The evolving landscape

Landscape and Urban Planning, 16 (1988) 3 5-44 Elsevier Science Publishers B .V., Amsterdam - Printed in The Netherlands

35

THE EVOLVING LANDSCAPE

JON RODIEK Park Administration and Landscape Architecture Department. Texas Tech Umrersiiv, Lubbock, TX (U. .4. .4 .)

ABSTRACT Rodiek, J.,

1988 .

The evolving landscape .

Landscape Urban Plann ., 16: 35-44 .

The landscapes we are most familiar with, more often than not, are the product of natural farces and the constructive forces of human culture. These landscapes we find to be in a con-

INTRODUCTION Authors, being shameless, tend to hurry into print the information, interpretations and conclusions derived from scholarly pursuits . This is particularly true of the academic who discovers a new theory or concept that holds promise for an audience . Although it is reasonable for an author to bring such discoveries to light, there is a risk involved in doing so . Many a conclusion derived and recorded in enthusiasm can fall victim to science's ruthless and incessant raids . Certainly this can be said of landscape erosion and landscape development . Landscape erosion suggests an image of destruction . ln this discussion, landscape erosion is intended to suggest the formation and recreation of land forms . Two additional quali0169-2046/88/$03 .50

© 1988 Elsevier Science Publishers B .V .

stant state ofrejbrmation . The process by which they are restructured is greatly influenced by the values we have for them . If we are to take more control and responsibility over this process, we must understand the relationship between natural forces, cultural forces and the human svstem of planning and design that strives to orchestrate the interactions of both .

fiers need stating to set the stage for this discussion . Landscape formation is a continuing process involving not only natural forces of erosion but also the constructive forces of mankind . However one might be inclined to reexamine landscape formation, one finds new scientific disciplines and new theories infringing on what once was sacred territory . Ecology, biology, anthropology and the applied science of land-use planning have all re-examined the subject . To discuss landscape erosion and the process of landscape development, one needs to include not only the visible form of the land but also the inner systems that generate and maintain them . The discussion of the evolving landscape will pursue several themes . A prerequisite to understanding any landscape process is the dis-

36

cussion of the concept of landscape itself . Once this is accomplished, it is possible to engage the subject of landscape development as it is influenced by landscape erosion . Finally, landscape development will be examined in terms of the existing continuum we have created and the principles one might derive from this continuing process . The discussion must also integrate salient facts concerning scientific interpretations on the evolution of the landscape with whatever illuminations may exist concerning ourselves . In this period of global environmental concerns, three questions have disturbed more than a few scientific disciplines . What is the relationship between our perception of landscape and our use of it? What adaptive features, if any, do our various cultures have available to them to build and protect landscapes? Finally, what is the dominant interest in shaping landscapes? Can we pursue the passions of profit and growth offered by our environment and still maintain a constructive creative relationship with our landscapes`? Each of these questions concerns the role of the landscape in cultural evolution and on concepts of cultural inheritance, Any author would defer these questions to future inquiry armed with so little evidence to build an argument . A fundamental point of departure for examining erosion in the landscape begins with the landscape itself. When we look at a landscape, we see elements . Elements merged through intellectual associations produce images . As Meinig ( 1979) states, "Any landscape is composed not only of what lies before our eyes but what lies within our head" . Landscape development caused by human and natural forces will not be examined here in technical terms . It merits broader attention that only a common language allows . THE EVOLVING CONCEPT OF LANDSCAPE Landscape erosion caused by the work of water involves the acquisition .. transportation

and deposition of sediment (Twenhofel, 1942) . Water is one of the three most important agents responsible for landscape formation . Atmospheric conditions and human intervention via land planning changes constitute the other two . In natural landscapes, locational patterns develop in response to the former two agents . In the cultural landscape, loeational patterns develop in response to the impulses generated by people as well as natural agents . To appreciate the role landscape erosion plays in this process, we must first understand the general nature of its human agents . As Mcinig stated, this activity of perceiving landscapes requires us to understand the process of intellectual orientation of people towards landscape as well as the process of actually changing them. The question arises, what is the relationship between our perception of land and our use of it? Landscape is an intrinsic part of everyone's life-long experience . How conscious we are of the landscape and what values we have for it varies with each individual. These value differences arise from the viewer's particular location and the landscape's relative size, scale and physical diversity . Nevertheless, this relationship is a very real and vital part of every individual's cognition . It has been suggested by scholars that landscapes for modern-day people, in the western world at least, are things to be looked at . traveled through or worked in but not necessarily thought about . These scholars suggest that most people seem to relegate landscapes to the background of conscious thought . Are we as individuals really unaware of landscapes as our lives evolve or do we .. like our ancestors before us, have a deep and abiding relationship with them? I submit that we are increasingly aware of our relationships with our landscapes and that it is becoming a most important issue in our lives . This relationship is one that promotes a sense of place and a sense of purpose within us not only as individ-

