Oral histories are invaluable primary sources, because they capture the personality and perspective of an individual's story in a way that physical documents cannot. Although a diary or manuscript may contain much of the same information or content, listening to an individual tell their memories and experience connects listeners to the raw emotion and humanity of their story. Tone of voice or pauses can give unique insight into the individual's feelings, emotions, confidence, and convictions.
In the partial transcripts below, interviewees relate their personal experience with environmental issues and activism in Kentucky. Topics include environmental organizations, trends in issues and activism, and incorporating activism into professional career paths. As you read and listen to each person’s experience and consider the perspectives represented, think about what unique knowledge we gain from first person accounts through oral histories.
The Louie B. Nunn Center for Oral History provides access to a wealth of interviews focused on many topics in Kentucky history. There are multiple projects concerning environmental issues and impact in Kentucky, but only a few excerpts are used in this module. To the right you will find links to the oral history interviews corresponding to the selected transcript excerpts below. In addition to discussing the interview excerpts below, students are encouraged to visit the corresponding links to listen to the selected excerpts and/or more.
Brainstorm. List 10-20 words or phrases about the documents/items. Start with the details of the document, like topic, names, publication, etc. What do you find interesting? Strange? Do you find anything appealing or disturbing? Things you don’t understand or are unfamiliar with?
Bias. Identify some biases in play. What do we know or what can we infer about the speakers? Whose perspective is represented? Who is the target audience?
Context. Think about the when and why of this source. What gives their voice authority? What should we be wary of? What makes this a valuable resource to the topic?
Language. How are these topics and perspectives sensationalized through the language used? Identify some key words or phrases that are meant to elicit strong reactions.
Reflections. What can we learn from these materials? How is our understanding of the topic enhanced through these first-hand recollections? What are some avenues for further research on this topic? Why does this matter?
Oscar H. Geralds, Jr., July 27, 1989 - Kentucky Conservationists Oral History Project
(5:04) Geralds: “As with most environmental matters, you don’t win a fight and then walk away. You have to keep winning them.”
...
(9:31) Geralds: “I’ve been very active in the Sierra Club, the Nature Conservancy, and various organizations such as that, I suppose. That little thing on the desk was given to me for twenty years in the Sierra Club, that little brass thing, a couple of years ago. Little camping lantern. Uh, so that must mean I joined about ‘67, I suppose, or somewhere along in there. When we had just started the Kentucky.”
(10:25) Geralds: “Yes, it had just formed, I think, probably the year before, as far as Kentucky was concerned. Um, we started out by being a group from another northern chapter and then we formed with Tennessee, we were the Kentucky-Tennessee chapter, or the Cumberland chapter composed of those two states. Which worked fairly well, but those are two—not too large states but rather long states, so logistically we had some problems and each state developed pretty well so we split and the now have a Tennessee chapter and the Cumberland chapter is strictly Kentucky now.”
(11:10) Interviewer: “Do you have any approximate dates for that?”
Geralds: “Okay. I would say early seventies, maybe seventy-one or –two that we split.”
Interviewer: “After four or five years, then?”
Geralds: “Yeah, somewhere in that. Um, we later have developed groups within the chapter—the chapter is a state organization and we have a group out of Louisville, a group out of the Bluegrass, the central Kentucky area, for a while we had a group up in Morehead, that was during the Red River fight, and it lost its steam after that. We now have a group in northern Kentucky and one in Ashland. Those four groups work together and then we have some members at large that are not close enough to any group to really attend the meetings. And those have evolved, it was the Louisville and Lexington groups, probably sixteen, seventeen years ago, and then it’s continued since then. (12:21)
…
(53:18) Interviewer: “Um, I wondered if you see trends, um, among the adults, in terms of environmental, um, attitudes, um, among politicians, as, as well as ordinary people in Kentucky? Uh, since you’ve been working for quite a while, has it become more or less difficult? Has the way you have to work changed? General trends you have noticed?”
Geralds: “Oh, you try to look back and see where the trends, I guess you’re in middle of them you don’t you aren’t that acutely aware of it. Yes, there are trends, um, and at one time you’re an environmentalist, so to speak, you think you need to walk down the street ringing the bell saying ‘unclean, unclean’ and people shun you. And then it became the ‘in’ thing to do, uh, it was ‘in’ for a while, then it kind of swings back a little bit that you’re a force to be dealt with, or contained or handled. I think maybe what I’m seeing is the environmentally oriented people are becoming a little better at getting the point across or convincing the people that make decisions that they have to take everything into account. You know before the environmental protection act, and some of those things, we just went rough shod and doing whatever we wanted to basically, and environmentalists, was—you know the John Muers and those that were maybe a bit odd, but people like him were very effective. But there weren’t a whole lot of them, it wasn’t too well organized, or at least any other part of the country. And in that area when it became more popular, or, I think it started-- suddenly dawned on people that something’s got to be done.”
