Historic Preservation and Environmental Conservation Essay

The preservation of historic sites and other historic artifacts is said to be significant if a society or a community values its heritage that paved the way to how far the society has reached. Historic preservation implies raising the public’s awareness regarding historical objects so as to ensure that these objects will be well taken care of through time. It is not only that these historic objects serve the purpose of reminding the public of their history and from where their society came from long before the present generation existed. It is also that these objects of historical value serve the purpose of providing an insight into the past which could very well contribute to the knowledge of the larger society, teaching lessons and principles from the past that still apply in contemporary times. As Donovan Rypkema explains, historic preservation â€Å"revitalizes and revalues the nearby existing investment of both the public and private sectors (1999, March). † However, there are criticisms against the purposes from which historic preservation is founded. For the most part, preserving large infrastructures that no longer meet the modern architectural standards faces the challenge of justifying the preservation of such historic architectures especially when health hazards to the general public are involved. Another consideration is when historic objects take a huge chunk of finances in maintaining their conditions through decades, if not centuries. While it is certainly convincing to say that the preservation of objects and landmarks that share a sizeable history of a community or a society is important, there remains the challenge of allocating the proper finances and other resources in order to address the task of preserving such objects through time. Moreover, the external conditions which are beyond the control of humanity such as the various forces of weather pose significant threats to the preservation of historical objects which further increase the allocated resources required to fulfill the task of preserving such objects. Nevertheless, the thought that historic preservation might demand for a huge share of resources while risking the health of the public to a certain extent does not necessarily entail that the task of preservation should be abandoned quite easily. Efforts to weigh and mitigate the competing public interests are equally paramount in order to bring about a shared sense for history. That goal can be done in various ways, from legislative efforts in the government to the collaboration of the government sphere with the sphere of private individuals and organizations. Historic preservation can overlap with environmental conservation precisely because these two things are interconnected in some areas. For instance, an effort to hinder the demolition of an ancient landmark to give way for the construction of a modern edifice is connected with the preservation of the natural resources surrounding the landmark. On the other hand, an effort to conserve the remaining flora and fauna in a tropical region can help in securing the area’s present condition which can give way to the preservation of the cultural heritage of the people whose ancestors have lived in the area many years back. In essence, any attempt to preserve history has a corresponding effect on the conservation of what remains of the environment and vice versa. In a more general sense, preserving historic sites and objects creates an impact on the demand of human beings on the resources of the world. That is, as old buildings and other significant landmarks are destroyed and are replaced with new structures, the environment surrounding the area is altered. Especially in cases where the historic landmark that is to be destroyed is situated in an environment teeming with natural resources such as trees and wildlife which local folks depend on for their daily needs to live, destroying the site will also alter the ecological footprint of these people in certain cases. Connecting Historical Preservation and the Environment Conservation The preservation of history and the conservation of the environment come hand in hand in many ways, one of which is the case where the demolition of an existing historic landmark so as to give space for a new building to be constructed requires the alteration of the current geographic and environmental location of the landmark. For example, the historic landmark may be a 19th century railway station which has been used until the beginning of the 21st century in America. The historic value of the railway station may come from the fact that it was the means of long-distance transportation of the people during those times, and that it was the first of its kind in the whole world. It may also come from the fact that the railway station is one which symbolized the beginning of the era of American interstate transportation, and that the landmark was built from the rising demands for an effective and efficient way of providing a cheaper transportation system in America. It may also come from the fact that the landmark has been built by the local people and, thus, the railway station stands as the concrete proof, literally and figuratively, of the common desires of the people and of the unity of the public consciousness during those times. With those things in mind, it can then be said that the railway station’s historic value justifies its preservation. If the landmark is to be destroyed, a portion of American history will vanish with it and that those who labored for its realization after years and years of work will soon just become another page in history books never to be seen firsthand by the generations to come. The part where the environmental conservation aspect comes in is the part where the actual demolition of the landmark transpires. The mere fact that in order to build a new edifice right on the spot where the railway station is built implies that the railway station has to be demolished. Architectural and engineering considerations oftentimes require not only a major altering of the exact location where the landmark is situated but also an altering of the vicinity around the landmark which in this example is the railway station. In the process of demolishing the old structure and building a new one in place of it, trees might be cut down, fertile topsoil might need to be excavated and replaced with cement, and wild animals might be driven away from their habitat just to name a few. Moreover, the debris and other wastes resulting from the demolition of historic infrastructures poses threats to the environment (The Greenest Building). However, if the historic site is retained and the goal of establishing a new edifice in its place is abandoned, there will be no need to cut the trees, to dig the fertile topsoil and to drive away wildlife from their dwelling place. In the end, the status quo of the environment around the old railway station is maintained and, thus, there will be no ecological concerns. Ecological Footprint First used by William Rees and Mathis Wackernagel in the early 1990s, the concept of â€Å"ecological footprint† involves the measurement of the demand of human beings over the ecosystems of the planet. With the planet’s capacity to regenerate its land and water resources, ecological footprint compares the consumption of natural resources with that capacity. Moreover, if