american buffalo

Peter Dykstra: Forgotten history

Early laws that were either the first step in environmental protection or the last straw in Native American genocide.

Let’s start by throwing a little shade on two central myths of American environmental history: That Teddy Roosevelt and Richard Nixon were the only Republican presidents to lift a finger on behalf of the environment.
As for lifting fingers, most—but not all—of the rest lifted the same finger against the environment. (Hint: It’s the same finger that we native New Jerseyans use during minor traffic disputes.)

McKinley’s laws

Republican president William McKinley, however, signed into law the predecessors of the Endangered Species Act and the Clean Water Act. The Rivers and Harbors Act was passed by Congress and signed by McKinley in 1899. The oldest pollution law in the U.S., a section of this law called the Refuse Act offers criminal penalties for dumping in waterways, and rewards for those who turn in dumpers. Mostly ignored until the 1960’s, the law was deployed in the fight to clean up the Hudson River before it was leveraged into the Clean Water Act.

The Clean Water Act was passed by Congress in 1972, but Nixon did not sign it into law, as he did with the Clean Air Act, the Endangered Species Act, and more. Nixon vetoed the CWA as too expensive, and with bipartisanship not seen in recent years, Congress overrode the veto.

In 1900, McKinley signed the Lacey Act, one of the first sweeping wildlife protection laws. The Act limited the interstate and international trafficking in fish, birds, mammals, and plants. It’s still in effect and has been a source of somewhat recent headlines: in 2011, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service used the Lacey Act to bust Gibson Guitars for using illegally imported Madagascar rosewood.

Gibson denied the charges as Fox News and other conservative news outlets had a field day telling the latest tale of Big Government picking on a beloved American institution. A year later, Gibson quietly fessed up, paying a $300,000 settlement.

It’s also worth noting that while the arch-conservationist Teddy Roosevelt served as McKinley’s vice president, he was not yet VP when the Rivers and Harbors Act and the Lacey Act were signed into law.

Land-use laws as a tool of genocide

It’s been more than 200 years since the first land use law, which seemed designed to throw Native Americans off their land.

In 1820Congress passed the Land Act, dropping the price of an acre of unclaimed land by 40%. It is considered a crucial step in America’s westward expansion at a time when “the West” meant anything west of the Appalachian Mountains.

In 1830, President Andrew Jackson signed and championed a more honestly named law, the Indian Removal Act, making it a federal policy to evict eastern Indian tribes, relocating them in mostly unexplored land west of the Mississippi.

In the middle of the Civil War, President Lincoln signed the Homestead Act of 1862. Western pioneers were promised 160-acre tracts if they occupied the land for at least five years

Other laws helped open up the West to loggers. And last week I wrote about the 1872 Mining Law, still swindling after all these years,

The wholesale slaughter of bison that marked the conquest of the West had ended by 1880: there were no more bison left to kill. At least two prominent leaders, Civil War hero Gen. Phil Sheridan and Interior Secretary Columbus Delano, endorsed the slaughter as the best way to wipe out Plains Indian culture.

Many of the estimated 500 surviving bison were relocated to the new Yellowstone National Park. But no federal law protected the decimated herd until 1894, when a new law outlawed killing a buffalo. A conviction drew a $1,000 fine and possible prison time. Intensive public/private efforts have built the population back up to an estimated 300,000.

Peter Dykstra is our weekend editor and columnist and can be reached at pdykstra@ehn.org or @pdykstra.

His views do not necessarily represent those of Environmental Health News, The Daily Climate, or publisher Environmental Health Sciences.

Banner photo: Yellowstone buffalo. (Credit: Tony Hisgett/flickr)

Donald Trump

Donald Trump wins US presidency. What that could mean for the environment.

His first term and recent campaigns signal massive deregulation and a reshaping of agencies.