37

uals but as societal groups . We usually speak of this value not in reference to individuals but more so with social groups in specific spatialtemporal settings . Jackson (1984) demonstrates this most eloquently, and develops a comparative analysis of three time-space settings of a classic New England landscape that has evolved over a 350-year period (Fig . I ) . The first interpretation Jackson describes was observed by Timothy Dwight in 1796 . Dwight was a theologian and educator who interpreted the landscape in heavy puritanical overtones . He wrote of the landscape's broad meandering river winding through tree-grown banks, fields and meadows . Ultimately, Dwight saw the landscape as a creation of natural and man-made forces that revealed the moral and ethical truth of its people as they toiled on the land. This landscape, Jackson explains, was not a lavish one, rather one that expressed a meager way of life . Although it was not considered picturesque, it did reflect the character of the landscape processes and human processes that shaped it . The second interpretation of this same scene reflects on the engineering era that overtook the valley in the 1860's . Railroads, viaducts and

Fig . 1 . The Connecticut River Valley .

bridges designed by engineers were placed along the river to improve the welfare of the communities found there . These forts, harbors and roads were constructed to serve the community's commercial and manufacturing or `civic" interests . Its engineers were referred to as "civil" engineers . Jackson's second interpretation of this evolving scene focuses on the conversion of the natural processes through the judicious use of mechanical and structural technology . Today, the Connecticut River Valley is dotted with agricultural enterprises, community improvements and the development of recreational and tourist activities . Its most important feature now seems to be its juxtaposition to the expansive urban populations found downstream in the Springfield, Hartford, New Haven megalopolis . Today people flock to this upstream paradise to escape, if only for a weekend, from the eternal pressures of life in the city . Jackson's interpretation of this scene combines the notions of physical scenery with the individual's revelation of self-awareness and evolving self-knowledge . Several insights can be derived from Jackson's analysis that are relevant to our percep-

38

ti on of landscapes and our continuing desire in making use of them . These insights will be offered as guidelines that can help draw us closer to an understanding of the intricate workings involved in the formation of cultural landscapes . Landscape as scenery

Modern civilization has come to develop the landscape through the use of two systems of operation called planning and management . A dominant theme of any planning and management activity requires the end product to he intimately concerned with the impact these plans have on the scenery of the place . The concept of scenery is not as naive a notion as one might first suspect . Scenery or landscape composition is the expression of what lies before us and what lies within us . It is therefore, understandable that many people will judge a plan on the basis of the scene's compatibility with what they see in the surrounding physical context and what they feel is important within their intellectual perception of that physical context . Scenery as cultural heritage

Scenery embodies physical elements and people's values toward those images created by landscape change . Individuals grow along with the existing cultural system that regulates their physical surroundings . Eventually, these people find things in that landscape or in those around them that they relate to very strongly. This phenomenon is multiplied countless thousands of times as each individual comes to terms with his place in the greater cultural landscape . Over time, these values are perpetuated in the form of acceptable landscape changes . Consequently, some scenes are replicated and in fact, become part of the landscape left to future generations . Once created, certain of these landscapes take on the dimen-

sions of a cultural resource that becomes part of things left for future generations to share . Landscapes as clues to culture

