Some excellent questions came up Monday night at the Open House that went unanswered. I'm paraphrasing based on my notes and my memory:
Where did you get the map you're using for the Primary Conservation Area?
It's the DNR's Biological Survey map.
Why are you using that map?
It shows areas of pre-settlement vegetation.
Why are you using that map?
The planner apparently thought she answered that question. The questioner didn't. Neither did I.
In an effort to try to understand what's going on here, I looked back at minutes of the CAC taskforce from last June, when Glen Shirley made a presentation to the committee that was working on this comprehensive plan project at that time.
Mr. Shirley included a number of links in his presentation. Although a lot of them are no longer working links, I found one that sheds some light on this "pre-settlement" concept.
"Pre-settlement" means before the Europeans got here.
A lot of us who are over a certain age have no idea why anyone would choose that particular moment in history to mark as significant. It wasn't part of our curriculum when we were in school. Mr. Shirley gives us a link to a documentary entitled "Minnesota: A History of the Land" that was put together a few years ago and shown on public television. I read the advertising copy and the Teacher's Guide that are available online, but didn't want to spend the $60 plus tax plus S&H to buy a copy.
The advertising copy and Teacher's Guide contain hate-filled rhetoric depicting our ancestors as evil beings who usurped and ravaged the land, coveting its natural resources. A quote shown here refers to farmers who plowed the land to feed, clothe and house their families as raping the land without any regard to his descendants' yearning for open space:
“How could man’s ambition combined with simple tools like an axe and plow in hand all but erase our state’s original forests and prairies in such a short time? Didn’t my great-grandfather know how deeply we would now yearn for just a few more precious acres of prairie to be left as he, row by row, plowed his fields of tall grass and flowers under? This extraordinary series is a poignant must see lesson in our state’s history.”
-Jim Brandenburg
Had Mr. Brandenburg's great-grandfather not plowed those fields, he might never have seen his grandchildren and great-grandchildren born.
Here are excerpts from the advertising copy for Episode 1:
With the arrival of Europeans comes a new way of looking at the land, one that will change the region forever. See how this is expressed in the land survey, which carves the natural world into squares that can be bought and sold.
So buying and selling land is portrayed as the evil that set the stage for the unprecedented ravages visited on the state's land.
And this gives us a peek at Episode 2:
Voices from the past and stunning nature videography re-create the natural world Euro-Americans first encounter. Find out what happens to North America's most abundant wildlife species as commercial hunters and the railroad arrives in Minnesota.
The majestic Big Woods are cut down to make room for farms and villages. Visit one of the little known crown jewels of Minnesota, the Bluestem Prairie. Find out why Minnesota has some of the richest soils in the world and how Minneapolis becomes the flour milling capital of the world.
Historic re-creations bring to life the bonanza era of wheat farming. And experience the catastrophic fire that ushers in a new way of looking at the land.
"Commercial hunters" provided for their families, while giving others goods they wanted. The railroads helped transport necessities to people over great distances. Farming the land to feed people, and building villages to create economic and social communities, used to be portrayed as good things, because they were good for the people who lived here. Had the pioneers not done these things, they would not have survived.
Perhaps that is what the makers of this documentary would rather have happened?
From the Viewer Guide, we learn that the Europeans were evil, plotting, covetous beings, while the land is referred to as though it were a virgin to be ravaged:
As the landscapes of Minnesota emerge from the most recent ice age, an intersection of natural systems is revealed. Three biomes and a confluence of waterways mark the region and draw American Indians, who inhabit and sculpt the land. When the first European settlers arrive, they usurp the territory and plot a new path for its future.
Surveyors begin mapping the land for sale, and entrepreneurs cast a covetous eye toward its natural resources. Loggers head toward the rich stands of white pine in Minnesota’s northern forest, and small towns begin to dot the landscapes at St. Anthony Falls and along the St. Croix River. The great influx of European settlers would come later in the nineteenth century. Episode I: Ordering the Land, describes the land they were coming to and the systematic way it is made ready for the axe and plow.
Why shouldn't the land be mapped? Why shouldn't people be allowed to own the land? Entrepreneurs provide the spark, the ingenuity that improves our lives. They take the risks that others won't take. They fail and start all over again. If we didn't have entrepreneurs, our lives would be much poorer. If we didn't have entrepreneurs, we wouldn't be able to pay the salaries of government employees, not even the ones that were on the production team for this documentary.
I see no indication of any concern for the families who came here to start a new life, who had only themselves to rely on in their struggle for survival in this harsh land. How did they get through the Minnesota winters? How many died from starvation, disease, or the cold? I see no reference to the many ways in which our ancestors fought to make our lives better. Think of the things we have that they didn't even dream of: indoor plumbing, central heat, hospitals, universities, the ability to communicate instantaneously with others regardless of distance.
And this tells us about Episode II:
Episode Summary
By the middle of the nineteenth century, a surge of European settlement makes new landscapes of the old. Loggers harvest the pine forest of the north at an ever-accelerating rate. The Big Woods in the south-central region of Minnesota are cut and turned into farms. The prairie fills with new settlers and booming bonanza farms. The flour mills at St. Anthony Falls bring wealth and renown to the bustling city of Minneapolis. The landscapes of Minnesota are blanketed by farms and industry, and the area’s wildlife is decimated with unprecedented fury by market hunters.
After less than fifty years of settlement, the prairie is nearly gone, numerous species have disappeared from the region, and the “inexhaustible” northern forest is strained by logging and fire. Changes in the Land is the story of the monumental change that sweeps the landscape of Minnesota in the last half of the nineteenth century.
Here are some questions for the teacher to pose to students, questions designed to foster disgust with capitalism, industry, progress:
1. Describe the worldview of the European Americans who settled Minnesota in the nineteenth century. Why do you think they held certain values?
2. How would you respond to G.W. Allen, who described the Big Woods like this: “As it now stood, covered with timber, it was not furnishing anyone with anything.”
Apparently, this is what teachers are teaching our young people now. Maybe this is why so many arrive at this discussion with their minds already made up, believing without being able to explain why, that we need to go back to "pre-settlement" times to make up for what our evil ancestors have done.
And I must ask this question: If you believe that the Native Americans' values were superior to those of the European settlers, then do you also subscribe to the belief that one must respect the wisdom of elders and honor one's ancestors?
But I'd still like to know why we must preserve "pre-settlement vegetation" as opposed to vegetation that may have evolved since then, which in evolutionary terms may be considered an improved response to its environment. I'd like to know whether this fixation arises out of the kind of irrational hatred that this documentary portrays. I'd like to know why we can't have a rational discussion of these issues, because if we can't approach these questions rationally, what hope do we have of coming up with good answers?
And I'd still like an answer to the question of why our zoning maps must be patterned on the DNR's Biological Survey Map. If we can't get a rational answer to that question, then why use the map?