When the news media announced that the Missouri River is the most endangered river in the United States, Judith Graham, in reporting on recommendations of the National Academy of Science's 147 page report wrote: (Chicago Tribune, January 10,2002)

There are many interested people who live along the 2,341-mile waterway, and who think that they, the businessmen, the farmers, the river biologists, the barge companies, the fishermen and boaters, should be present when plans for the restoration of the Missouri River are discussed. There are no simple answers to such problems as the pollution of the great Missouri River. In her delightful book, "Biography of a River, The Living Mississippi", Edith McCall has an interesting paragraph about the Mississippi. This statement could also apply to the Missouri River.

Ownership of property has always been a discussion issue for philosophers, theologians and legal scholars. Some questions which can always provoke much discussion are the following: What can be owned? How is one to use one's property? How does one gain ownership? Does one have absolute use and control of one's property if one does have ownership of it?

In the past 30 to 40 years there has been a major awakening among citizens, both about the value of nature, and also about the relationship of nature to the human beings. From elementary schools to universities, students are exposed to views that critique what has been happening to our natural resources. One author of an environmental ethics book begins his introduction with such assertions:

\par Each day, 57 million tons of topsoil are lost to erosion. In the past 100 years, one-third of the topsoil on American farms has been stripped from the soil. Each day there are 116 square miles less of tropical forest-an area larger than that of Maine or Indiana. Each day, at least 1.5 million tons of hazardous waste will be "disposed of by being released into our air, water and land, and Americans will throw away enough garbage to fill the Superdome in New Orleans two times. (From: "Earth Ethics" by Japes P. Sterba, Prentice-Hall, 1999, p. 1)

Such statements are certain to provoke questions like this, "Why are such things happening?" "Are we treating nature in a proper way?" Sterba could also have added that leading scientists recently put the extinction of species at 1,000 to 10,000 times greater than the natural rate of extinction.

He could also have listed the findings of a private commission (Pew Oceans Commission) that concludes that farm runoff, from the midwest, has become the main source of pollution in the oceans. Their findings stated that:

Studies in environmental science, ethics, law, and other disciplines are offered at all levels of education so that people today are more informed about the issues and the proposed recommendations for the solutions of such environmental problems than previous generations. Usually authors of environmental books present the Native American approach to the environment, as one view of humans and their relationship to nature. Another view that is always presented is that of Aldo Leopold (1887-1947), who argued that we need to adopt a different view of the world around us. Such a view was presented in his 1949 book, "A Sand County Almanac," and was termed "The Land Community." It might be noted that Leopold's view is somewhat compatible with the native American approach to nature and world around us.

Without attempting to respond to the various interests of the many people who will be arguing their various positions, environmentalists can make some general observations. Alan Atkisson wrote a short article called, "Why Christians are Seeing Green" and gave reasons why more Catholics are discovering in their Bibles a previously overlooked commandment "Thou shalt care for the Earth." He quotes a social worker from the rural bayous in Louisiana, Rob Gorman, who said:

Atkisson also quotes Albert J. LaChance (Embracing Earth: "Catholic Approaches to Ecology" (Orbins, 1994) who summarizes his ideas in these few words:

Although there are some people who criticize environmentalists, referring to them as "Environmentalist Wackos," and imply that anyone who interferes with private ownership is wrong, there are good reasons, to investigate and analyze the various reasons, why more people are seeing green. One does not like to get into terminology, but in this situation it is almost necessary to use technical terms to understand that there are many and varied ethical approaches to the problems of the environment. Historians, theologians, and Scripture scholars argue that people in the Western World have emphasized what is termed an "Anthropocentric Paradigm." The proponents of this paradigm argue that this view is not only useful in discussing the world of nature, but it is also very practical in dealing with nature. Although this view has been the traditional and accepted approach to morality from ancient times, this paradigm has been strengthened since the middle of the 17th century when the Western World developed science and technology. "Knowledge is power" said Francis Bacon, and by this he implied that human beings should both dominate nature and control it. In view of this position, human beings and only the human beings have moral standing, and the animal world and the plant world existed for humans to use and dispose of as they willed. The non-human world did not have moral standing. The proponents of this approach to nature sometimes justify their position by quoting the first book of the Bible, Genesis which reads:

Of course the emphasis from this ethical theory is on "subduing the earth and having dominion over fish, birds, and all living things." Scripture scholars comment that this text must be studied in relationship to other parts of the bible which also speak of stewardship of creation, caring for creation, the goodness of all of God's creation, and the human as an image of God.

A number of views that critique the "Anthropocentric Paradigm" offer other criteria for determining which things deserve moral consideration. All human beings have certain rights and are owed certain duties. The only criterion is that they are members of homo sapiens. However, even with this anthropocentric view, there are a number of questions as to the range and content of this ethical theory. Some humans have both rights and duties, while others have duties that are owed to them. However, there are still the so-called hard cases. Does the paradigm include human fetal progeny, brain dead yet breathing humans, recently dead humans, anencephalic (born without a brain) babies? Another problem with this paradigm is that it excludes by definition, the well-being of non-human animals, non-human members or parts of the ecosystem, and ecosystems themselves. Each one of the excluded members has strong defenders such as Aldo Leopold, Pope John Paul II, St. Francis and others.

Aldo Leopold (1887-1947) has written one of the most influential books regarding the environment - "A Sand County Almanac" -- and this book still sells 20,000 to 30,000 copies a year. His biographer, Curt Meine, believes that Leopold is the most quoted figure in the conservation movement, even though he is perhaps not as well known as Henry Thoreau or John Muir. From Leopold's essay titled "The Land Ethic":

Leopold was a strong influence in Wisconsin where he helped to bring back the sand cranes, restore the Wisconsin River and plant thousands of pine trees. He and many other environmentalists see all of nature interconnected, and that this old river saying is true: "Everyone lives downstream!"

In a recent article, "Dust in the Wind" (World/Watch, January/February, 02), John C. Ryan again emphasized the view that everything is interconnected. A marine biologist, Ginger Garrison, has studied the effects of dust and fallout in Africa and their impact on other parts of the world. She concluded that microbes, synthetic organics, pharmaceuticals, antibiotics, and whatever might travel with the dust particles: It's just another example of how small the Earth is, and how so many things are interconnected: global processes mixed up with how people live their lives. The mounting evidence of damaging fallout thousands of miles from sources of dust may help convince the rest of the world to pay more attention to the forgotten, dusty corners ofthe planet Earth. Maybe we should be more concerned about the welfare of people and the land in these far away places. The Holy Father, Pope John Paul II and the Catholic Bishops of the United States, and countless others have addressed the interconnectedness of all creation. Environmentalists would agree that the Missouri River should be a concern of everyone and not just for those who live along the river.