A Sand County Almanac: Part III: Wildlife in American Culture Summary & Analysis

Leopold believes it is important for people in society to remember the “wild rootage” of their culture. He believes there are three ways to do this. First, he thinks there is value in any experience that reminds a person of history. He calls this “split-rail value.” Second, he finds value in any experiences that remind a person of the importance of the natural world and the circle of life for their own survival. He calls these “man-earth experiences.” Third, Leopold finds value in any activities that force a person to practice “sportsmanship.” By this he means that any activity which requires a person to voluntarily limit their use of mechanical technology, so as to use another method that requires more skill and precision, is valuable.

Expanding on the concept of sportsmanship, Leopold looks back to an archetypical pioneer, the original sportsman. These pioneers traveled lightly, and adhered to a “one-bullet-one-buck” mentality. Both of these qualities were out of necessity, as a pioneer was unable to carry much equipment, and this included bullets. Additionally, once they killed an animal they had to transport it themselves, and so only killed what they truly needed.

After the pioneer came the “gadgeteer,” a person who uses gadgets and mechanical tools instead of “self-reliance,” “woodcraft, or marksmanship.” The gadgets are often expensive, and their cost is equated with “the economic value of wildlife.”

Leopold admits that while gadgets often replace sportsmanship, it is possible for both to coexist. He gives the example of Theodore Roosevelt, who used contemporary rifles, tents, and dehydrated foods, but was able to use these “mechanical aids, in moderation, without being used by them.”

Still, Leopold has noticed an overall increase in mechanization, and a decrease in the cultural values (like split-rail values and sportsmanship) he finds so important. He argues that outdoor recreation is “essentially primitive,” and therefore unsuited for mechanization, even as the developed world continues to mechanize.

He also argues “mechanization offers no cultural substitute for the split-rail value it destroys.” However, he concedes that cropping—that is, reintroducing animals to fish or hunt into a former wilderness—does provide a cultural substitute, as it requires the cropper to remember the man-earth relationship, and practice sportsmanlike restraint.

Leopold proposes a reframing of what a “sport” can be. He suggests that more people should take up the sport of wildlife research, which uses gadgets in a positive way, and does not hurt the landscape. He relays an anecdote of various amateur naturalists who turned their hobbies into vocations. He cautions the reader to not think of this as an example of anyone making “work out of play,” but instead a lesson on how “the most fun lies in seeing and studying the unknown.”

Leopold points out that although behavior patterns in large populations of animals is observable, individual animals are likely unaware of the role they play in a larger cycle. Leopold suggests that humans may also be playing a role in a larger, species-wide behavior pattern, while individuals remain unaware. He suggests looking to the animal kingdom for “analogies to our own problems.” 

Leopold ends the chapter by reminding the reader that wildlife and nature were once interesting enough to occupy a person’s leisure time. He suggests the world would be better off if people turned back towards nature as a site of leisure, while also treating it as a site of new wisdom.