When U student and upstart environmentalist Tim DeChristopher foiled a land auction for oil extraction in January, we called his actions inspiring. The Chronicle wasn’t the only news source to acclaim DeChristopher’s victory over the Bureau of Land Management, as he garnered national attention and skyrocketed to the top of Utah’s environmental movement.
It’s time to put our feet back on the ground.
DeChristopher spoke at a rally Saturday where he suggested hunger strikes and “all out stalking” Utah Rep. Jim Matheson to produce environmental friendly legislation in Congress. Both at the rally and beforehand, DeChristopher was critical of the progress made by Utah’s environmentalist groups in favor of a more radical approach.
The single-handed jamming of a BLM auction was a heartening step forward and a call to action for more than just environmentalists. DeChristopher’s success reminded students and others that one person can make a significant difference. In contrast to the optimism DeChristopher lent us in January, this radical approach and his carping criticism of the Utah environmental movement accomplishes nothing but to divide potential support. DeChristopher’s actions were impressive, but not everyone can risk years in prison to rescue land parceled off for oil extraction. Not everyone can participate in a hunger strike or stalk state representatives for the good of the environment. Such a hard-line approach, justified or not, will alienate a sizable portion of the more practical members of the environmental movement. Even wholly committed Utah environmentalists will not likely respond well to DeChristopher’s negative judgments of their past and ongoing efforts. Instead of being unified and energized after a successful bout with the BLM, Utah’s environmental movement is getting more divided. DeChristopher might have won the battle, but this radical approach will ensure Utah loses the war.
If the environmental movement is to be successful, it needs to be a collective effort. Instead of encouraging extreme measures only a select few can support, environmentalists should reach out to a wider audience. A “go big or go home” mentality won’t work to save Utah lands. The battle to protect the environment can’t be won by a handful of vocal individuals.
DeChristopher has more than once been named the new leader of Utah’s environmental movement. Whether or not the title has staying power is yet to be seen. Accusations and extreme activism will only dilute support. If he is a legitimate leader in the effort to protect Utah land, DeChristopher needs to reconsider some of his divisive actions and work to unify the public and other activist groups. It would be a shame to take so many steps forward just to take most of them back.