Land Ethic

Savage Dreams and GasLand both provide examples of situations where, when looking through the perspective of utilitarianism, the actions being explained could be considered ethical since the benefit of some is sacrificed for the benefit of many.  However, when looking through the perspective of the Land Ethic, we can see that Solnit and Josh Fox are acting in the best interest of the land.

Savage Dreams poses an ethical challenge regarding the Nuclear Test Site.  Through the perspective of utilitarianism, it can be argued that the actions at the Test Site can be considered ethical because of the benefits from the nuclear testing.  The nuclear testing provides valuable insight into nuclear warfare and nuclear energy that wouldn’t be possible without the test site.  However, the Land Ethic supports Solnit’s (and the rest of the protesters) actions to oppose the testing and try to prevent the nuclear storage facility at Yucca Mountain.  The protesters are acting in the interest of the land by working to eliminate the negative effects of the nuclear testing on the land.

GasLand poses a similar situation.  Since fracking provides cheap and relatively clean energy in the form of natural gas, it can be seen as ethical through the lens of utilitarianism since the benefit of only a few are sacrificed.  However, the pollution and contaminated water caused by fracking goes against the “integrity and stability of the biotic community.”  Fox is acting in the interest of his homeland by raising awareness about fracking and trying to prevent fracking in Pennsylvania.

Stickworks poses a different situation.  Although the Stickworks project modifies the ecosystem by using small trees and saplings, it does so in an environmentally sustainable way.  Since the project uses only understory species that grow back very quickly, the project is actually in the interest of the land.  Also, the project shows the unique and natural beauty that can be generated from something as simple as sticks and trees.