Anything. Comcast along these Television Companies support cspan2 as a public service. If you are enjoying American History to be sent for our newsletter is in the qr code on the screen to receive the weekly schedule of upcoming programs like lectures in history, the presidency and more present for the American History tv newsletter today for sure to watch American History tv or any time online at cspan. Org history. Two years ago at the covid19 pandemic closed down businesses and schools people across edition turn to parks and other open spaces but urban spark some sprawling National Parks with withouttraces or we could sociay distance and let nature. We enjoyed public lands but often taken for granted. I do came about and how they had been used over time and riches are overall understanding of them. Here the National Archives we have preserve the records of the four federal agencies most i involved in the management of our nations public lands. The bureau of Land Management, u. S. Forest service, u. S. Fish and Wildlife Service and the National Park service. The written records, photographs and Motion Pictures contain the stories of the beddings of federal stewardship. In his book, making americas public lands, takes us to the history of these lands and examines changing priorities and challenges concerning them. A professor of history at the university of idaho. The author of United States west coast and environmentalnd histo. The environmentalce justice and the american conservation. And visible from the moon. Michelle knaus as project editor of the atlantic she hundreds futures who plotted section a series called lifo right writings appeared in publications in the near times utmagazine. Shes the author of beloved beast, fighting for life in an age of extinction lets hear from adam and michelle. Thank you for joining us today. Hi everyone. It is such ait pleasure to be wh you today. I am michelle i am here with adam. To talk about his a wonderful new book making americas public lands of you are tuning in today it is likely youve spent at least some time and what adam calls the publics lands for our National Parks, wildlife refugees, National Forests or any one of the other landscapes that make up our public land system. Items history one of the many things i appreciate about adams book is that its both very nuanced, but also wonderfully accessible. It is in addition very alert to the role of the public lands today. Not only as valuable conservation lands but as a source of some very deep rooted myths, concepts and traditions in our national politics. But not national politics. Adam begins the book and away you might not expect. He invokes about Henry David Thoreau and the political philosopher hannah. I know if it were possible to eavesdrop on a conversation between those two human beings out give up the lots in order to do so. Adam invokes that had a very idea that could be held in common for the public good. The metaphor of the table make a metaphor for the public sphere. A table being a place where citizens can gather and find something approaching common ground. Think adam we will start the short reading from the introduction that elaborates on the second metaphor. Think it michelle. This will be a very short reading. This cable metaphor works to guide us to the history of American Public lands. It helps us think about the public lands as part of the democratic experiment that is the United States. It takes a great leap of insight to find faultsng and failures ad immediately promises of democracy. Where the nation is rooted in the dispossession of indigenous improvement of africans. They history public lands include democratic shortcomings and exclusions just like every other partt of the u. S. Politicl history. That is partly white thinking about public lands as an element in the democratic experiment is helpful. We can see who defines the nation and for what purposes. How do new ideas planted old wounds and how novel understanding complicated traditional views. As the common object equals attention. We learn quintessentiallss systm like the nation itself is full of experiments, successes and failures and promises made, broken, redefined. Throughout this history the table and those gathered around it changed and multiplied guided by evolving laws and science. Not to mention shifting political interests. Like a growing family at a holiday dinner incorporating new entrees and unfamiliar it appeared to those who had been gathering there for generations. This book is an account of how the table changed which is to say it is a history not philosophical. The book attempts to explain how the system came to be and why as well as how and why it changed over time. The consequences of this system on the land itself are people who relied on it for whatever purpose they remain central to the account that follows project special attention to constraints and boundaries were redrawn and new political and legal traditions initiated. Ns these moments of transition draw attention to novel arrangements frankly if not always the processes that governs them matter to americans who relied on them. Such are inevitable and healthy participants are allowed to be involved. Some were barely perceived their exclusions att time. Thank you for setting the table for us. [laughter] one of the things about this book we have reported on public land politics for a long time very complicated