What is most revealing about Jackson's comparative analysis is not only the change in scenery per se but also the changing relationship between the resident culture and the natural processes of landscape formation occurring there . Lewis ( 1979) observed that "landscapes are a clue to culture . They represent an investment in money. time and emotions . They provide us with strong evidence of the kind of people we are, were and are in the process of becoming ." In this perspective, every resident culture leaves to its new inhabitants two things . Firstly, the new residents inherit a greater degree of responsibility to maintain control over their landscapes . Secondly, the demands for maintaining the land require the people to make the future a more serious part of their everyday lives and thinking . THE ROLE OF LANDSCAPE EROSION IN LANDSCAPE DEVELOPMENT The concept of landscape, intuitive as it is, bears importantly on our understanding of landscape development . The concept gives credibility to our sensory perceptions and our ability to conceptualize patterns . Through this intuitive process we are better able to adapt to our surroundings instinctively . An understanding of the landscape-formation process involving natural processes and the intervening human activities is equally important to our understanding of landscape development . Landscape formation is the most fundamental step in landscape development . This process involves the megaforces of moving water, plate tectonics and glaciation . Our intuitive abilities will not allow us to perceive these phenomena accurately without some assistance . Through science and technology we are bet-

39

ter able to appreciate and understand those events that influence the landscape in dimensions that exceed our scale of existence . Scientific knowledge gives us the data and the concepts that provide the basis for linking phenomena to a larger framework of organization . This information greatly enhances our ability to predict a landscape system's ability to support our plans for it . For the purposes of gaining a useful perspective of the role landscape erosion plays in defining the development of the landscape the following hierarchical classification is presented . PHYSIOGRAPHIC PROVINCES Today, most landscape planning is carried out at its highest level in the physiographic province scale . At this scale, the forces of plate tectonics, glaciation and landscape erosion are most evident. The provinces or landscape patterns are separated from all others on the basis of geomorphic activity, the colonization patterns of organisms and the residual forms produced by the forces of landscape erosion . The United States has 15 provinces defined under this interpretation . Representative types include the coastal plain, the northern Rockies, the great plains and the New England provinces . Although little actual planning work is done at this level, policy formulation and goal setting does take place . Size : 100 000-I million square miles . THE REGION The region has been defined by geographers as "an uninterrupted area possessing some kind of homogeneity in its core, but lacking clearly defined limits" (Steiner et al ., 1981) . The basis for homogeneity is usually left to the scientist, researcher or planner. In terms of landscape erosion, the region is most appropriately defined as a system of interlocking watersheds that yields a specific pattern of stream channels and a specific energy balance flowing

to and from that system . The region has been defined under this interpretation to possess a characteristic pattern of drainage . Representative types include dendritic, rectangular, trellis, radial, braided and parallel systems . In this scale of landscape, specific policy formulation, guidelines and laws are formulated in response to the region's physical characteristics . Size: 100-100 000 square miles . THE PLANNED UNIT The planned unit is usually a land area with very definable physiographic and political boundaries . In landscape erosion terms, the watershed itself or combinations of major watersheds joined by specific stream channels are used to identify the area . Representative landscapes include youthful streams, mature streams . entrenched meadows and braided channel landscapes . At this level of planning, the specific mechanisms for achieving goals become the dominant and pervasive activity . Size : 250 acres to 100 square miles . THE PROJECT UNIT The project unit is usually defined as some logical subdivision of the watershed . At this scale, landscape zones are of concern . The zones are defined on the basis of localized patterns created in response to landscape erosion and plant colonization created by moving water over land and in the stream channel and the presence of soil and sediment deposition on the landscape . Representative types include upland, flood plain, wetland and aquatic habitats . The theme for planning is oriented towards the integration, creation, protection and maintenance of cultural landscapes within these zones . Size : 1-250 acres . LANDSCAPE DEVELOPMENT PRINCIPLES Several hypotheses can be abstracted from this overview of the landscape-formation pro-

40

cess and our continuing involvement with it . To do so, one must analyze the developed landscapes that have evolved on these land forms . The work of several scholars will be used to develop these hypotheses . Dc /being revourcev

Firey's most famous hypothesis states .. "Resources are not . they become" (Firey . 1960) . He submits that the role of culture is pervasive in fixing people's perception and manipulation of natural phenomena . Landscapes arc in fact, made valuable to their people through culturally available beliefs and techniques . In Jackson's New England Landscape . the resident cultures were able to make use of the landscape by virtue of their pioneering spirit and their subsequent skills as agronomists, engineers and entrepreneurs . To the resident Indian population, the landscape was exploited as habitat in which agrarian and hunting interests prevailed . The more successful culture eventually_ took over and exists there to this day .

