The book is about wildlife in urban areas. Van Horn starts with several short chapters discussing different types of wildlife he encountered since moving to Chicago, or at least encounters that felt significant to him. Spotting a coyote loping across a golf course near dusk, or learning peregrine falcons have turned skyscrapers into their own cliffside nesting sites.
The section second of the book is still focused on wildlife, but less about how wildlife have adapted to what humans built up for ourselves, and more about how the city has changed, in ways great and small, intended and otherwise, that have prompted some sort of response in wildlife. A robin nests near a school, and some teacher placed cones around the tree with a sign advising the children to not disturb the birds. The city improving its sewage treatment, so that waterways are less polluted and pelicans can use them as stops on migration, or night herons can pick their way through the reeds.
In the third and final section, he turns to things we can do that will make cities more compatible with wildlife, but also improve the cities for ourselves. Walking or biking trails also provide corridors that connect chunks of suitable habitat for many creatures. A woman is spearheading a neighborhood program (along with another program for backyard vegetable gardens and things like that) encouraging people to plant beds of pollinator species on the corners. It helps butterflies, but also beautifies the neighborhood and maybe promotes a sense of community.
Van Horn cites conservationist Aldo Leopold, philosopher Lao Tzu, and the Coyote of many myths as major influences in his thinking for this book, and starts sections of the book with short tales (which van Horn apparently came up with) of Coyote encountering the city and trying to find a way to make humans more aware of other life. The spiritual aspect doesn't always land with me. When he's citing the Tao Te Ching on the paradoxical weakness and strength of water in chapters about the waterways around Chicago, it feels like a bit of a put on, at the least a stretch. Trying to give the book an air of something more, enlightened or scholarly.
It may not be that; van Horn talks a lot about how seeing herons when he kayaks, or making eye contact with a bison at a restored prairie, makes him feel. His arguments in favor of remaking cities to be more collaborative with the earth and nature aren't strictly ecological, and certainly not economic. He believes allowing nature more room in cities, rather than trying to confine or eradicate it, helps connect people with the world, and that this is very important. Even if I wouldn't describe my reactions to being in nature or seeing wild things near to home in the same way as van Horn, I'd agree with him on that.
'So while restoration ecology involves diminishing human impact in particular places so that other beings can thrive or reestablish themselves, reconciliation ecology advances the position that humans can create and build novel systems that are suited to other species. In short, by understanding the behaviors of other species and what they require to meet their needs, we can deliberately create places of cohabitation.'
No comments:
Post a Comment