is very long longer than its written history. You have managed to fit a lot of complexity into a graceful volume that is, just a little over 200 pages. And my experience of written history the Conservation Movement how do you find a path to capture the nuance of a manageable length. Got it reads that way to you. Can use every example in every story you uncover. We think about the book a little bit like a key. It unlocks the larger history so that if you readr it doesnt include your favorite park or your favorite forests in your state you go too. The context in which they exist. I dont know that its unique for the systems at large but many writers or historians have taken a single park or taken on the Forest Service. There are some that look at all theth public lands. When you look at those many organized as a section on and i wanted to try to see if i could tell it as a history more of a stream of time. Ge looking for trends that cross all of the agencies in the same sort of decades. Maybe use examples that time tie multiple things together. Or if i had gone a bit by bit, agency by agency it wouldve been a much much longer book. [laughter] i can see that. You brought out some scenes that were maybe not news to me but had not grappled with directly. They were so big that i could not see them i was on the weeds of individual agencies or places. I found those big scenes to be especially fascinating. Now you make clear the history of the public lands does not of course begin with the founding of the Forest Service. Does not begin with the signing of the constitution. As i mentioned its longer than the history of the public lands where it is the history of the public lands truly begin . Is a great question. As with so many things sadly in American History, i think the history of the public lands begins with the dispossession of Indigenous People who lived on this continent to claim and memorial the forces of colonization that populated much of the continents and change the political military dynamicsna here. Let sets the stage for all that comes after. It is that clash of colonization that precipitates or at least the public land system we see emerging a little later. I do want to return to that later in our discussion. That history of course is still very much with us. There are some moderate responses to it than a very interesting sources of hope for all of us. But let me move forward in time a little bit in the context of the dispossession. Their wares in a very interesting and complementary role played by Founding Fathers jefferson and madison. I was actually not aware of madisons role which is his his visionwas mostly ignored i. It was influential in the formation of the public lands. Could you say a little bit about their effects on the publicec system . I would be glad too. The effect is somewhat indirect. Sometimes they called the agrarian philosopher famously sees the virtue embedded in farming and the practices of the labor of the lambs. That in part explains why he was enthusiastic to gain the Louisiana Purchase to increase the size of the nation expecting independent farmers can move and move the west. I course the land is the process of dispossession happening with the westward movement. Independently with their labor matransformed into good producte labor. Good productive products that we might sell and have sustenance for. The challenge with this is theres a lot of land in north america became very easy to cut and run as you would imagine in a forest. But madison, along with others in the early part of the republic. There is a need to slow down there is a need to improve our land and not is it so extensively. So stay rather than move and treat the land more sustainably which was in some ways antislavery position as well. And not keep moving west and there are so many paradoxes we could spend the rest of the hour talking about them. Both of these men did not live there ideal as we write about them. But ill stop with that. Those were slave owners we should acknowledge. So really, for a long time that vision that led to the public lands was a commercial vision. Conservation did not come in until much later. It is interesting to me what comes up rick on the land itself and the reality of the western claimant. The public land system, i think it could be said in a very broad sense it resulted from a collision between the jeffersonian vision of an agrarian republic on the harsh reality of the western claimant. Can you tell us what happened when those two visions met are r those two realities met . Tw even before the constitution was signed, the system that was in place was all land held in common by the state, the ultimate goal is to become owned. Ly the government under the articles of confederation and under the constitution developed a various means to get that land into private hands. The most famous example of course is the homestead act of the 1860s. But there were predecessors to that. That worked reasonably well paid 160 acres you can make a selfsufficient farm in many places like that. But is more a white farmers moved to the west they found 16r way too much. It was too dry or also to mountainous was also something the homestead act is not sustainable for. And so congress tried adapting these laws for this if you plant some trees you could have more land for putting irrigation you can have more land. These just kept not working. 