTV oil
and the public attach to a proposa l, policy, or person; such bounda
ries define a par- 1"I'I'l'scntatlons you see tod ay III . media today- for examp e, on ,
ticular policy, idea, or instituti on as reasona ble, appropr iate, or accepta lin,,' shows, in Hollyw ood films, in ads for SUVs or
ble. cars.
Termin istic screens: The means whereby our languag e orients us to
see cerrain things,
some aspects of the world and not others. Defined by literary theorist
Kenneth Burke .U(i(a :STED READINGS
(1966) to mean, "if any given termino logy is a reflection of reality;
by its very nature
as a terminology it mllst bc a selectio1l of reality; and to this extent "'n ,It-t.lIlnt account s of U.S. enviromTIcnral history and U.S. and
it musr function global environ-
also as a deflectiol/ of reality."
flll'III,II .'p'"PS, sec
 7()
• Samuel 1'. I-lars, Ile'lIIty, Health. (/lid l'el'l/llllli'/lCt': 1·:/IllironJlIl'III.1/ 1',,111;($ ill
the United States, 1lJ5S-1 985 (1987)
• Carolyn Merchant, The Columbia Guide to American Environmental Histr>ry
(2002)
• Philip Shabecoff, A Fierce Green Fire: The American Environme/ltal Movemellt
(2003)
Robert Gottlieb, Forcing the Spring: The Transformation of the American
• ,111.1 dw conljlll:st theme in American culture. In C. G. Herndl & S. C. Brown
Environmental MOl/(:meltt (1993)
• Luke W. Cole and Sheila R. Foster, From the Ground Up: Environmental
Racism and the Rise of the Environmental Justice Movement (200l)
• Robert J. Brulle, Agency, Democracy, and Nature: The U.S. Environmental
Mcwemel1t from a Critical Theory Pers/Jective (2000)
• Bron Raymond Taylor, Ecological Resistance Movements: The Global
Emergence of Radical and Popular Environmelltalism (1995)
• Paul W~lpner, Environmental Activism and World Civic Politics (1996).
Information on the life of Dr. Alice Hamilton and her advocacy for industrial health
in the 1920s can be found in her autobiography, Exploring the Dangerous Trades:
The Autobiography of Alice Hamilton, M.D. (1943).
REFERENCES
Alston, D. (] 990). We speak for ourselves: Social ii/stice, race, and environment.
Washington, DC: Panos Institute.
Andrews, R. N. L (1999). Managi1tg the f!lwironmcmt. managing ourselves. New
H,lVen, CT: Yale University Press.
Axelrod, R. S., Downie, D. L., & Vig, N. J. (2004). The global environment:
lllstitutio/ls law & lm/ic)' (2nd ed.). Washington, DC: CQ Press.
Bailey, H. (2003, May 5). Pictures of controversy: The Smithsonian, Newsweek, p. 16.
Banerjee, S. (2003). Arctic National Wildlife Refuge: Seasons of life and land.
Seattle: Mountaineer Books.
Biesecker, B. A. (2002). Remembering World War II: The rhetoric and politics of
national commemoration at the tllrn of the 21 st century. Quarterly Journal of
Speech, 88,393-409.
Bookchin, Murray (1990). Remaking society: Pathways to a green fUttlre. Boston:
South End.
Bradford, W. (19~2). Of Plymouth plantation, 1620-/647. (S. E. Morison, Ed.).
New York: Alfred A. Knopf. IOriginally publishedl898.J
Brulle, R. .J. (2000). Agency, democrac)', mid nature: The U.S. ellvironmentalll/cwe-
ment from a critical theory perspective. Cambridge: MIT Press.
Buck, S. J. (1996). Understanding environmental administration alld law. Washingmn,
DC: Island Press.
l~lIl1ard, R., & Wright, B. H. (1987). Environmcntalism and the politics of equity:
Emel-gcnr trends in the black community. Midwestem Review of Sociology, 12,
2'1-37.
l{llI',.1I1l ;Ill.,. Sh;lpill~ ,I ... F.lIVIIIlIIIlH'111 /1
".' ';1'1/11",1,,' ,/(/iOIl: hi';"~)"~ rI/I /iIi" litemture. and
1\111 k.', 1\.. (I 'lhh). 1.• IIlgllll,iit·
IIIt·th"d. Ikl'kl'ky: IllliVl'rsil y 01 t:;dil"lll"l1iil Press.
