BRSF Index | Steward Index | WebMerchants Index | Search
The two sides of any major environmental issue may be neither right nor wrong, or either may be right or wrong, depending on one's understandings and priorities. This idea is illustrated no better anywhere than Neil Compton's The Battle for the Buffalo River. Dr. Compton, a long-time resident of northwestern Arkansas and a Bentonville physician, accurately describes the background of the dam-building era.
He carefully relates how the Ozark topography was ideally suited to reservoir creation. He describes the general benefits derived from the water bodies that would be thus produced, the negative aspects of them, and the events that led up to the Buffalo River controversy in Arkansas in the early 1970s. The book is much more than a time-sequenced documentary on meetings, politics, and journalism; it is a novelized account of human nature in crisis - crisis produced when one's most prized corner of the world and favorite activities are threatened with extinction.
The argument that the Buffalo River should be preserved in its natural condition arose from the personal desires (recreational and aesthetic enjoyment) of relatively few persons. Ecologists could easily agree with their arguments citing concepts of ecological integrity, biodiversity, and predictable impacts of environmental alteration. Before long, many peripheral persons and groups were aligning with the preservationists out of sympathy for the cause or because they had been harshly and, perhaps, unjustifiably criticized by the opposition.
The argument that the Buffalo River should be dammed and turned into two or more large reservoirs also arose from the personal desires of relatively few persons. Pro-reservoir developers contended that reservoir-style recreation, water supply, flood control, and hydro-electric power were all noble values and very needed in some areas. The anti-dam people argued that this area of the Ozarks already possessed ample supplies (Norfolk, Bull Shoals, Table Rock, and Taneycomo Reservoirs). But a fifth (reluctantly admitted) and most compelling component of the pro-dam desires was real estate and commercial development in the vicinity of the reservoirs. These opposing urges would cause many heated confrontations and unprofessional activities by the dam supporters (e.g., cutting large trees to fall across the river and stretching barbed wire across the river to block a canoe flotilla).
The Buffalo River crisis was not a local phenomenon; it eventually became an issue that drew national attention. Along with similar battles occurring at the same time on the Current River and Eleven Point River in Missouri, the Buffalo River controversy made its way into virtually every newspaper in the middle two-thirds of the United States. It ultimately was the proverbial straw that broke the camel's back regarding the Corps of Engineers' influence and power in the big-dam-building period.
The controversy also polarized opinions in north-central Arkansas and caused people on both sides to organize and pull their resources together, each group for its own cause. From this came the Ozark Society, which quickly achieved national recognition for its Bulletin and for the generally cool and logical way it handled the controversy. The activities of the Ozark Society also helped spawn several other conservation groups, including the Arkansas Natural Heritage Commission, and the Wilderness Area program (later adopted by the US Forest Service). Not only did the Ozark Society succeed in stopping the damming of the Buffalo, it was instrumental in achieving the Buffalo's designation as the nation's first National River in 1972. These successes also caused the Corps of Engineers to change their plans to dam several other significant streams in Arkansas.
The book is not intended to be a scientific treatise, but references made to ecological concepts are accurate. The (generally) coolly logical arguments produced by the conservationists stand in noted contrast to the emotionalism of the opposition. If you are familiar with the Buffalo River area, your memories will be stimulated as Dr. Compton describes the scenic beauty and his appreciation of it, and the book will be hard to put down. On the negative side, some of his accounts of hiking trips into areas adjacent to the river are a little tedious. Perhaps the most important message in the book is that private citizens, unified on a particular stand, may ask government to do their wishes - and succeed. The quality and value of this book are reflected in its nomination for a Pulitzer Prize, a gesture which this reviewer strongly supports.
John D. Rickett is at the Biology Department of the University of Arkansas at Little Rock. Neil Compton's book is © 1992 University of Arkansas Press, Fayetteville AR. This book review first appeared in Ecology 74(5), July 1993, p. 1607(1).