160 acres on a steep slope in the Rocky Mountains is not going to lead you to a selfsufficient livelihood. Many places in the west were too high or too cold to have an agricultural economy as these founders had expected request to matter how many trees you plant. [laughter] exactly. Andd so in 1870s and 1880s and increasing in the area a number of people said we want to do things differently. Some of that was b maybe the lad need to be taken away or given needed to be smaller. Bring in irrigation and manage a smaller amounts of land or you need a bigger you need a lot of acreage to run cattle in different parts of colorado for example. Soom we could make adjustments there. Whats in those conversations were the ideas that emerges is maybe these big mountain ranges with all of these trees should notec be owned by individuals. One to 60 acres of trees is not going to last for long. Maybe they should be controlled by the federal government. So these ideas start percolating 1860s or 1870s. It took a while before they decided in 1891 the president could have the right to reserve some of those lands so they would not be cut. They would not be owned by individual people or companies. Theyll be kept in trust by the federal government. Theres a variety of ways around the 20th century into what we think of as conservation. Yes. Just to emphasize these lands that could not be homesteaded were still being exploited both by individual landowners and by corporations who saw them as free trees, free pasture. Tell us a little bit about what was happening on the landscape . Before these measures go into effect, it is free and open for whoever can get to it. There are large herds of cattle and sheep moving up the mountains and sometimes they are competing with the other. That led to pretty bad overgrazing and lots of cases. There is a lot of concern about timber itra being stolen from te federal lands as well. The first four straight reserves were created they were relatively few regulations. Then the concerns are going to run out of lumber for this is the age of wood. Provided fuel as well as building material. Hadd unmetered and quickly in te last for the 19th century there is a great concern that cannot be allowed to happen in the sierras in the cascades in the rockies we would not have enough wood no one paid anything. They are taking from the public land valuable resources and turning a profit from it. Thats the concern that develops around as we move into the 20th century. This was in part these people who were incensed echoing a wee afrequent use of the soil they say were going to use of these trees. The early conservation sentiments. There is alsoo a federal government is losing money or passively giving away these resources. Rate. The federall government has control over the public lands did create mens bitterness. I read stories was like to be the first forest rangers to ride into town as a representative of this force service and unhappy ranchers who for the first time going to have to pay grazing fees are going to have to Pay Management cattle in certain ways. And generations later and know from reporting and living in the real west its not unusual to hear presence in the last and im sure in other parts of the country ass well referred to a set the second record straight. Its not a landgrant but was it . Hook is not a land grab ill have to think about what it was. The vast unclaimed once the land have been dispossessed from native people all the unclaimed land is what was known as the public demands. Territories in utah, idaho wyoming whatever, theyd be entered into the union for it all or almost everyone theres just a couple of exceptions. Explicitly gave claim to all the Public Domain land. Those are the federal governments. You will often these states should get the land back. It was never there is to have so it could not be taken back. The Forest Service pry the best example of this it finally created just a quick note theres no agency in charge of them on theres a gap there and how things are going to be managed. Real quickly i would say some regulations get imposed fairly small grazing fees get imposed. But if you are a rancher who had grown accustomed over a decade or two decades or r three decads of not paying anything the grazing fees seemed like they are taking money from you. They were taking your rights away. Great deal of controversy around that. They push back against it. The Supreme Court said absolutely the First Service at the force service has the right to do that and administer these sorts of fees. In many places the records show the initial creation of these places generate a lot of resentment and a lot of uncertainty. In a little bit of time it becameec okay. The Forest Service is going to help put out fires. Made it an okay thing to be around now. Many of the restrictions are on the larger context for all the changes happening in the first part of the 20th century hole, not that big of a deal. There is this suddenly in process were locals get accustomed to. What the public land agencies are doing, because quite frankly they are not doing a lot. Theyre doing more than existed before, but not real restrictive measures quite yet. The Agency Settles into its place fishermen of court metaphorical table. The people are sitting at the table had set themselves at the table the use of their presence. Is a good way to describe it. The conflicts did continue parade there was acceptance