(55:32) Interviewer: "Are you talking about the seventies?”
Geralds: “Yeah, the early seventies, when it did—seem like people’s eyes opened that we’ve gone awful far and we’re in trouble, that we have to have some laws. It became the popular thing to do. But you know, immediately, with the laws, the people that it's affecting monetarily start fighting the regulations or how to get out of it. So you switch from trying to get the laws in to following them, monitoring them, seeing that things are done right. Um, there’s a lot more expertise in the environmental movement now. There’s--people with expertise are willing to work in that area or to advise. And now it’s no easier a job, but you just do things differently.”
…
(56:21) Geralds: “Nothing is really hopeless, I suppose. [laughs] And uh, that’s true, things can start from a small beginning and there are certain things that you just have to speak out against and certain positions you have to take. And uh, I’ve done it and a lot of people have done it, have been maybe the sole voice speaking out on an issue, but if I don’t do it, I haven’t done my job, as I see it. And uh, it’s--every now and then when you speak out you find that there are a lot of people feeling the same way that are not speaking out. Which I think is why environmental organizations are so important, it gets people together and helps exchange ideas and maybe gives you a little more sense that something can be done.”
Gordon R. Garner, July 18, 1989 - Kentucky Conservationists Oral History Project
(43:33) Interviewer: The, the last question that we've been asking people is whether they would have any advice for a young person starting out in Kentucky now who's full of zeal to protect Kentucky resources, about how to do it most effectively.
Garner: “Well I think there’s several things. Um, the issues have become more and more technical, and if you’re going to have a effective career in environmental protection at any level you need to have the kind of education that will facilitate that. And that doesn’t mean you have to get a degree in nuclear physics or something like that, but you certainly have to have an above average understanding of science and technology. And that needs to be included in your curriculum choices, otherwise you’re going to be limiting what your opportunities are. There’s predicted to be a significant shortage of people with the skills to deal with um, hazardous waste and environmental issues in the future, so there will be plenty of opportunities for someone with the interest, but you’ve got to be able to understand enough of what’s going on to be an effective—to have an effective career in that area.”
…
(46:59) Garner: “There’s a whole range of things that you can do. Um, what I do, and what I have done in my career is to integrate my personal interests with my career choices, you know some time ago I decided to start doing that. And have probably been as successful as anyone that I know of in developing a situation where I can do things that meet me personal goals and my professional goals, a lot of them at the same time. Um, a lot of people, when I, say ‘you’re going to work for a sewer district? Well what can you do, you know, what kind of deal is that?’ you know, and put a very narrow definition on what that might be, um, whereas I’ve been able to take that kind of situation and broaden it greatly, in terms of what I can do. For example, you know, I have much more involvement in state and national environmental issues operating as the head of the sewer district of Louisville than I could ever have had as commissioner of public works in Lexington. Um, and it’s hard to explain exactly why that is, but when you really start looking at what we do, we have regional authority, we have, because of that we have—we're on an equivalent basis with a lot of the larger cities in terms of the activities and responsibilities. Environmental issues have become much more important, and they’ve focused on, you know all the clean water stuff is here. We’re doing the storm water, we’re doing the wastewater issues, industrial pretreatment, hazardous materials, response, so a lot of what’s going on is, we’ve been able to focus on as an agency because it meets community needs and there’s support to do it.”
Richard R. Hannan, June 26, 1989 – Kentucky Conservationists Oral History Project
(09:48) Interviewer: “Uh, when the Commission was established in 1976, uh, why all of a sudden—what, what was going on that brought it into being?”