I '1I111'11l'II, K. K., &. I IIIXII1;1n, S. S. (2003). The rhetorical ael (3rd cd.). Belmont,
1:'\: Th0ll1S011 W'ildsworth.
\ ,\I'.l'II, Ie ( 19(,l). .'iilt'llt spril1g. Greenwich, CT: Fawcett Crest.
I I.lIk, (;., I taIlOl';lIl, M., & Woodford, A. (1996). Thomas Cole's vision of "nature"
I his.), (;1'1'('11 culture: Elwironmental rhetoric in contemporary' America
il'l'. 261-2IHl). Madison: University of Wisconsin Press.
111111.11. W. .J. (1994, February 16). Federal actions to address environmental jus-
11''(' in lI1inority populations and low-income communities. Exccutive Ordcr
1.I.X')H of Fehruary 14, 1996. Federal register, 59, 7629.
1,,1.·, I.. W., & Foster, S. R. (2001). From the ground up: Environmental racism and the
or
ri.'" the environmental it/stice movement. New York: New York University Press.
1",,1'('1", I.. (1960). The rhetoric of Aristotle. New York: Appleton-Century-Crofts.
! !lX, J. R. ("1980). Loci communes and Thoreau's arguments for wilderness in
"Willking" (1851). Southern Speech Communication Journal, 26,1-16.
I ll\, .1. R. (in press). Golden tropes and democratic betrayals: Prospects for envi-
flllllllcntal justice in neolibernl "free trade" agreements. In P. C. Pezzullo &
R. Sandler (Eds.). Environmental iustice and environmel1talism: Contrary or
, IIIf1I,limentary? Cambridge: MIT Press.
( 1011011, W. (1996). The trouble with wilderness, or, getting back to the wrong
11;11111"(:. In W. Cronon (Ed.), Uncommon ground: Rethhlking the human place
/11 lIatllre (pp. 69-90). New York: W. W. Norton.
I klll"a, K. M. (1999). Image politics: The new rhetoric of environmental activism.
New York: Guilford Press.
Ilt-I.II":I, K., & Demo, A. T. (2000). Imaging nature: Watkins, Yosemite, and the birth
uf environmentalism. Critical Studies in Mass Communication, 17, 241-260.
III ( :biro, G. (1996). Nature as community: The convergence of environment and
sm'ial justice. In W. Cronon (Ed.), Uncommon ground: Rethinki11g the human
I'laa' i" nature (pp. 298-320). New York: W. W. Norton.
I hIllL,p, R. E., & Mertig, A. G. (Eds.). (1992). American environmentalism: The
rI.S. environmental movement. 1970-1990. Philadelphia: Taylor & Francis.
Ihllll.lll' R. E., & Van Liere, K. D. (1978). The "new environmenral paradigm": A pro-
posed instrument and preliminary analysis. Journal of Environmental Education,
'). 10-19.
I )III1L'I', R. E., "Van Liere, K. D., Mertig, A. G., & Jones, R. E. (2000). Measuring
"Illorcement of the new ecological paradigm: A revised NEP scale. Jo£/rnal of
.\,,";al Sciellces. 56, 425-442.
hln. K. (1996). The institutionalization of environmcntalism: Ecological discourse
,lilt! the second transformation of the public sphere. In S. Lash, B. Szerszynski,
~ It Wynne (Eds.), Risk, environment, and modernity: Towards a new ecol-
"g~' (pp. 203-223). London: Sage.
1)'.,111, T. (2003, May 3), Smithsonian is no safe haven for exhibit on Arctic Wildlife
H.-fllgc. Nelli York Times, p. A20.
11,,11, Ii. P. R. (1968). Tile pOfllllation homh. San Francisco: Sierra Club Books.
 J • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • , \ , ...