of the presence of the Forest Service. But of course arguments continue between the agency and land users per there were also arguments between land users themselves between the cattle ranchers and the sheep which got quite they are legendary and negative sense in the region. Can you tell me a little bit why that so passionately thought . I was a real complicated story. Depends upon the location where you are. Part of it hazardous scarce resources. When the forage declines and theres a lotan of animals tryig to eat that scarcity if you have animals you move them is called does not work super well with private property. That could generate challenges as well. Labor that ran many of these animals across the mountain ridges and valleys in wyoming or in the southwest were not always a white. That could be associated with conflict as well. Associations regarding who is a legitimate homebuilder which was a term that was used often at the turn of the 20th century. Many of those economic conflicts emerge. Theres also the conflict between someone who runs thousands of cattle and someones just got a small homestead is trying to make it work. They are more powerful interest cant really run what you might call the little guy out. People were killed. Theyre not divorce from the land. Theyre not doors from cultural preferences and issues like that either. Will sometimes hear them referred to the cattle and sheep wars. They might not have been on the scale we usually think of as wars but they did as you say they were riddled in violence. That is a good point is not simply a conflict between two waves of using the public lands. It is economic perhaps racial and cultural conflict as well. So, as this is happening certainly would call them customary users of the public land are grappling with the presence of newly created federal agency. There is also in the nation as a whole the work of the agencies and how is that effective whats happening to the landscaping itself . Quickset is a great question. There are lots of elements and so for example one element involved is recreation. We want to protect the beautiful places people can visit as a tourist. Americas equivalent of visiting the alps for example in europe. We want to protect they are usually unusual landscape the grand canyon, yellowstone, they get protected it would be a place to recreate and recreate ourselves for you to think about ourselves as americans, something distinctive in the world. That is one element of this. That iss different at this point from lets protect the trees. There are other elements of the Conservation Movement that are interested in making sure there is water to be irrigated or to go to cities. That relates very closely to the nationalor forest which are the early ones are almost always in urban watersheds. We dont really think about it this way but thats what many of the first is to protect the watershed of seattle without. And so these things start to work together. I think at this time as well there are other concerns about wildlife which you know more about i do of course. Certain animals are either going extinct or very nearly so. The necessity to protect some habitat more animals may be able to survive or have places where they would not be hunted was a simplistic motion there hunting and all the animals will come back. That was how managers were starting to think about this. Work to create more of this type of wildlife and that type of wildlife theyld beat control reduce the coyotes with animal or we want. What starting to emerge in the early part of the 20th century and intensifies we go to the middle of it is lots of management. Lots of fingers trying to get i into the systems and tinker with them. This is the place we can have tours w in. This is where we can have this sort of animal. You get rid of the other kind of animal that might cause a problem there. Will manage these forest and water but later down the road. There is long time thinking but there is also a narrower range of options that are in the imagination of the people starting to do all the tinkering. Quickset is such an interesting point. Someone has thought a lot about conservation. There are these different threads we are looking on separate front to the large extent the sportsmen are trying to protect the animals they like to hunt. The urban reformers who want clean water in the cities. People who were trying to protect scenic landscapes. People who recognize are starting to recognize the ecological importance of forest and wanting to protect them for that reason. Theyre all fighting on separate fronts but they all conversed in the sense of the public land. And sitting at the table trying to get a seat at the table. And then, as you say the managers themselves that kind of tentatively set down and so dont worry about us. Were going to charge raising fees the number of cattle you run and perhaps prevent timber approaching. We are now going to have a much extended move over much more space at the table. We are going to get much more involved in what happens on the landscape. So that brings us into an era you thought a lot about in particular the 50s to the 70s. You have identified that as an especially important chapter in the public lands. This is something fairly new to me as well. We have a Conservation Movement in the 50s to the 70s . Quickset is great. Real quick preface that is importance. In the 1930s as a Great Depression