all human beings lived a given lifestyle, then it is possible to know exactly how much human demand is being provided for by the planet’s ecosystem through its numerous natural resources in order to support humanity’s existence. Does historic preservation have an effect on one’s ecological footprint? Apparently, there is no easy answer to this question simply because it is not always the case that historic preservation affects one’s ecological footprint. Neither is it always the case that historic preservation does not affect one’s ecological footprint. Simply put, historic preservation may or may not entirely affect one’s ecological footprint depending on the circumstances. The calculation of the ecological footprint for areas with dense population, for instance, is said to lead to the perception that such populations are â€Å"parasitic† because small cities or countries with a huge population have little internal capacity to generate and regenerate its biological resources especially biological resources on the land to provide for its large population. Moreover, the ecological footprint would indicate that these small cities and countries might depend on the hinterlands just to meet the demands for natural resources for its dense population. Since historic preservation basically involves the preservation of historic sites and the objects that may be found in these sites, cities such as the first-class and heavily industrialized ones with historic sites may choose to demolish such sites in order to put commercial infrastructures in its place. And since these cities already depend largely on the hinterlands for its needs of natural resources, there will be a very minimal effect, if not a negligible one, on the ecological footprint of the whole city. There are instances, however, where historic preservation directly affects the ecological footprints of certain groups of people or certain societies. In the case of the people living in the hinterlands and where there are several historical sites which have been left untouched for several years by commercial or business ventures, the obliteration of local historic landmarks such as famous barns and classic farmhouses built in earlier times would alter the current state of the environment. For instance, removing the barns and farmhouses in order to give way to the construction of a new highway affects the production capacity of the locality in making use of the natural resources. Moreover, the construction of a new highway makes the lands in the hinterlands more accessible for capitalist ventures such as the creation of houses and other commercial infrastructures—like wood gathering facilities—in place of the barns and farms. These things would eventually lessen the natural resources available in the land while increasing the size of the population of the locality at the same time. Thus, the failure to preserve historic sites in the hinterlands, for instance, causes the alteration of the consumption rate of the natural resources by the hinterland’s population of both wildlife and the people. This in turn leads to an alteration in the capacity of the ecosystem in the hinterland to generate and regenerate its natural resources since an increase in the demand of resources such as land, water, plants and other animals and a decrease in the locations where the ecosystem can continue to regenerate its resources distorts the balance between the supply and demand for such resources. The hinterlands or the wilderness truly indeed have benefits, specifically from providing critical habitat for endangered animals to maintaining the important biological diversity (Wilderness Society, 2004, p. 1) In essence, the extent of the influence of historic preservation on the ecological footprint of a given population depends on whether or not the population lives in small cities or countries that rely on the resources found outside of their immediate territories to supply their population’s demands. A small city with a dense population that primarily depends on its neighboring hinterlands in meeting its needs for resources may not be directly and largely affected either by the failure or the success of efforts to preserve historic sites situated within its boundaries. On the other hand, a small town with a dense population that largely depends on its internal natural resources and barely depends on the resources coming from other towns will be greatly affected by the demolition of historic landmarks found at its vicinity. The removal of such landmarks for the intent of expanding the commercialization of the town will decrease the natural resources available and, thus, decreasing the resources that would have been regenerated by the town’s ecosystem. Depending on the existing demands, the size of the population and the location of historical sites, historic preservation may nonetheless affect ecological footprints. Demand and supply Conventional wisdom reveals that a high demand for natural resources requires a high supply of those resources as well. The interconnection between historical preservation and environmental conservation is further highlighted with the connection between the demand for resources and nature’s supply of resources. As more heritage sites and cultural landmarks are destroyed in order to give way to the construction of more modern buildings and sites, and while more farmlands are being transformed into residential and commercial areas, the supply of natural resources continue to dwindle. This is because the ecological footprint would reveal how the ecosystem is continuously losing the resources to generate and regenerate, outpaced largely by human consumption. On another note, the demand for knowledge about the heritage and history of peoples and societies is always present whereas the supply of the original sources of such history and heritage is on the decline. For instance, constant looting of ancient tombs in Egypt brings a decline in the artifacts which can be used for further investigative study and research on Egypt’s rich history. As a result, knowledge that could have been eventually derived from such artifacts never gets to reach the awareness of the public. Nevertheless, there are current efforts to preserve what is left of the Egyptian tombs and other important historical sites in Egypt (Aslan, 2007). Historic preservation and environmental conservation are two important factors in the existence of mankind. They not only give the people a sense of history and an attachment to the biosphere—more importantly, both things also give the people a sense of responsibility over the things that provide them sustenance to their physical and mental lives. While the preservation of historical objects and the conservation of the environment are tasks that require concerted efforts and a huge volume of tasks to be completed, the benefits at the end of it all far outweigh the challenges that may stand against the way of humanity. References Aslan, R. (2007). Rescuing Cairo’s Lost Heritage. Islamica Magazine, 15. Rypkema, D. (1999, March). Historic Preservation is Smart Growth. Speech presented at National Audubon Society of New York s Conference on Smart Growth, New York. The Greenest Building (2008). The Greenest Building is the One Already Built. Retrieved July 31, 2008, from < http://www. thegreenestbuilding. org/> Wilderness Society (2004). FACTS: National Wilderness Protection System: 1.