Resource exploitation and environmental degradation

The needs of human beings for food, shelter, clothing, and other material goods are most often met by extracting raw materials from the natural physical environment. In the process of undertaking this extraction, the quality of the environment is often degraded. By understanding the nature of this degradation and the environment's regenerative capacity, laws and regulations can be developed to meet human needs in environmentally compatible ways.

Background

The satisfaction of human resource needs and desires often involves intense interaction with the natural physical environment. Such interaction may involve resource extraction, transportation, and processing. Each of these events has the potential to degrade the environment while meeting human resource needs. Yet instances of environmental degradation also have the potential to solve problems in ways that may provide long-term satisfaction of resource needs in an environmentally compatible manner. Four examples—damage to wildlife, forests, and soil, and the degradation caused by surface mining—illustrate the circumstances under which such problems have developed and the methods by which environmental restoration has been undertaken.

Surface Mining

Surface mining for resource extraction has a long history. The primary modern procedure is to use large-scale machinery to remove the overlying earth material to expose the economically valuable mineral resource beneath. Once the mineral is exposed, it can be removed, transported, and refined for use. The most widespread application of surface mining in the early twenty-first century was the mining of bituminous coal. Modern mining is often driven by critical mineral mining, such as cobalt, rare earth minerals, and lithium.

During the mining process, numerous undesirable disruptions in land use, water quality, and a community’s social fabric can occur. Generally, surface mining is considered aesthetically undesirable because large areas of exposed earth material degrade the landscape. The premining land uses are also disrupted, and once-productive lands (farms, forests) are taken out of production. The exposed earth material, if left unprotected, is subject to erosion by both water and wind. If the land is left in an unreclaimed state, the mined land is slow to revegetate and remains an unproductive source of eroded materials and an eyesore.

The atmosphere near surface mining activities is also negatively impacted by methane leaks and other mine-related emissions. As vegetation near mining operations is cleared, the area's natural carbon sink is also removed. This results in more harmful emissions from large machinery and explosives reaching the atmosphere, potentially creating a heat island effect. As the atmosphere continues to be polluted, the environmental impact of surface mining activities is further amplified.

Water pollution problems may also result from such mining. Most commonly, the removal of coal may expose iron pyrites, which, when exposed to air and water, contribute acid mine drainage to the regional water supply. This acid drainage, along with silt washed from the eroding surface, clogs stream channels, kills aquatic life, and lowers the overall water quality. In cases in which streams are large enough for dams and navigation, the silt fills in reservoirs and clogs the machinery from operating navigation locks. Structural features such as bridge piers, dams, and locks may be damaged from extreme stream acidity.

In the areas where mining occurs, the social organization may also be disrupted. Roads are relocated, farms and houses removed, and, in some cases, entire villages may be removed for mining to take place. Therefore, mining may contribute to numerous social and environmental problems in the areas where it occurs.

Because of these many disruptive qualities, states where mining occurs, and the federal government have taken steps to remedy the problems and provide a framework for mining the coal needed to meet US energy needs in a more environmentally compatible way. From the 1940s to the 1960s, states such as Ohio, Pennsylvania, and Illinois began passing legislation to address surface-mining-related problems by requiring reclamation of mined land. The success of these efforts, coupled with the need for a national effort to establish a consistent reclamation program, led to the passage of the federal Surface Mining Control and Reclamation Act of 1977. The Office of Surface Mining Reclamation and Enforcement in the Department of the Interior is responsible for administering the act's programs, reviewing state reclamation programs, and enforcing the act’s provisions.

Current mining operations are subject to the provisions of the act, and money is provided to reclaim those lands left unreclaimed and abandoned in the past. Through a series of standards, requirements, and enforcement policies, this act, in conjunction with state laws, has directed the once environmentally destructive process of surface mining into a pattern of energy resource acquisition, mined land reclamation, productive land creation, and post-mining environmental restoration.

Wildlife

A second example in which resource exploitation has led to environmental degradation is wildlife. Wildlife populations depend on a complex set of interacting factors such as food, water, protective habitat, migration routes, and breeding areas. As human populations have grown and expanded across Earth's land surface, wildlife populations have been displaced. This displacement has resulted from habitat loss, water pollution, air pollution, the introduction of alien species, hunting, and changing land uses. All these activities have led to declining wildlife populations while meeting human needs for food, shelter, and living space. The declines have led to the extinction of some species and to population declines in others, to the point that they are considered endangered. At the same time that these declines have occurred, recognition of the problems confronting wildlife populations has led to human responses in areas of habitat preservation and restoration, wildlife management, and the development of a legal framework for wildlife protection.