ofe course. One of the great programs of the fdr new deal was a conservation corps. Public land agencies their availability a bunch of unemployed men to do projects or trails gotd built fire lookouts got built. Phone wires got strung between the places in the backcountry. That helped set the stage what happens after world war ii. So much of them built during the 1930s because of these programs. Sorry to interrupt you but the economic stimulus purpose for that. Not only to employ people but to stimulate tourism, correct . On the public lands. They built campgrounds. All sorts of things. Okay, interesting. The infrastructure if you will is created then during the 1930s and expand what is been there before. Ifshe move into the postworld r ii era on the one hand we have a big chunk of American Society that is pentup demand and theyve got some money. So people you have geared to go backpacking and theres all these news trails. The infrastructure to get to these places. On the public side there is a large and growing group of people who want to experience the outdoors. Want to experience the public land. They are going to scenic places and seeing a magnificat magnifis unquestionably magnificent. You cannot argue with that. At the same time some of the managers they are trying to manage their getting involved. They are intensifying their management of these places. They are intensifying everything. They are intensifyingthere intel use for their intensifies inc. How to manage the forge, the grasses the animals are going to eat. They are intensifying how the going to manage the force themselves. And at the same time, part of that consumer demand i mentioned a moment ago included building a lot of new houses. And a lot of private timberlands had been if not entirely exhausted before world war ii at this point in the postworld war ii era to the public source as a source of lumber. So timber sales on National Forest increased dramatically. A bunch of stuff is happening here. Its intensifying management and the National Parks, in the National Forest on the management lens. There intensifying we have more tducks we want to hunt on the wildlife refugees. Is not just managing it, we are going to maximize the use of these places and the use of these resources. And at the same time all of these americans are going out, driving their big cars into theg National Parks. The going camping in the National Forest and they are starting to see stuff the sink over greatest lands there starting to see clearcut the te force of the doing too much. Maybe the park service is built too many visiting centers. So emerging in the 1950s then, i have not a mexican jams been put in every stream thats possible. There is an emergent wilderness movement. There is a divider to protect places in commercial development more ore less entirely. That coalitions to what becomes a wilderness act of 1964. The very first law between 1964 and say 1970 6a whole handful rick couple of handfuls of laws passed Congress Overwhelmingly bipartisan. Some of them unanimous in the house or the senate. Endangered species act. Therefore to vastly change what happens on the public lands. And what some of the purposes are. Im not only that the wilderness has a different purpose think its codified for the first time through congress. But the other thing that emerges that is so important as the processes of management change. So when changes to the wilderness areas or when timber sales areow going to go up they will now be the beginning of the 1970s. A place for the public to not only object to weigh in. The Forest Service with the proposals that we have. The public could have a lawsuit this created opportunities for that. And so to get back to the table metaphor all of the sudden theres a lot more people sitting at the table. There people there who are willing to represent famine for their people there who will represent rafters for the people theyre going to say we should not be cutting trees in this place for these purposes. If you are somebody sat at the table when there were only 10 people another 20, you have power and that becomes concerning. People used to listen to you and i have to wait longer when you are not the only voice. And so that really changes how the system has been functioning. Right, what you still cook a full table is starting to look a little thin. [laughter] yes people reach out to get what they want. And look how far we have, and our discussion in the last few minutes. I am just struck by the contrast between what was happening just a century earlier the federal government have these lands there were almost in some sense as a burden to the federal government. They cannot give thembe away thy were not suitable for homesteading. They have some commercial value butre really they were kind of unwanted land. And now, the period were discussing in the 70s are expected to provide timber, provide clean water, provide pastor, provide water through reservoirs. In provide all sorts of recreation, motorized and nonmotorized. Im provide all the values we attribute to capitol w their thl definition of wilderness. This is just a huge shift in our perception of these lands and what we expect from them. Absolutely. Within the career of one person and one of those agencies they would have seen just a radical change of what is being asked of them. That is an important way to think about it. You are a young person may be the