How has that played out over the course of the history that you're telling in this book?

Yeah, that is definitely one of the themes.

I mean, we sort of pull out multiple different themes in the book that we sort of weave throughout, but certainly one of the significant tensions, particularly once there was a recognition that development, exploitation was unfettered exploitation and development was problematic.

That there was a need for conservation or protecting public health or consumer protection or whatever the various different segments of what we would call a very broadly environmental law.

There became inevitably a tension among those who were interested in protecting the environment or public health or engaging in conservation, between idealists, who fundamentally were seeking a fundamental transformation of the political legal system, and primatists, who were primarily focused on pursuing achievable incremental wins.

And so you see this as a tension, certainly, that many of you familiar with environmental legal history in the United States will see as sort of coming up in the progressive era.

But it really one thing that I thought was an insight that at least to me, as we were writing these pages, is that in many ways, this sort of this tension, it lives within each of us.

But I think it is one of the things that I really love about the book project was trying to think about how complicated the actual legal picture is, and then understanding that in the broader perspective, as we start thinking about how we're going to trace environmental protection, how it really behooves advocates to be very open-minded about not only the heterogeneity among approaches, but also perhaps targets for protection and ways that we can make progress.

So just to give us kind of the, that framework for, uh, our discussion here, could you go over briefly what are those five periods and kind of what's distinctive or important about each one?

I'll, I'll certainly try to be quick about that because, you know, there's quite a bit there.

But I mean, uh, there...

I-- Let me start by saying you are completely right that, that in many ways the book is...

That, you know, we keep saying this, but, you know, uh, to be more specific about it, no prior book on the history of environmental law has taken as genuinely broad a view.

Most focus only on sort of environmental protection laws emerging from the nineteen seventies or, or possibly the progressive era's public lands legacy, uh, really missing centuries of legal history that has driven exploitation, uh, in the United States.

We really wanted to look at both sides of the coin, the laws that sort of harmed the environment and the laws that protected it.

A- and, you know, and then understanding that in the broader perspective, um, uh, as we start thinking about how we're going to trace, uh, environmental protection, um, how, how, uh, it really behooves advocates to be very open-minded about, um, not only the, you know, heterogeneity a- among approaches, but also perhaps, um, you know, targets for protection and, you know, ways that we can make progress.

How has that played out over the course of the history that you're telling in this book?

Yeah, that is definitely one of the themes.

I mean, we sort of pull out multiple different themes in the book that we sort of read throughout, but certainly one of the significant tensions, particularly once there was a recognition that development, exploitation was unfettered exploitation and development was problematic, that there was a need for conservation or protecting public health or consumer protection or whatever the various different segments of what we would call a very broadly environmental law.

There became inevitably a tension among those who were interested in protecting the environment or public health or engaging in conservation between idealists who fundamentally were seeking a fundamental transformation of the political legal system and primatists, who were primarily focused on pursuing achievable incremental wins.

And so you see this as a tension, certainly, that many are familiar with environmental legal history in the United States will see as sort of coming up in the progressive era.

But it really one thing that I thought was an insight that at least to me, as we were writing these pages, is that in many ways, this sort of this tension, it lives within each of us.

I mean, certainly can't speak for everyone, but only for myself, where on the one hand, we might be we might find.

But I think it is one of the things that I really love about the book project was trying to think about how complicated the actual legal picture is, and then understanding that in the broader perspective, as we start thinking about how we're going to trace environmental protection, how it really behooves advocates to be very open-minded about not only the heterogeneity among approaches, but also perhaps targets for protection and ways that we can make progress.

So just to give us kind of the, that framework for, uh, our discussion here, could you go over briefly what are those five periods and kind of what's distinctive or important about each one?

I'll, I'll certainly try to be quick about that 'cause, you know, there's quite a bit there.

But I mean, uh, there...

I, let me start by saying you are completely right that, uh, that in many ways the book is...

That, you know, we keep saying this, but, you know, uh, to be more specific about it, no prior book on the history of environmental law is taken as genuinely broad a view.

Most focus only on sort of environmental protection laws emerging from the 1970s or, or possibly the progressive era's public lands legacy, uh, really missing centuries of legal history that has driven exploitation, uh, in the United States.

We really wanted to look at both sides of the coin, the laws that sort of harmed the environment and the laws that protected it.

It, and, you know, and then understanding that in the broader perspective, um, uh, as we start thinking about how we're going to trace, uh, environmental protection, um, how, how, uh, it really behooves advocates to be very open-minded about, um, not only the, you know, heterogeneity a- among approaches, but also perhaps, um, you know, targets for protection and, you know, ways that we can make progress

So just to give us kind of the, that framework for, uh, our discussion here, could you go over briefly what are those five periods and kind of what's distinctive or important about each one?

I'll, I'll certainly try to be quick about that 'cause, y-you know, there's quite a bit there.

But I mean, uh, there...

I, let me start by saying you are completely right that, uh, that in many ways the book is...

That, you know, we keep saying this, but, you know, uh, to be more specific about it, no prior book on the history of environmental law is taken as genuinely broad a view.

Most focus only on sort of environmental protection laws emerging from the 1970s or, or possibly the progressive era's public lands legacy, uh, really missing centuries of legal history that has driven exploitation, uh, in the United States.

We really wanted to look at both sides of the coin, the laws that sort of harmed the environment and the laws that protected it.

And, you know, and then understanding that in the broader perspective, um, uh, as we start thinking about how we're going to trace, uh, environmental protection, um, how, how, uh, it really behooves advocates to be very open-minded about, um, not only the, you know, heterogeneity a-among approaches, but also perhaps, um, you know, targets for protection and, you know, ways that we can make progress.

So just to give us kind of the, that framework for, uh, our discussion here, could you go over briefly what are those five periods and kind of what's distinctive or important about each one?

I'll, I'll certainly try to be quick about that 'cause, you know, there's quite a bit there.

But I mean, uh, there...

I, let me start by saying you are completely right that, that in many ways the book is...

That, you know, we keep saying this, but, you know, to be more specific about it, no prior book on the history of environmental law is taken as genuinely broad a view.

Most focus only on sort of environmental protection laws emerging from the 1970s or, or possibly the progressive era's public lands legacy, uh, really missing centuries of legal history that has driven exploitation, uh, in the United States.

We really wanted to look at both sides of the coin, the laws that sort of harmed the environment and the laws that protected it.

How has that played out over the course of the history that you're telling in this book?

So just to give us kind of the, that framework for, uh, our discussion here, could you go over briefly what are those five periods and kind of what's distinctive or important about each one?

I'll, I'll certainly try to be quick about that, 'cause, you know, there's quite a bit there.

But I mean, uh, there...

I, let, let me start by saying you are completely right that, uh, that in many ways the book is...

That, you know, we keep saying this, but, you know, uh, to be more specific about it, no prior book on the history of environmental law is taken as genuinely broad a view.

Most focus only on sort of environmental protection laws emerging from the 1970s or, or possibly the progressive era's public lands legacy, uh, really missing centuries of legal history that has driven exploitation, uh, in the United States.

We really wanted to look at both sides of the coin, the laws that sort of harmed the environment and the laws that protected it.

It, and, you know, and then understanding that in the broader perspective, um, uh, as we start thinking about how we're going to trace, uh, environmental protection, um, how, how, uh, it really behooves advocates to be very open-minded about, um, not only the, you know, heterogeneity a-among approaches, but also perhaps, um, you know, targets for protection and, you know, ways that we can make progress.