Donald Trump won the U.S. presidential election on Wednesday and while his campaign largely focused on isolationism, immigration, crime and inflation, his previous record in the White House suggests ramped up domestic fossil fuels production, weakening of laws meant to curb pollution and an overhaul of environmental and health agencies.

Keep reading...Show less
Senator Whitehouse & climate change

Senator Whitehouse puts climate change on budget committee’s agenda

For more than a decade, Senator Sheldon Whitehouse gave daily warnings about the mounting threat of climate change. Now he has a powerful new perch.
person holding a plastic bottle near shoreline full of other plastic bottles
Credit: smithore/BigStock Photo ID: 4018443

Trump's re-election could unravel US role in global plastic treaty talks

With Trump poised to retake the White House, U.S. support for cutting plastic production could shift sharply, threatening efforts for a robust treaty at the upcoming South Korea negotiations.

Jordan Wolman and Leonie Cater report for Politico.

Keep reading...Show less
oil rig

Oil industry lobby aims to remove methane fees under Trump presidency

A group of U.S. oil and gas companies is pushing to end penalties for methane emissions, led by a major Trump donor whose company was recently fined for methane pollution.

Oliver Milman reports for The Guardian.

Keep reading...Show less
smokestack

Canada releases draft rules to curb oil and gas emissions

Canada plans to cap emissions from its oil and gas sector, aiming to cut greenhouse gases by 35% by 2030, though the move faces resistance from Alberta and calls for stronger action from environmentalists.

Ian Austen reports for The New York Times.

Keep reading...Show less
rolling farm

Farmers in Europe face rising costs, climate pressures, and far-right influences

Amid the climate crisis and costly environmental policies, European farmers feel neglected and burdened, making them susceptible to far-right appeals that claim to defend rural communities.

Matthew Taylor and Helena Horton report for The Guardian.

Keep reading...Show less
traffic sign in flood water

Federal aid deepens wealth gap after disasters, study finds

Federal assistance programs intended to help hurricane survivors often reinforce economic inequalities, with white residents gaining wealth while people of color fall further behind.

Amy Green reports for Inside Climate News.

Keep reading...Show less
Boston Medical hospital
Credit: Kate Hannon/Flickr

Boston hospital offers solar-powered support for patients struggling to afford energy

When patients at Boston Medical Center couldn’t pay their utility bills, the hospital launched a solar-powered program to help cover their energy costs and support health needs.

Martha Bebinger reports for WBUR.

Keep reading...Show less
From our Newsroom
Donald Trump (left) and Kamala Harris (right) on a split screen

2024 election: Two radically different visions for environment, health

Americans’ choice will have immediate and lasting effects on our planet. Here’s how.

Residents from Pennsylvania's Mon Valley region listen to local and national candidates speak about environmental issues

Pennsylvania voters press local, national candidates on fracking just days before election

Environmental justice communities near fracking want more answers — less political football.

U.S. Steel Pennsylvania pollution

Coal-based steelmaking in Pennsylvania causes up to 92 premature deaths and $1.4 billion in health costs every year: Report

Just three facilities near Pittsburgh cost the state $16 million in lost economic activity annually, according to a new report.

COP16 UN biodiversity

Pollution is one of the top drivers of biodiversity loss. Why is no one talking about it at COP16?

“Chemicals are really at the center of this triple planetary crisis of pollution, biodiversity and climate change.”

COP16 UN biodiversity

La contaminación es una de las principales amenazas de la biodiversidad. ¿Por qué nadie habla de ella en la COP16?

“Las sustancias químicas están realmente en el centro de esta triple crisis planetaria de contaminación, biodiversidad y cambio climático”.

clean energy transition

Op-ed: Labor and environmental groups can both win in the clean energy transition. Here’s how.

Groups are choosing to repair broken lines of communication and visualize the transition for its true potential to mitigate climate change – the common enemy.

Stay informed: sign up for The Daily Climate newsletter
Top news on climate impacts, solutions, politics, drivers. Delivered to your inbox week days.