year the forest was created in 1905 and you start working for the Forest Service or newark 25 and 1938 you spent 30 or 40 years that for service, it is going to look pretty radically different. Zelenskyy publics very different. On the processes as you are saying all of the sudden they are where you used too as a forest ranger gone out and talked withh a few people about whats going to happen next or on the fourth you have a formal system of Public Consultation whether participated in for people all across the country for their number federal laws. They need to be considered as your planning. These are all that we consider great conservation victories. They will certainly change the conversation of the public lands quite significantly. Absolutely. You talk about this, in a lot of ways this crowding of the table. [laughter] i dont mean to make it sound negative. That led to come in some ways led into the Political Polarization we saw during the reagan years. He talked about the connection there . To some extent, the public lands started to become started to play a significant role in national politics. I think that is right. Part of it is again about showing a power which i have already mentioned. 1979 the assembly of nevada declared public lands with the nevada and congress ever had the right to take them. We have seen various forms of it sort of popup every half decade or so. And what Ronald Reagan did run for president in 1980 the first time its count me in as a rebel. Trying to associate himself with the rebellion. Because what it does at this time is one more representation of the federal government. And the federal overreach. Most of our problems are being from that perspective of the 1980s. And if you look back the previous couple of decades from the federal lands. As i was speaking of in the last few minutes, its a bewildering change to a whole lot of people. Only to resist change is to say lets go back to the way things were and are lets go back to the way we imagine things were. Her states will take over. Now it states, most state lands are required by statute to maximize resource potential. That is not consistent with the wilderness act and other such things. So call by western states to return the land we want to have more control. Will washington d. C. To have less control. Most of those things did not actually go into t effect. And one of things that did go into effect. One of the things you see happening in the 1980s is a shifting radicalism from the environmental site and the anti conservation site if you will. Neither label is exactly correct. But to get my sincere. Theres spectacles sites participate in. Theres protest both sides participate in civil disobedience that both sidespa participated. And over the next 40 yearsrs i guess those things and wane. As we move into the 1990s. The day after the Oklahoma City bombing a local Forest Office was to her if you come take my cattle youre going to be greeted with 100 bones with guns or just something we sag in the 21st century. This is an accelerating trend that happened the reactions and changes that happened in the middle part of the 20th century. Yes. As you say, to emphasize the point there is perhaps there is nostalgia for a past that never quite was. Because the public lands were never envisioned. The public land system was never envisioned as a place purely protect land undisturbed. It was never envisioned as a commercial enterprise. Theres an element of sustained from thehe beginning. There is always an element of commercialism. Quick to think thats right. I think that is true. Everyone is getting along and exactly they wanted. [laughter] yes, right. [laughter] but there were times when people perhaps have more of a life because other people were being left out. That is a real change though perhaps not quite the change doesnt though its characterized by people does not often acknowledge the reason why it that more of a voices because other people did not have a voice. The polarization we are talking about, member quite clearly i was a wildlife field researcher in the mid 1990s carrying some of these conflicts over the management of endangered species of public land they got quite heated. With threats and actual violence towards Forest Service and bureau of Land Management employees. At some of the same people they are descendents of some the same people have continued this kind of rhetoric. Into the modern era. Perhaps you can talk about what we have seen in the past three years . I was you back to the origins of the public land. There have been anti conservationist from the beginning. Public lands b being reserved ad retained by the federal government. They again popup theres a big movement after world war ii. There is hope vlan can be returned to the states are thebo critics for that movement is not about that. Its not supporting the Conservation Movement at all. Trying to undermine that an idea of stable or private profit. We have seen it play out on conservation to cover protesters or wilderness study areas. Carved into them to try to keep them from becoming wilderness areas. One set of radicalism points to another and the sink to ratchet up. And i think the antidote to that is hard work. Sitting down at the table, i imagine this table most of the time this book being around. We can sit at this round table and see each other. We are all in a different position have different values but we can