Among the best-known organizations concerned with wildlife are the National Audubon Society, the World Wildlife Fund (WWF), and Conservation International (CI), but these are only a few of the many national, state, and local wildlife organizations. Such groups undertake a variety of wildlife-related projects such as maintaining preserves and refuges, stocking streams and habitat areas, cleaning waterways, and educating the public. Such activities promote citizen participation and establish a grassroots base for wildlife preservation.

As a complement to these activities, there are those functions and programs that result from governmental actions. Federal, state, and local governments are all involved in wildlife activities. While it would be impossible to list all activities, the broad categories of habitat protection, species protection and restoration, and wildlife management are all part of governmental concern. Much of the early federal government concern for wildlife was expressed as part of action on other issues, such as forest protection, soil erosion, and water pollution control. A federal tax on sporting guns and ammunition passed in the 1930s devoted resources to the purchase of land for wildlife conservation. In 1960, the Multiple Use-Sustained Yield Act specified that wildlife and fish be part of the overall administrative concern. The Endangered Species Act of 1973 gave the federal government direct involvement in addressing the problems of endangered species through the Department of the Interior. The expansion of habitat areas by various government agencies was also a positive step toward preserving and restoring wildlife. At the international level, a variety of laws, treaties, and agreements exist to protect wildlife.

The 1946 formation of the International Whaling Commission is a good example of an international organization. It was formed to regulate whale harvesting so that overkilling did not result in species elimination. Such regulation, however, was not binding by law, and countries could withdraw from the commission. More specific regulations are found in the Migratory Bird Treaty. This treaty involves the United States, Canada, and several other countries in habitat protection, wildlife hunting regulation, and international cooperation. Globally, there is a wide range of laws, treaties, agencies, and organizations aimed at wildlife protection, habitat preservation, and achieving a balance between human use of the world’s resources and wildlife needs.

Forests and Forestry

A third notable area of resource exploitation in the context of environmental degradation is the forestry sector. When European settlers began exploiting the resources of the United States, forests covered about two-thirds of the land. To the settlers, these forests were both a resource and an impediment. As a resource, the forests provided structural materials, fuel, fencing, implements, and windbreaks. As an impediment, the forests had to be cleared to make way for agriculture, farmsteads, roads, and towns. To many early settlers, these forests seemed endless, so cutting, burning, and removal went on without concern for the decline in forest cover. Not until the late 1800s did people begin to perceive problems arising from the overuse and abuse of US forests. These concerns reached such a level of importance that in 1897, an act was passed by Congress to allow the establishment of national forests.

Along with land earlier set aside, lands declared national forests established a basis for preserving and conserving the national forest resources. Management of these resources developed along lines that began to recognize two crucial qualities of forestlands: Forestlands could provide a sustained yield, and they could serve a multiple-use purpose. In the first case, if the rate of losses caused by cutting, fire, and insect damage could be offset by planting and land-use management, then the forest’s yield could be managed on a sustainable basis. Second, forestlands offer splendid potential to be used in a multiple-use context. Forests offer protection to the soil to slow or prevent erosion, slow runoff, and retain moisture for release during periods of reduced precipitation. Forests, therefore, provide very good watershed protection.

Forests also play an important role in wildlife habitat. They provide cover, food, nesting sites, and space, all essential to wildlife continuation. The recreational benefits of forests—as places for camping, hiking, and other outdoor activities—are also part of a multiple-use approach. In a multiple-use context, therefore, forest management seeks to balance the sustainable yield of forest products with the provision of recreation, wildlife, and watershed protection values. This concept of multiple use, sustained yield was formalized with the passage by Congress of the Multiple Use-Sustained Yield Act of 1960. This act integrated the ideas and concepts of multiple use with those of sustained yield to provide an overall management approach to forest use. While these approaches have not removed all problems from forestry, they have helped to balance the problems resulting from exploitation with the ability to achieve a higher quality environment.

Soil

A fourth resource that has been degraded by exploitation is soil. The degradation has resulted from a combination of improper agricultural practices, careless rangeland use, thoughtless forestry practices, and unplanned urban growth. All of these have led to an overall deterioration of US soil resources and a decline in farmland. In many ways, the soil losses have mirrored the decline in forest productivity. The early settlers cleared the forests to make way for agriculture. Impressed with the size of the trees and the extent of the forest cover, they often viewed the soil beneath the forests as very fertile and nearly inexhaustible. In the humid East, the forests were replaced by clear tilled-row agriculture that exposed the soil to rain and did little to slow runoff. The result was erosion and the subsequent loss of the productive topsoil.