Ehrli.:h, 1'. R. (lOOll. 1'llIlllilll lIatllrl',~, nature cOlIsrrvatiol1, ,llld l'llV i roll Il1l'!H;I I
l·thi.:s. /3i"Sciel1L'C!, S2( I): J 1-43.
Esty, D. (1994). Greening the GATT: Trade, environment, and the lilll/re.
Washington, DC: Institll£c for International Economics.
Fiske,]. (1987). Television culture. London: Methuen.
Flippen,.I. B. (2003). Richard Nixon and the triumph of environmemalisl1l. In L. S.
Warren (Ed.), American environmental history (pp. 272-289). Oxford, UK:
Basil Blackwell.
Friln~esconi, R. A. (1982). James Hunt, the Wilmington (0, and institutional legit-
IInacy. Quarterly lOl/rnal of Speech, 68, 47-59.
Gottlieb, R. (1993a). Forcing tlJe spring: The transformation of the American Cltvi-
r()mnel1tal movement. Washington, DC: Island Press.
Gottli~h, R. (1993h). Reconstructing environmentalism: Complex movements,
" diverse roots. Environmental History Review, 17(4): 1-]9.
Gottlieb, R. (2002). Environmentalism unbound: Exploring /lew pathways for
change. Cambridge: MIT Press.
Hamilton, A. (1925). Industrial poisons il1 the United States. New York: Macmillan.
Hamilton, A. (1943). Exploring the dangerolJs trades: The amobiograpby of Alice
Hamilton, M.D. Boston: Little, Brown.
Hariman, R., & Lllcaites, ]. L. (2002). Performing civic identity; The iconic photo-
graph of the Aag raising on Iwo lima. Quarterly Journal ofSpeech, 88, 363-392.
Hari~an? R., & Lllcaites, J. L. (2003). Puhlic identity and collective memory in U.S.
, IconIC photogntphy: The image of "accidental napalm." Critical Studies in
Media Communication, 20, 35-66.
Hays, S. P. (1987). Beauty, health, and permanence: Envirmlmental politics in the
United States, 1955-1985. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
Hclvarg, D. (1994). Tbe war agaillst the greens: The "wise lise" movement. the new
right, and anti-environmental violence. San Francisco: Sierra Club Books.
Herndl, C. G., & Brown, S. C. (1996). Introduction. In C. G. Herndl & S. C. Brown
(Eds.), Green wlttlre: Enviromnelltal rhetoric in contempo1'£1ry America (pp. 3- 20).
Madison: University of Wisconsin Press.
Hill,]. (n.d.). Julia Butterfly Hill. Downloaded August 16,2005, from www.venus
project.com/books_au thors/j ulia_butterfly_h ill.htm I
]llsinski, J. (2001). Sourcebook 0/1 rhetoric: Key concepts ill colltemporary rhetori-
cal studies. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Jehl, D. (2001, March 21). E.P.A. to abandon new arsenic limits for water supply.
New York Times, p. A I.
Kazis, R., & Grossman, R. L. (1991). fear at work: Job blackmail, labor and the
environment (New ed.). Philadelphia: New Society.
Kidd, D. (2003). Bec.:ome the media: The global IMC network. In A. Opel &
D. Pompper (Eds.), RelJresentillg resistance: Media, civil disobedience. and the
. . global justice movement (pp. 224-240). Westport, CT: Praeger.
Killingsworth, M. J., & Palmer,.J. S. (1996). Millennial ecology: The apocalyptic nar-
rative from Silent Spring to Global Warming. In C. G. Hcrndl & S. C. Brown
/.1
\h k l, ( ;,.. ','/I '11/11"-": "'11';1'11111/1"111," rh, '1"1'11' III ,'"I//('IIIf!tJf<lry Alllericli (pp. 21-45).
i\,I.UII"'''I: Illli\'l'I"~iIY "f \VISn)lI~ill 1'1'I·~S.
I ... 1.'11, F.. IX MOlllll', (:, (1')X5), I 1f'.l:I'/IWI1}' lIJleI socialist strategy: Toward a radi-
•.iI ""/lIlla".--v, I.Dllllon: Verso.
