Changing Landscapes

By: Sally

The morale and physical health of a culture deteriorates, so to do the traditions by which it maintains its values and belief systems. Cultural anthropologists concern themselves with uncovering dead traditions and preserving endangered ones. An example of this in American history the work done by Alice Fletcher, which she published in paper in 1904 entitled “The Hako: A Pawnee Ceremony”. In it she documented the details of ritual she had observed to be gradually disappearing among the tribes of the Omaha, Ponka, Dakota and Pawnee Indians. Her study revealed a complex set of rituals, the intricacy of which indicate the profound relationship between nature and Pawnees culture.

Richard White, in his essay “The Cultural Lanscape of the Pawnees”, discusses the interaction of nature and culture, using the term “landscape” to mean an environment seen through the lens of a particular culture. He points to interaction between Quakers and Pawnees. The Quakers wanted the Pawnees to give up hunting Buffalo and turn their energies entirely to agriculture, while the Pawnees saw hunting buffalo and the offering of meat to the Great Spirit as necessary in order to be able to continue harvesting corn. They were not able to come to an agreement because neither understood the landscape of the other. Alice Fletcher’s record of the Hako Ceremony gives insight into the Pawnee cultural landscape but it in itself elucidates the nature of our own cultural landscape. Her many-year study produced a meticulous record, with every detail of the ceremony recorded in writing or by gramophone. And yet, complete as it is, the modern-day reader cannot miss what is lacking about Fletcher’s effort: the Pawnee themselves. Fletcher was able to write down what they did, but she was not able to preserve their cultural landscape, which began to change with the influx of white missionaries in the 1840s and continued lose its ancient ways as their population declined.

It is doubtful that Fletcher herself believed that her record could capture exactly what the ritual was. More likely she saw it disappearing as the moral and health of the tribes deteriorated and believed that by preserving the objective, the observable, details of the ceremony, somehow the emotional, cultural and spiritual power it contained could also be preserved. Her paper “The Hako: A Pawnee ceremony” foreshadows a modern-day a problem American culture now faces. As our understanding of environmental problems grows, we believe that our problems can be solved by external actions alone. Hence we see an explosion of green technologies and political mechanisms aimed at minimizing human impact on our forests, oceans and skies. However, in our zeal for action we forget something that perhaps the Pawnees understood. The impact of technology and the power of law will be insubstantial and short-lived if not rooted in a cultural landscape that sees humans as within rather than above nature. We cannot “save the environment” with technology and legislation alone anymore than Fletcher was able to save the Hako Ceremony by simply writing it down.

Competing for a Common Good

By The Foolosophizer

Stephen Forbes, whom The National Academy of Sciences referred to as “the founder of ecology in the United States (Daniel Schneider, “Local Knowledge, Environmental Politics, and the Founding of Ecology in the United States," p. 684),” sought to better understand natural communities by observing the lakes of Illinois. By treating this one area as a “microcosm,” he made global conclusions about the development and interdependence of organisms in a single place. This idea was explained in his 1887 classic essay, “The Lake as a Microcosm,” where he detailed the food web of the lakes. For instance, the future of the black bass population didn't only depend on its food source, but its food source’s food source as well; algae, insects, shellfish, smaller fish, and even mud were directly or indirectly in interdependence. Yes, organisms competed against one another for survival, but complete annihilation of one species would drastically alter the community. Forbes’s analysis of ecosystems and food chains seems elementary today, but they are important in understanding the history of nature and how we came to be. During his observations of the lakes of Illinois, Forbes’ used the local knowledge and populations (such as fishermen) to further his research. At the same time, local forces and outside interests such as privatizing land distracted his science. Forbes found himself in the middle of a political battle and began to advocate for conservation and public access over privatization and possible ruin. Forbes concludes in his essay that although competition dictated by natural selection exists in nature, it also promotes a “close community of interest,” in a world of predator vs. prey. Although political conflict surrounding the lakes occurred years after he wrote “The Lake as a Microcosm,” Forbes ends his essay by commenting on nature’s collective interest to humans. “If the system of life is such that a harmonious balance of conflicting interests has been reached,” Forbes states, “…may we not trust much to the outcome where, as in human affairs, the spontaneous adjustments of nature are aided by intelligent effort, by sympathy, and by self-sacrifice?”

This idea of cooperation and adaptation in nature transcending to values in human society relates to the contemporary relationship between man and nature: man not only dominates nature, but destroys it. Intentional or unintentional, many refuse to realize that damaging the environment threatens our own existence. The oilrig explosion in the Gulf of Mexico in 2010 illustrates this modern conflict. Not only did the disaster damage the nearby ecosystems, but further supports Forbes’s call to action found at the end of his essay. Just as the local issues and politics surrounding the lakes engulfed him, competing interests and agendas of science, business, and government surrounded the oil spill in the Gulf. Indeed, Forbes abides by Charles Darwin’s theory of natural selection and survival of the fittest, but observed that in such a world, harmony did exist and a collective interest was maintained. In the end, humans are animals and still compete to survive, whether it’s economically, politically, or socially. So in this situation, what will fulfill our collective good? More oil? Wildlife preservation? Free enterprise? It seems that, like Forbes’s conclusion, the collective interest of mankind was largely ignored or deemed impossible in the Gulf oil spill. Such a fact may show man’s true disconnect from nature.

