I recently spent a day out in the beautiful Berkshires with Doug Bruce of the Berkshire Natural Resource Council. Our most recent endeavor into the woods was slightly more productive and slightly less exhausting then are first day together. The property that we spent the day in is located near the MCLA Athletic Complex, and I’m not sure of the name of the property. The lot was a recent Resource Council purchase, bought from a man who planned to create housing developments at the base of the mountain we would be working on. While walking up to the Resource Council’s lot, Doug spoke of how interesting this parcel of land is to the Council. As mentioned before the parcel, which is a mountain ridge, is right next to a future housing development. This seems rather odd if you consider the idea of conservation, which is to preserve land for the use of the public. While the Council would prefer to own all of the land and not have more housing developments come to the Berkshires, they also realize that they must pick and choose their battles. In a sense the Council really embodies the ideas of Pinchot, in that they realize land must be practically used.
Up to this point, if I had to tie the works of the Resource Council back to the text I would say that they embody the National Park Services’ approach to Conservationism. This approach, as Wellock showed in the text, has its ups and downs. The Resource Council today faces the same double edged sword that the National Park System faced in the early parts of the 20th century. Both of these groups need visitors to their lands in order to receive funding. However, any time you bring people into the wilderness you run into problems. Just like the roads that had to be built through early 20th century national parks, modern housing developments that can be seen from scenic ridgelines, are a necessary evil in today’s efforts in conservation.
Going along with the theme of necessary evils I must discuss the boundary markers for the Resource Council. Along the boundaries of parcels, similar to posted sings, the Council puts up markers that state whose land this is and where the property line runs. The big problem with these boundary markers however, is the wording on the sings. The sings, designed by Doug’s predecessor, state the name of the organization followed by the following; NO vehicles, dumping, camping, fires. The problems with these sings according to Doug, is that they state what visitors cannot do in a bold fashion, rather than outlining what they can do, hunting, fishing etc. I certainly consider it to be true that a visitor to Resource Council lands will most certainly notice the NO signs first. This is truly a shame, but yet again highlights the very difficult task of a keeping a park system open to the public. While obviously the Council or any park service would love to attract lots of visitors, they must remember that visitors can often spell problems and sometimes bold signs saying no are the best way to avoid some of these problems.

Berkshire Natural Resource Council's Mission

Nearing the end of my internship with the Resource Council I felt it necessary to dedicate a journal entry to what the BNRC is. I felt that the best way to accurately portray the Council, rather than my through my own often irrelevant interpretations, would be to give a run down of the Council’s Mission Statement according the Council themselves. According to the Councils website, WWW.BNRC.NET the Mission Statement of the council is to “To protect and preserve the natural beauty and ecological integrity of the Berkshires for public benefit and enjoyment.” Approved by Board of Directors, October 20, 2006.
According to the Council’s Board of Directors, they aim to preserve the Berkshires for public benefit and enjoyment. A common theme throughout my reports on my internship with this organization is the idea of a balance in modern conservation. Constantly throughout our text book we find classic examples of maintaining a balance between practical conservation and preservationists wishes. Logging National Parks, hunting rights and regulations, and even things as specific as the battle for Hetchy Hetch Damn, are all examples of trying to find a balance where people’s reliance on natural resources should coincide with the desire to protect nature. In the BNRC mission statement this constant battle in conservation is rather clear, they aim to protect the Berkshires, but for the sake of benefit and enjoyment of the public.
Now that we understand the purpose of the BNRC, which is seemingly to help both nature and those who wish to enjoy it, we should understand the origins of the group. According to the website the Council was opened in 1967 and since its origin has
“worked closely with hundreds of Berkshire landowners to help them meet their preservation and planning goals.” (WWW.BNRC.NET) As I stated in earlier posts, these preservation and planning goals are related to the Conservation Restrictions that private land owners sign over to the Council.
Just how big is the Council today? According the website, “The Council today owns and manages 7,100 acres and protects an additional 9,200 acres through the use of conservation restrictions.” That is certainly a large piece of territory within Berkshire County and on these various parcels of land the Council is mainly concerned with “forests, streams and ridge lines – the great landscape features that give us clean water, fresh air, local produce, healthy wildlife and outstanding recreational opportunities.” (WWW.BNRC.NET)
Obviously the intent of this entry was to present Berkshire Natural Resource Council the way they wish to be perceived in the public eye. The real question is, what have I observed in my internship that would help me evaluate how well the Council is doing in working towards the intent of their mission statement? From what I have seen I would say that the work for the Council I have done is spot on in terms of syncing with the intent of the organization. I have observed several parcels of land that the Council owns the conservation restrictions on and they certainly are preserving the beauty of the area. Furthermore, I have done work that would have increased public access to the land and increase the ability of the visitors to utilize the lands for personal use. It is rather evident that people are using the land to hunt and hike and I believe that would be the ultimate goal of any conservation organization- getting people to use the land.