I ,.... I:. ( 1")\),1). I~~yond wxil: wastes and rac.:e. In R. D. Bullard (Ed.), Coltfrcmting
"1I/'ll'fJlIIl1c'l1ll1ll't/cism: Voia!s from the grassroots (pp. 41-52). Boston: South
1',llll I'n~ss.
I'T. ,'.. (1"<)6). Environmcnt: Where we live, work, phly, and learn. Race. Poverty,
,111.1 I/It' /':/IIJimJlment. 6, 6.
J IIllh.JII,~h, R. (I Y92). The way things ought to be. New York: Pocket Books.
:\\., Ie lM;IY/.Iunl' 2OCH). Tuna meltdown. Sierra. 88(3), 15.
~ 1.11"". ':. (' 990). Green rage: Radical environmentalism and the unmt,kitlg of
,il'i!i<.• ,lirJII. Boston: Little, Brown.
~Ill ,,'I', M. C. (1975). In search of "the people": A rhetorical alternative. Quarterly
1""1'11"/ of Speech, 61, 235-249.
1\1"'-"h:ll1l, C. (2002). The Columbia guide to American environmental history.
N,'w York: Columbia University Press.
1\1111...-. C. (1004). Gifford Pinchot Qlld the making of modern environmentalism.
W;lshin~(()n, DC: lsland Press/Shearwater Books.
N,I,.h, It. F. (2001). Wilderness and the American mind (4th ed.). New Haven: Yale
lllliv~'rsity Press.
1''0/,1111111.11 Environmental Justice Advisory Coum:il Subcommittee Oil Waste and
bl'ilit), Siting. (1996). Enviromnrmtal jllstice, urbal1 revitalizatiol1. alld brollln-
li"'''s: l1Je search for authentic signs of hope. EPA 500-R-96-002. Washington,
III :: t I,S. Environmental Protection Agcncy.
N,,\\, ( )Illy YOll Can Save Grand Canyon From Being Flooded ... For Profit. (1966,
IIIIH' lJ). New York Times, p. 35.
1)1'''\'1''', (:. (1981). John Muir, Yosemite, and the sublime response: A study in the
rh"loric of preservationism. Quarterly JOllrnal of S/Jeech. 67, 245-258.
l )",)\'1"', (:. (1984). Conservationism vs. preservationism: The "public interest" in
Ill\' t Il'rch Hctchy controversy. Quarterly Journal of SpeedJ, 70, 444-458.
. 1'111 '11m. T. (1958). Authority, legitimation, and political action. In C. Friedrich
()':".), Authority (pp. '197-221). Cambridge: Harvard University,
P"/lIIIII>. I'. C. (2001). Perfonning critical interruptions: Rhetorical inventionanu narnl-
II\'<'S of the environmental justice movement. Western Journal of Communication,
r../, I..,.!S.
1'11,11\"'" n. c., & Ehrlich, P. R. (1974). Ark 11: Social respollse to enviromnetltal
IIIII,,·ft/lhles. San Francisco: W. H. Freeman.
/', I f ' '·".!in.t!,s: TlJe first national people of color eJlvironmelltal leadership summit.
( I ,)") I, (ktober 24-27). Washington, DC: United Church of Christ Commission
It 'I Ib,'i'll Justice .
Un",\\,. (.!OIU, June 5). Subhankar Banerjee, Arctic National Wildlife Refuge:
''''.ISI>nS of Life and Land. Planet (Jackson Hole, WY). Downloaded July 17,
,'i)( 1·1. fnllll www.J1\ounraincersbooks.org!prodllctdetails.dll1?PC=524
 .. .••• '\.\ 1'1'1,11 f\"I··'II"l tl\l';-"

Sail', 1<. (11.)9J), The ,t;reL'1I rC'l'o/lI!i fJl/: '/111.' AlUt'rin lll (!ll1'irwl Willi,' 11o,"w. (I 'l'H, F.·I>m,I.-)' II). 1'..~,·,·lIliVl' Orlkr IlIl911:
IIlf'II/,d 11/011/'111 ('11/ FcJcml actions to
1%2-IY Y2. Nt:w York: I-Jill & Wang. .Hldfl'~~ 1'llvi,,"llllll'IlI;\1 jllsli,,' III milloril) ' populations and low-income popllla-
Schueler, D, (1992). Southern exposure. Sierra, 77,45-4 7.
