It's been 34 years since the first Earth Day was officially celebrated in the United States. It was 1970 -- a year marked by continued public protests, violence and social upheaval over America's military involvement in Southeast Asia and our racial policies here at home. Yet, amid the unrest, there was a collective belief in the nation that our environment -- our life support system on Earth -- needed attention to maintain our quality of life as individuals and as a nation.

So much has changed since then. The environmental benefits are all around us. Rivers like the Cuyahoga that once burned because they were so polluted now support fish and other aquatic life. The bald eagle is now thriving. In many major metropolitan areas, the air has gotten cleaner, thanks to federal mandates. Because of the passage of the Clean Water Act and greater regulatory controls on sewage treatment and substances like pesticides, drinking water is safer.

But all is not well. The nation's last remaining old growth forests -- themselves life support systems for countless species -- continue to be threatened by those who want to harvest these few remaining icons and turn them into dimension lumber. Public works departments struggle to supply enough water to their communities. Obsolete power plants that spew dangerously high levels of mercury and that were scheduled to be phased out, have been allowed to continue to operate to the benefit of giant utility corporations.

But nowhere are the problems more obvious than in the politicizing of the conservation ethic and the environment, especially with the current administration and its conservative supporters.

Those who actively advocate for protecting the long-term health our land and water are branded as liberals. Those who stand up to efforts to squeeze every last drop of oil and degrade our public lands are accused of inhibiting energy independence, national security and jobs -- claims that more often than not ring hollow when the facts are carefully reviewed. Even the term environmentalist is spoken with a hiss in many so-called conservative circles.

The irony is that when the first Earth Day was celebrated, leaders of both political parties worked closely on environmental issues that affected quality of life in America. Congress adjourned for the first celebration so that members -- Democrats and Republicans -- could return to spend the day with their constituents in cities like Minneapolis and St. Paul.

The year before the first celebration, Congress overwhelmingly approved and President Richard Nixon signed legislation that expanded the Endangered Species Act and created the National Environmental Policy Act. In 1970, the Clean Air Act Amendments were approved and the Environmental Protection Agency was created, again in a broad show of bipartisan support for the environment.

Historically, at least up until the first Earth Day and in the years that followed immediately after, partisanship rarely entered policy debates related to the environment. When opposition to environmental initiatives did occur, it was regionally, rather than politically based. In fact, historically, major initiatives to protect the environment were the domain of Republican presidents, including Lincoln and the father of the modern conservation movement, Theodore Roosevelt.

It was under Roosevelt that the terms "conservation" and "conservationist" were coined to describe the movement created to more wisely use the nation's natural resources for the greatest number of people. So why is it that today many modern conservative politicians support using up our natural resources, resulting in short-term gains for a few industries?

What has changed? It's not the attitude of the American public. In poll after poll, they are shown to want clean water, clean air and protection for the nation's public lands and spaces. One can only draw the conclusion that the evolving nature of our political system, and political campaigns in particular, is at the heart of the problem and that expensive campaigns and reliance on campaign contributions -- especially from those who have a financial stake in environmental regulations -- is its dark soul.

On this Earth Day, the American public should not only celebrate Earth, they should ask what went awry in 34 years. They also ought to ponder the question of what needs to be done to once again make the Earth -- and the environment we depend on to survive -- something of importance to people and elected leaders of all political persuasions.

Mike Dombeck is professor of global environmental management at the University of Wisconsin-Stevens Point. He formerly served as chief of the U.S. Forest Service and director of the Bureau of Land Management.

© Copyright 2004 Star Tribune

###