"The Truth about Water" in Tucson, Arizona

By: Sean P. Harvey, aka: A Very Thirsty Student

In the 1950s, Tucson, Arizona seemed to be the ideal place for businesses or residents to relocate. In Tucson, people and corporations could find 350 days of sunshine, a leisurely Western lifestyle and panoramic vistas. But, one might pause to think about the fact that Tucson is a desert-town and may have difficulty procuring water for its corporate and residential citizens. In order to assuage the hydrological concerns of those who were contemplating a move to the Old Pueblo, the Chamber of Commerce produced a pamphlet on the issue. Titled the “Truth About Water” (cover image at left by courtesy of University of Arizona, Special Collections) the document refuted all claims that there was a water shortage and delivered the promise that one would always have all the water one could possibly need for agricultural, industrial or recreational purposes. For those who were familiar with Tucson and its parched environs, the guarantee for unlimited water in perpetuity seemed absurd. Local hydrologists such as George Smith railed against such “misleading and untrue” accounts. However, the pleas of residents and experts such as Smith went unheeded as the water table in Tucson and the rest of Arizona would continue decline throughout the twentieth century.

The debate over groundwater regulation that occurred in Arizona during the mid-twentieth century, as exemplified in this pamphlet, illuminates several concepts that relate to how the environmental sciences relate to the regulation of natural resources. First, it allows us to see how legal definitions of environmental resources or concerns can hinder the conservation of resources. When the framers of the territorial Arizona constitution first applied the doctrine of prior-appropriation to water resources, they only applied that legal regime to surface waters only and not groundwater. As a result, groundwater occupied a legal netherworld which allowed people to hoard and waste the resource without contemplating its effect on the environment and the livelihood of their neighbors. When environmental resources and situations are placed outside the scope of a regulatory apparatus, the environment and those who depend upon those resources suffer. Secondly, it allows us to see what happens when economic priorities are placed ahead of environmental concerns. In its calculations, the Chamber decided that more business and population would outweigh the negative effects of possible groundwater depletion. This prioritization of economic benefit over environmental health would lead not only to dry riverbeds and the elimination of the greasewood and cottonwood copses that once surrounded the Santa Cruz and San Pedro rivers, but also deprived farmers and other local businesses of a resource that they depended upon. Lastly, it allows us to see how science can be relegated to the realm of opinion and not fact. Hydrologists such as Smith advised the legislature about the dangers posed by groundwater depletion on official advisory councils, as well as in correspondence and on his annual radio show. However, his expertise was shunted aside as overly-cautious and unrealistic. As such, the legislature and local boosters were able to manufacture their own ‘truth’ about the state of groundwater in the Old Pueblo.

Man’s Drive into the Future

by Evan G.

Our readings from Darwin made me think more about how things change and evolve over time. In Origin of Species Darwin said, “…Man in the distant future will be a far more perfect creature than he is now…after such long-continued slow progress" (p. 433). Man is constantly trying to improve himself, chasing an ambiguous idea of perfection. Thinking about man one day becoming ‘god-like’ seems ridiculous to many. Yet, the earliest humans would’ve had a difficult time separating people today with our advanced ways of communication, transportation, etc from the creators of their world. Darwin’s ideas on evolution were in part inspired by geology and the idea that the earth’s features are the result of long term and constant processes. He helped distinguish the different natural processes of change by first examining the evolutionary processes of our earth. The Grand Canyon in particular acts as a metaphor for time and [slow] change. It’s the result of billions of years of the earth’s evolution. Synonymous with continuity is the ‘arcadian’ view of nature as discussed in class, there’s a desire for a balance or continuity in nature often attributed to certain peoples who were considered ‘uncivilized’. The notion of ‘progress’ for Native Americans wasn’t to invent new technologies to improve their lives. They wanted to live in harmony with their natural world by using the knowledge preserved to them through previous generations. From the imperial point of view, progress is characterized by a drive to improve and overcome man’s natural limitations. Native Americans lived a very comparable lifestyle to that of their distant ancestors, in part due to their cultural continuity. On the other hand, in the 20^th century alone Americans went from trains, to automobiles, to planes, and ultimately to the World Wide Web. Such rapid advances in technology have profoundly changed man and his relationship with the world, stemming from an innate desire to govern all of nature.

Humans have evolved alongside major advancements in technology, and the two will only become increasingly intertwined in the future. For most of human history, people mainly relied on fire, farming and hunting tools, and basic shelter to survive. Now almost every aspect of our lives is dependent on advanced and crucially interconnected technologies. Technology is becoming an inner and integral part of our natural landscape. As technology advances it will continue to become less noticeable, more efficient, and increasingly accessible, drastically altering the world. Ultimately, technology will be inside and all around us without us even realizing it’s there. Accepting the significance of technology in our lives is hard for many people, even though it’s a seemingly obvious reality. Technology is slowly, yet in retrospect rapidly allowing us to reconstruct and reshape the natural processes of the world. Yet, there is no type of progress that justifies evil; we can’t ignore the impact that advancing civilization has on all different walks of life and must protect those who aren’t fully aware or prepared for change.