Natural forces as pt edeterininanis of cultural landscapes

The land forms yielded from natural forces demonstrate two interrelated properties of landscapes . These are described as structure and function . The structure of an eroded landscape presents to the observer a specific threedimensional view of its constituent elements . Landscape structure represents the distribution of energy, materials and organisms displayed in a diverse array of sizes, shapes, numbers and configurations made available to us (Forman and Godron, 1986 ) . It is imperative that the resident culture recognize this structure as one set of conditions to work with if our proposed landscapes are to endure . The landscape also represents an invisible set of functions that created them and the process by which they change . If' we are to plan successfully for occupation within them, we must understand the relationships between structure and function so as not to break the critical linkages in this relationship . THE LANDSCAPE DEVELOPMENT CONTINUUM

Modih>ing human behavior

If we are to build creative linkages with landscape structure and function, we must first accept the hypothesis regarding human behavior modification as it relates to land use . The culture of a people consists of a "fund of beliefs and techniques for classifying .- evaluating and manipulating (natural) phenomena" (Fired, 1960) . In any culture there is usually a limited number of themes or cultural patterns which allow its people to modify their behavior and thereby their land-use practices . Firey states . "The idea that human agents can be motivated to make their behavior comply with a subset of optimum resource practices rests on social and psychological assumptions . It supposes that the social order can he remade after the image of an ideal" (Fired . 1960) .

We have taken two looks at landscape development . We have looked at landscape first as an intellectual orientation . Through this perspective it has been suggested that landscape is more than artistic image . Scenery is molded by our values and beliefs, Scenery in this context becomes landscape . This end product represents a legacy of values and responsibilities that can he liabilities or assets to those who inherit our works. We must, therefore, be very careful to create durable landscapes for those who inherit them . We have looked at the role that natural resource phenomena have played in shaping our landscapes . We have suggested that shaping landscapes involves cultural perceptions and our ability to manipulate the landscape that lies before us . A historical view portrays the devel-

Fig . 2 . Natural landscape : landscapes without significant human impact .

Fig . 3 . Managed landscape : pasture lands, range lands and forest lands where native species are managed and harvested .

opment of the landscape in three stages . In stage one, invading cultures exploited land, water and land form directly . In stage two, cultures exploited "resources" . In stage three, we discover that we cannot continue to develop the land in the mode dictated solely by what the conditions of culture drive us to do . Finally, we shall look at the landscape continuum itself. Each landscape is a product of its historical cultural development . For those

of us who are convinced that landscapes matter, there is a need to communicate these ideas and impressions to a larger audience . We can observe a continuum of modifications ranging from the most natural to the most man-made . This continuum tells us in visual terms the magnificent and inspiring relationship we have with our environment and the potentialities that lie before us . Forman and Godron (1986 ) have identified five primary landscape types.



Fig. 4 . Cultivated landscape : villages and patches of natural or managed ecosystems scattered within the cultivated lands of the area .

Fig. 5 . Suburban landscape : a town or country area with a heterogeneous patchy mixture of residential areas, community centers . croplands, managed vegetation and natural areas .

Fig . 6 . Urban landscape: remnant managed park areas scattered in a densely built-up urban matru .

We shall use this classification system as a means to convey the variety and diversity of our partnership with our landscapes . Natural landscapes show no signs of visible human occupation . We visit these places to re-

create, to escape and to reflect on the untrammeted beaty of the place itself (Fig . 2) . Managed landscapes include pasture lands, range lands and forests where native species are managed and harvested . Few of us are lucky

