By Alex Weissman

A lot of people have asked me why I am so concerned about the proposed development of the area known as the Wooded Hillock on campus.  We’ve all heard reports that something on the order of 3 to 7 million acres of forest are lost in the Amazon every year. So why such a big row over 9 measly acres of PG county forest? 

I could point out that although 9 acres of forest isn’t much on a global scale, in our small community where most of the land has already been paved, it forms a significant oasis of undisturbed natural habitat for a surprisingly diverse range of plant, bird, and fungal species.  Or, I could take the political perspective; decision-making among campus administrators is notoriously opaque to the rest of the community, and students and faculty were virtually left out of the decision to develop the Hillock.
Picture
The real issue, however, is attitude – a problem with much farther-reaching implications than the development itself.  Since the dawn of agriculture, our species has treated the planet as nothing more than a resource to be exploited to drive our mission of pathological growth.  In the face of impending ecological disaster which threatens our own survival, we are starting to see the need for a more “sustainable” approach to growth and resource utilization.  People are starting to care about certain things, such as global warming and water quality. 


But yet, the problem of attitude still remains.  “Going green” is seen as a status symbol, and as with wearing designer clothes or driving a fancy car, people compete with each other to boost their egos by showing how “green” they can be.  The danger behind this kind of self-centered motivation is that sustainability is being reduced to a fashion, rather than a philosophy.  When the fashion inevitably dies out, as all fashions do, people are liable to resume their lives of reckless consumption. 


This type of attitude is certainly not limited to individuals; on the contrary, it is even more endemic among organizations.  For the University, too, sustainability is simply a fashion.  Many positive steps have been taken – recycling rates are up, dining halls and sporting arenas are composting, and energy conservation is being promoted.  But on a fundamental level, the primary purpose of these measures is marketing.  The University wants to tout itself as a progressive, forward-thinking, green institution.  Unfortunately, you can’t market something like “not cutting down a forest” unless, of course, there is enough opposition to it in the community that it no longer remains a silent issue.
Picture

Tomorrow (Friday), the SGA and the Student Sustainability Committee and will be hosting a picnic on the Hillock at 5PM.  Students and faculty from a diverse range of backgrounds will come out to show their support for the largest remaining area of undisturbed forest on campus.  Perhaps this show of support will encourage administrators to not only rethink their marketing strategy, but their attitude and core values.  It’s not just that I want the University to preserve the Hillock; I want the University, and all of its members, to want to preserve the Hillock. 


Only when we begin to dispel the veil of self-promotion, acting with compassion towards each other and our environment, can we truly begin to progress.

For more information about the Hillock, please check out the photos below or click here.