all see each other. As we move into that. Closest to us that feels much more like a long skinny table where we cant see everybody anymore. We just continue to face off rather thanf share. I think that is one of the challenges is one of these solutions is a lot of hard work getting to know what you want, what i want too. Where we might be able to compromise and collaborate. A variety of locations but not a lot of examples of it. Its timeconsuming and its costly per the conservation challenges we are faced with our extensive interconnected. One agency another agency plus private land. It takes so much time in so many resources and it is a lot easier just togh yell at each other. [laughter] card light, i like that metaphor. Metaphor of a long table we cannot quite see each other or see each other fully. I often feel that way when a report on these types of conflicts. People are standing up and pontificating from a great distance to other people have a stake in these lands. There is a little listing going on there are some examples of these roundtable still exists at the local and regional level. We can close the end of our time. Maybe you could leave us with some inspiration. Our very heartening. And are examples of things that we could follow in the future. We do not know the stories well enough yet. I know there are in the american southwest are examples for decades now working with traditional users to figure out better ways. There is a hybrid partnership in Eastern Oregon worked really hard. This is in the same neighborhood taken over in 2016. In the 1990s tensions were really at the high points there is a determination lets solve ethis make it less intense. There is been some Research Done that suggests thehe region thel takeover did not have a great local effect there been long hours of neighbors getting to know neighbors and trying to solve these sorts of problems. Looked at the Intertribal Coalition that comes together to protect beers from southern utah and eventually it turned into a National Monument where they will be co managers. This feels like some sort of whole circle, something happening here you have Indigenous People reaching out and being part of this rather than being left out deliberately or having landed taking it deliberately. I am hopeful the way that might go as it moves forward and developments their Management Plan there. We started this conversation talking about the history of public lands is rooted and dispossession. In the story like bears ears gives me hope certainly that history cannot be reversed or cannot be made up for it. But there is a way forward from it. On the height of the partnership we should say for those of you who do not remember the National Wildlife refuge by extremists, antigovernment extremist that et lasted 40 days. And i think, as you say the reason the community was not more supportive of the ideals of these interlopers on but announced to the extremists from out of state the local people and local public land managers have done decades of work to find their places at the table and to have a conversation with one another. Exactly. We can all take heart those conversations are not easy but they are possible. Exactly. I only want to end with a very short reading that reflects the spirit of it were just talking about. Quick sauce paragraph in the book i just got done talking about people coming to the table to find common ground. At this point its not meant to suggest using governing public lands in the future will be, it can be or should be easy never has been. Environmental constraints is among world historys most complicated and important task. The exercise of democracy are diverse and complicated society like the united c states challenges their decisionmakers to fit narrow interest and seek a broader public interest. To make matters even harder the 21st century includes global problemsf, Climate Change biodiversity and political corruption. Moving toward the future public lands can and should play a central role in combating compounding crises. Quoted in the books introduction the integrity of our public lands depend on the integrity of our public process within the open space of democracy. Promoting and maintaining the integrity demands honest reckoning with history the path that includes the exploitation of people and the land as well as the protection of places and democracy. The very land in which we stand as a foundation can be a source of shared identity and common cause for the task before us then is to ensure our common parks,d scattered across the nation, function as the public land and not one group or another. For that undermines the promise of a democratic and ecological hecitizenship that might not bid the nations together. One weight we might begin to prepare the earth and our politics is with the public lands. Thank you so much a adam. And thanks for this conversation today. Its great to hear insight. Again adams book is called making americas public lands. It is out now. I hope you will all pick it up and read it. It is really full of very thoughtful commentary on a very complicated story that affects all of l our lives and theha landscapes and all of us love. So thank you for joining us today. I hope you will join the next event at the National Archives. National archives. Take care, adam. American history tv saturdays on cspan2 exploring the people at events that tell the american story. 3 . M