43

enough or skilled enough to survive in these landscapes for any length of time . We visit these places to learn, to dream and to plan (Fig . 3) . Cultivated landscapes are those places where small villages, and patches of natural and managed ecosystems are scattered within the dominant cultivated lands of the region . Life here openly reflects the dominance of human occupation and the liabilities associated with this lifestyle (Fig . 4) . Suburban landscapes are places where towns exist among patchy mixtures of commercial centers . croplands, natural areas and managed vegetation (Fig . 5) . Finally, there are the urban landscapes with their densely structured matrices of streets and buildings . Remnant park areas are scattered in and about the area (Fig . 6) . CONCLUSIONS We have attempted to identify some of the patterns of landscape development created by human agents and the creative forces of landscape erosion . Our purpose is to develop a clearer picture of the processes of cultural development of the landscape and to set forth some guidelines for maintaining and improving the ways we shape our future environment. Human activities increase landscape diversity in three fundamental ways . Firstly, we see that invading cultures disturb natural rhythms in the landscape in the short term and in the long term by imposing land use practices that convert resources into material commodities . Secondly, we see that continued occupation of the landscape proliferates the conversion process and changes the relationship of people and land . Once surpluses are accumulated . the quest of culture shifts to the pursuit not only of material .. but also of energy and psychological resources . In this relationship man is converted from a symbiotic agent to a co-dominant agent in shaping the land . Finally . the landscape is transformed into one where man is the dominant agent of change . This condition results in degraded or destroyed linkages

between people and landscape in tangible and intangible ways . Psychological resources, energy resources and material resources may no longer be available to people at this point. Consequently, we expand, rebuild and begin the process anew . This situation is repeated in increasing frequency and scales throughout our region and our provinces . The question arises, "Have we in our quest for relentless social progress, unleashed powerful urges that will lead us to disaster?" To answer this question, one must consider two realities . The first relates to the basic nature of humans, the second to the adaptive features we now possess . Exploratory, creative impulses seem to be part of our biological inheritance . To deny this reality is self-defeating . A more realistic reaction might be to accept these inventive impulses and channel them in ways that rebuild linkages to our landscapes . To do this, we must turn to those adaptive features that we have at our commmand . We have several. First and foremost, we possess the scientific knowledge to engage the landscape-shaping process as never before. The science of ecology and the applied science of land-use planning can enable us to realize the potentialities and limitations left open to us . What we must realize is that landuse problems require us to resolve the decisions and solutions of our past as well as those needed to secure our future . We now have at our command an immense arsenal of technology to assist us in this activity. We can now comprehensively evaluate a landscape problem and the context in which it exists and predict with a greater degree of accuracy the consequences of our decision before implementation . Finally, we must recognize social values . Many cultures are now building the mechanisms for identifying socially important issues regarding landscape values, the process of arbitrating decisions and the vehicles for carrying out selected plans . Certainly we will continue to pursue the incentives for economic profit and the passions

44

for growth . We must also pursue the means for creating new ways to build and maintain durable linkages with our landscapes . In growing societies we must, therefore, recognize that any project or plan is not an entity unto itself, but rather a foreclosure on future options in the larger landscape system . The culture that can balance the impulses of economics, society and environment will be the one that survives and prospers .

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

McVision graphics were designed and produced by Robin Basinger . Wayne Cleveland and Professor Curt Paulson . Agriculture Communications, Texas Tech University .

REFERENCES Ftrey . W ., 1960 . Man . Mind and Land . A"I heory of Resource Use Free Press ofGlencoe Illinois, 256 pp . Forman R .T . and Godson, M . . 1986 . Landscape Fcologs . W ile7 . New York, 619 pp . Jackson .G ., .J 1984 . Discovering the Vernacular Landscape . Yale University Press, New Haven, New London, 157 pp . ., 1979 . Axioms for reading the Iandscape . En : D . WLewis, PT ,Meinig ( Editor), The Interpretation of Ordinars Landscapes . Geographical Essays . Oxford University Press . Oxford, pp . 11-32 . Meting, D .W ., 1979 . The beholding eye . In : D .W . Mcinig (Editor) . The Interpretation of Ordinary Landscapes . Geographical Essays . Oxford l niversity Press . Osfosd, pp33-48 . Steiner. F . . Brooks, K . and Sttuckmeyer, K . . 1981 . Determining the regional contest for planning . In : Regional Landscape Planning : Proceedings of fhrec Educational Seminars . Washington, D( Annual Meeting of the American Society of LandseapeArchiteeIs, p I . Iwenhofel, W .H . . 194'__ Physical changes psoduced b, the wafer of the Earth . In : (IL . Memzer ( Editor ) . Hodrology . Dover Publications . McGraw-Hill, New York, pp . 5926U5 .