As the settlement frontier moved westward, eastern agricultural practices followed. These practices, developed in areas with more than 50 centimeters (19.7 inches) of rainfall per year, were inappropriate for the drier conditions encountered west of the Mississippi River. Combined with crops ill-suited to the new conditions, they led to crop failure and, in years of drought, severe soil erosion from blowing wind. Similarly, overgrazing of the rangelands of the western United States led to soil erosion and subsequent soil loss. Thoughtless forestry techniques have also left the topsoil exposed to erosion by running water. Urban expansion alters the landscape, removing vegetative cover and leaving the soil exposed to erosion from wind and rain. As a result of these combined problems, by the 1930s, serious concern existed regarding soil erosion and losses.

The severe drought of that decade, which resulted in the Dust Bowl conditions of the Great Plains, stirred people to action. Land rehabilitation was given great assistance through the actions of the Civilian Conservation Corps (CCC). Participants in this program planted trees and built soil erosion control structures and dams, all aimed at slowing the rate of erosion and soil loss. This growing concern was given greater attention in 1935, when Hugh Hammond Bennett was appointed head of the Soil Conservation Service. This service, a part of the US Department of Agriculture, was designed to assist farmers in developing farm plans to reduce soil erosion. Contour farming, land terracing, farm pond construction, and conservation planting all assumed important roles in soil erosion prevention. Congress also passed, in 1934, the Taylor Grazing Act, which had as part of its provisions the establishment of rangeland use and regulation to curb soil abuses and losses.

Context

The preceding examples depict some of the problems associated with human exploitation of the resource base. Certainly, this exploitation has involved considerable costs in terms of resource use, misuse, and loss, and has had a severe impact on the environment. However, recognition of the problems has also meant that some solutions have been found. Extinct species can never be recovered, and careless exploitation continues today, but a legal and administrative framework has been established to help correct past mistakes and to attend to humankind’s resource needs in a more environmentally compatible fashion in the present and future.

Bibliography

Chiras, Daniel D., and John P. Reganold. Natural Resource Conservation: Management for a Sustainable Future. 10th ed., Pearson Prentice Hall, 2009.

Cutter, Susan L., and William H. Renwick. Exploitation, Conservation, Preservation: A Geographic Perspective on Natural Resource Use. 4th ed., J. Wiley, 2004.

"Deep Point: Ending Exploitation of Earth's Resources." Economist Impact, 5 June 2022, impact.economist.com/sustainability/ecosystems-resources/data-point-ending-exploitation-of-earths-resources. Accessed 22 Jan. 2026.

Ehrenfeld, David. Becoming Good Ancestors: How We Balance Nature, Community, and Technology. Oxford UP, 2009.

Goudie, Andrew. The Human Impact on the Natural Environment: Past, Present, and Future. 8th ed., Blackwell, 2018.

Huo, Jie, and Chen Peng. “Depletion of Natural Resources and Environmental Quality: Prospects of Energy Use, Energy Imports, and Economic Growth Hindrances.” Resources Policy, vol. 86, 2023, doi:10.1016/j.resourpol.2023.104049. Accessed 22 Jan. 2026.

Lazano, Philippe. "Causes, Effects, and Solutions to Environmental Degradation." Plant with Purpose, 15 Mar. 2023, plantwithpurpose.org/stories/causes-effects-and-solutions-to-environmental-degradation. Accessed 22 Jan. 2026.

Leopold, Aldo. A Sand County Almanac, and Sketches Here and There. Illustrated by Charles W. Schwartz. 1949. Reprint, illustrated ed., Oxford UP, 2020.

Liotta, P. H., and Allan W. Shearer. Gaia’s Revenge: Climate Change and Humanity’s Loss. Praeger, 2007.

"Overexploitation of Natural Resources (& Impact on Biodiversity) ." Gaia Technologies, 28 Apr. 2025, gaiacompany.io/overexploitation-of-natural-resources-and-impact-on-biodiversity. Accessed 22 Jan. 2026.

Walschot, Maureen. "Mineral Extraction, Environmental Harm, and Conflict: The role of EU Due Diligence in Promoting Sustainable Practices in Conflict Hotspots." International Peace Information Service, 16 Apr. 2025, ipisresearch.be/weekly-briefing/mineral-extraction-environmental-harm-and-conflict-the-role-of-eu-due-diligence-in-promoting-sustainable-practices-in-conflict-hotspots. Accessed 22 Jan. 2026.

Xiong, Yuyu, et al. “Mineral Resources Depletion, Environmental Degradation, and Exploitation of Natural Resources: COVID-19 Aftereffects.” Resources Policy, vol. 85, 2023, doi:10.1016/j.resourpol.2023.103907. Accessed 22 Jan. 2026.

Zhang, Yali, et al. “The Economic Benefits and Environmental Costs of Trans-Eastern Tourism in China.” Environmental Impact Assessment Review, vol. 108, 2024, doi:10.1016/j.eiar.2024.107603. Accessed 22 Jan. 2026.