Conservation and rural-life policies are really two sides of the same policy; and down at bottom this policy rests upon the fundamental law that neither man nor nation can prosper unless, in dealing with the present, thought is steadily taken for the future.
The nation behaves well if it treats the natural resources as assets which it must turn over to the next generation increased, and not impaired, in value.
As soils are depleted, human health, vitality and intelligence go with them.
Conserving our natural resources does not mean using them up less quickly. We can re-learn conservation by reading the earth, observing that in Nature, nothing is wasted, and everything is made ready for the next user.
A state without some means of change is without the means of its conservation.
This national administration (G. W. Bush) is the worst for conservation in my lifetime, maybe in history.
Conservation is ethically sound. It is rooted in our love of the land, our respect for the rights of others, our devotion to the rule of law.
We seem ultimately always thrown back on individual ethics as the basis of conservation policy. It is hard to make a man, by pressure of law or money, do a thing which does not spring naturally from his own personal sense of right and wrong.
We abuse land because we regard it as a commodity belonging to us. When we see land as a community to which we belong, we may begin to use it with love and respect.
The conservation movement is a breeding ground of Communists and other subversives. We intend to clean them out even if it means rounding up every bird-watcher in the country.