111111'. ( lHil'\' of till: I'ress Secretar y.
Schulzke, E, C. (2000, March 26). Policy networks and regulatory WIIIII' 11,,11'1', (lOO2., August 22). President announces Healthy
change in tht: Forest Initiative.
104tl1 Congress: Framing the center through symbolic legitimacy ,llli,,' of 11ll' Press Secrct.uy. Retrieved June 24, 2003,
conflict. from www.whitc
Paper presented at the meeting of the Westel'l1 Political Science Associa lit tll~.· .1'.' )v!lwws/rt:lcasesJ2002/08/20020822-3.html .
tion, San
Jose, CA. Whilr. I .. , Jr.
(11.)67). The historical roots of our ecological crisis, Science,
Schwab, J. (1994). Deeper shades of greel/: The rise of blue-collar 1S5,
and mil/ority Ilo.\-ll Il7.
envirollmetltalism iu America, San rrancisco: Sierra Club Books. ~·"",I'.I"'\\,l)nh, M. (1662). God's controversy with New England . In Proceed
Shabecoff, I'. (1996). A new lIame for tJcace: International environmentali illgs of
sm, sus- tl,,' M,/:;s</cIJUsetls Historical Society, 12 (1871), p. 83, in Nash (2001),
p. 36.
tainable development, and democrac)·. Hanover, NH: University
Press of 'I.,d'lIl. ~. ( 19'JJ). Co),otes arId toUJI! dogs: Earth First! and the environ
New England. memal f!10ve-
1/1,'/11. New York: Penguin.
Shabecoff, P. (2000). Earth rising: American environmentali~m in
the twenty-first
century. Washington, DC: Island Press.
Shabecoff, P. (2003). A fierce green fire: The American environmental
movem ent
(Rev. ed.). New York: Hill & Wang.
Shaiko, R. G. (1999). Voices and echoes for the environment: Public
interest repre-
sentation in the 1990s and beyond. New York: Columbia University
Press.
Smith, A. (1910). AI/ inquiry into the nature and causes of the wealth
of nations
(Vol. 1). London: J. M. Dent & Sons. (Original work published 1776.)
Solnit, R. (1992). Up the river of mercy. Sierra, 77,50, 53-58, 78,81,
83-84.
Stone, D. (2002). Policy paradox: The art of political decision making
(Rev, cd.).
New York: W. W. Norton.
Taylor, B. C. (2003). "Our bruised arms hung up as monum ents": Nuclear
iconog-
raphy in post-cold war culture. Critical Studies in Media Commu
nication,
20,1-3 4.
Taylor, B. R. (:1995). Ecological resistance movements: The global emergen
ce of rad-
ical and popular enllironmentalism. Albany: State University of New York
Press.
Thoreau, H. D, (1893). Walking. In Excursions: The writings of Henry
David Thoreau
(Riverside ed., Vol. 9, pp. 251-304). Boston: Houghton-Mifflin. (Origina
l work
publishedJ 862).
Tindall, D. B. (1995). What is environmental sociology? An inquiry into
the paradig-
matic status of environmental sociology. In M. D. Mehta & E. Ouellet
(Eds.),
Environmental Sociology: Theory and Practice (pp. 33-59). North York,
Ontario:
Captus Press.
Turner, T. (1991). Sierra Club: 100 years of protecting nature. New
York: Harry
N. Abrams.
Waddell, C. (Ed.) (2000). And no birds sing: Rhetorical analyses of
Silent Spring.
Carbondale: Southern Illinois University Press.
Wapner, P. (1996). Environmental activism and world civic politics.
Albany: State
University of New York Press.
Warren, L. S. (Ed.). (2003). American environmental history. Oxford
, UK: Basil
Blackwell.