Hannan: “Um, a—as I recall, and this is not first-hand, uh, information, but in 1972, uh, state—then state senator, I believe, uh, Jon Rickert, uh, J-O-N R-I-C-K-E-R-T, uh, Jon Rickert, he was an avid birder, ornithologist, and uh, he’s always had an interest in conservation, he saw what was going on in some of the surrounding states, especially Illinois, uh, and Illinois created the Nature—the Illinois Nature Preserves Commission, I believe it was in 1970, uh, I’m not exactly sure, but he saw what was going on in our sister state, and so he went up and talked to the people up there and get kind of excited about doing a similar type of—create a similar type of agency in the state of Kentucky. And so, he championed a bill to create the Nature Preserves Commission, I believe in ‘72, and uh, it failed in 1972, and, uh, I believe he went out of office, and so he was not in Frankfort for the 1974 General Assembly. But then in 1976, uh, then Governor Julian Carroll, contacted Jon Rickert and said I—I really like the concept, uh, that you promoted back in ‘72 and would you be willing to uh, to draft a similar legislation, and uh, have it introduced, because I’d li—I think would be a good undertaking. And so in 1976, in—it was indeed drafted and introduced, and passed. And uh, I hope the dates are correct, but that’s...”
(12:06) Interviewer: “So there was a real change of consciousness in the legislature in those four years between ‘72 and ‘76?”
(12:13) Hannan: “Uh, let’s say enough of a change to get it passed. [laughs] I wouldn’t say this is a groundswell of support for...”
…
(55:22) Hannan: “I think Kentucky, um, has to, uh, diversify its economy. Um, Kentucky, uh, just does not have the economic base that it needs to, uh, develop, uh, the way it probably should. And that, uh, has ramifications on, uh, to education, to conservation activities, and to, uh, recreational opportunities through the whole spectrum of goods and services that are needed by a modern society. Uh, I guess as I look towards the development, uh, what I would like to see, uh, is wise development or development with some, uh, with some, with some thought. Too many times, uh, in our, uh, in our haste to get yet another industry in the state of Kentucky, we many times overlook, uh, the environmental consequences, and uh, this relates not—uh right from the very beginning, from the [citing] issue, uh if we have, uh, valuable resources, endangered, threatened species, uh, unique forests, or unique habitats, prime farm land, or whatever issue that is a concern to you, uh, uh, we tend to be more anxious to get these new jobs and dollars than worrying about the environmental cost, that uh, to getting the industry into the state of Kentucky. What I would like to see is that our office, uh, in gathering this information on the state of Kentucky tries to make it available to decision-makers. We are a non-regulatory state agency, so that, that’s, uh, really one of the most effective ways we can, uh, we can protect these unique resources until they can be acquired, is to let people know about them, let decision-makers, let politicians, let the county judge executives, let these people know where these valuable resources are so that when they are courting a new industry, or a new factory, that they can say, hey yes, we would like you to come to our community, uh, but we also have, uh, these other things that are a concern to us. And uh, you need to touch base with the Nature Preserves Commission, and, uh, work with them to try to find a location that would be suitable for your plant, but at the same time be the least damaging to our environment, so uh--”
…
(59:26) Hannan: “I would like to see, uh, environmental planning, uh, uh, you know, a requirement made that these things are in fact considered. And many industries are doing that now, they’re--we work with, uh, many industries and consulting firms and helping them locate their businesses in Kentucky. Or, not helping them locate, but letting them know what the impacts might be. Um, what I would like to see is, uh, uh, a requirement might help, uh, but I think it’s a mindset that, that we’re looking at more than anything. Uh, too many times when you talk about the issues that are concerned from myself and the Nature Preserves Commission, the first thing people think of is this snail darter, and this little bitty fish, that uh, that can do us no good is stopping this wonderful dam from going in. And, uh, people have—there has to be a shift in uh, philosophy for people to recognize that everything on this earth has a function, has a place. And if we can’t--if we don't—are ignorant of what that is, that’s not, uh, that doesn’t mean that that organism doesn’t have a place, it means that we just don’t understand where its place is. And, uh, if we look at Kentucky’s streams, which are, uh, the ultimate depository for most of our industrial waste, uh, Kentucky’s streams were unique in North America in that, uh, we have, uh, the third highest number of native fish and mussels, clams, in our streams and rivers and lakes, and this—it's thought that this center of origin for clams was in probably the Cumberland river system, Cumberland and Tennessee river system, and so Kentucky, Tennessee, and Alabama have just a tremendously rich aquatic biota, and uh, these things, these organisms have become much imperiled because of pollution, from industry, from agriculture, from damming of our streams, from alteration of the water quality. And, um, the reason I state this, is that, uh, when we go to look at industry coming into the state of Kentucky, and we look at the effluent that’s gonna be dumped into our streams, uh, and people thinking about, as they do now, about the streams and the organisms and the snail darter mentality, they think what good is this organism? You know, so what if this kills a few mussels, the thing they don’t realize is that these mussels and fish, if we’re killing them, then we’re slowly but surely killing ourselves as well.”