It aint easy being green, at least according to Kermit the Frog.  Conservation has its work cut out for it if it is going to fight for green.  According to Frances Kuo, who wrote Conservation at the Crossroads: A View from the Side of the Road, there are two major developments that he has observed that conservationist should take advantage of.  The first development is societal in nature, while the second is scientific.

The first development is that nature is disappearing from children's lives.  In reference to this development, Kuo makes reference to Last Child in the Woods written by Richard Louv. Kuo hints at two concerns: children don't have nature to play in and around and that there is a greater interest in playing indoors with electronic toys such as gaming systems, television, and the internet.  In my own opinion, this last concern is due more to a lack of parental involvement involvement.  When a parent is willing to take a stand and limiting the use of the electronic toys mentioned above, I believe children will tend to gravitate toward physical play which is best accomplished outdoors.  Kuo leaves open the question as to wether one of the concerns or the other, of some combination of the two, plays a role in future conservation.

Kuo directs some of his comments toward parents and grandparents.  He points out that their children don't have a special nature space like the current parents had when they were growing up.  What I find odd is a pathos appeal coming from a self proclaimed, at least in the article anyways, scientist.  As mentioned earlier, I am of the belief that parenting style had a role to play in the fact that the current generation of parents and grandparents took advantage of the nature available to them when they were young.  Perhaps this is a matter for further investigation, maybe an associate study of how parenting styles and limits placed and conservation beliefs and attitudes in their children.  Kuo further points out that if don't stop and reverse this trend, that children's access to nature is decreasing, the children of today will have no appreciation of nature and be less willing to pay for its conservation.  

Fortunately, as Kuo points out, a grassroots movement has emerged in response to Last Child in the Woods.  This group is characterized by energetic and diverse people.  Several states have passes legislation to help reconnect children to nature. 

The second development pointed out by Kuo is that scientist are finding that nature is an essential component of a healthy human habitat.  He cites several examples of studies that were done which show relationship between nature and health.  It should be pointed out, however, these studies can only prove association and can not prove causality.  This means that the examples cited can not prove that access to greenspace caused increased health conditions.  Greenspace is only associated with increased health conditions.  Kuo fails to point out this fact, which leads him to wrongly assert that conservation can improve health in the areas listed and is a necessary component of human habitat, when the only real claim he can make is that conservation may can lead to an increase in greenspace which may improve health.  The difference is subtle but needs to be noted.  

After discussing these two developments, Kuo makes several suggestions as to how conservation could make the most of these developments.  What strikes me is the fact that the suggestions he makes are goals that conservationist have had for an extended period of time now.  While I applaud his enthusiasm, his suggestions are not new and conservationist have been working toward these as goals for a while now.  

While in this blog, I seem to be bashing Kuo for his efforts, I am really am just trying to think critically about this issue.  I applaud his attempt.  My own views on conservation run thusly: God has set mankind as stewards over the entire earth and so far, we have been doing a mediocre job at best.  I agree that conservation is necessary and that more of it needs to be done, however, the same two questions keep coming back to me.  How are we going to do it and who is going to pay for it?