Wisconsin's Department of Natural Resources has come out with a Land Legacy Report that is supposed to "identify places critical to meet Wisconsin's conservation and outdoor recreation needs over the next 50 years." The DNR asked a lot of questions about what kinds of wildlife and habitats we should protect, but the question that struck was the most was this simple one:

What special places will our children and grandchildren wish we had protected?

That's a great way to think about environmentalism. People get frustrated with extremist environmentalism that seems to regard human beings as a blight on the earth. This type of question harkens back to a different kind of environmentalism, which I'd classify as a "love of the land". As DNR land specialist John Pohlman says:

People are passionate about the areas they love. They really care about what's here now. And they care about the future. They want to leave a legacy. They want to leave a legacy for their grandkids.

The ideal is that we balance our economic needs with this primal need for beauty and wide open spaces. For some reason I'm reminded of a quote from Roger Ebert's review of the film "Koyaanisqatsi" (life out of balance):

This film has one idea, a simplistic one. It contrasts the glory of nature with the mess made by man. But man is a messy beast, given to leaving reminders of his presence all over the surface of planet Earth. Although a Hopi word is used to evoke unspoiled nature, no Hopis are seen, and the contrast in the movie doesn't seem to be between American Indian society and Los Angeles expressways, but between expressways and a beautiful world empty of man. Thanks, but no thanks.

A life (and by extension, a state) in balance isn't so much about going back to nature, but rather incorporating the natural world into our lives now and our plans for the future. It's kind of amazing to say this about a government agency, but I think they're going about this in exactly the right way.

On, Wisconsin indeed.