MHC 200: Power of Parks Does Central Park work?

One common definition of “nature,” noted by Raymond Williams, is “unspoiled places,” or anything that has been untouched by man. Following this basic definition, Black Rock Forest can easily be perceived as something very natural, and at a glance most people would agree that it is far more natural than Central Park. Upon further investigation, however, it becomes clear that Black Rock Forest is shaped and “spoiled” by its human inhabitants and that over the last several hundred years its development has been tied closely to its human presence. In this respect, Black Rock Forest is much less “natural” than it would appear to be. Numerous scientists conduct experiments here and in doing so interfere with “nature” in order to find answers to their questions. For example, while walking through the forest, our tour guide pointed out a huge number of “natural” looking objects that were in fact heavily influenced by man. These included way points for hiking trails, the reservoirs, bridges, and even entire populations of plants that had been tailored by researchers. Scientists were actively shaping the environment, creating pools and placing logs in order to create habitats for animals, and sometimes fencing off entire sections from deer in order to protect saplings. Furthermore, before these scientists made their mark, the inhabitants of this area have relied on the forest for centuries (as mentioned above), to the point where our tour guide stated that it would be impossible to speak of Black Rock Forest without speaking of a human presence. Despite what you might expect, however, that same tour guide mentioned this without a trace of remorse, as clearly he did not see this relationship as a harmful one.

View Social Life in Central Park in a larger map

Due to the rainy weather conditions, there were less people that were there than usual. Furthermore, it was a Wednesday morning, so many people would be at work. Once we arrived, we saw a class of Jewish day students by the entrance of the park where they were playing soccer. As we walked further along the trail, we noticed many tourists walking slowly and taking pictures of the scenery, especially by the statue of Balto. We also walked by the Shakespeare Statue, where one or two people were looking at it. At this time of day, there were also many dog walkers. There were some joggers and bicyclists, and people exercising. We spotted a few nannies, although there were fewer than we predicted. At the Tots playground, we saw kids playing around with their actual parents. We walked by a cafe called Le Pain Quotidien, where people were drinking coffee or eating breakfast. On the area along the walkway to the Bethesda terrace, there were many vendors selling portraits, posters, and art. On this road, many tourists sat on the benches where the food carts were nearby. By the terrace, there were many tourists on horse carriages. Under the terrace, tourists were watching a band play music. Some tourists bought food from the food carts. At the fountain, people sat along the edges of the fountain and along the ridges of the lake. Some people were rowing boats, and we saw one man fishing. On the 65th Street traverse, we saw one man walking from the west to the east side.

As can be seen from the map, the most common activities on this overcast, cool day in Central Park were tourists taking pictures exploring, people traveling through, recreation and people sitting on benches. The colored indicators show the high occurrence of each of these activities as compared to other social activities. We observed the most people around the Balto statue and at the Bethesda Fountain. The Balto statue is situated along an intersection where people would pass by, so many people would stop, look, and take pictures of the statue. There were a lot of people at the fountain because it is one of the well-known landmarks in Central Park. It is a famous fountain in popular culture, where many shows and movies were filmed. Furthermore, there is a large circular space where people can gather in big groups. At most of our locations, it was likely to see New Yorkers using the park to travel to another destination. Recreational activities—playing soccer, playing in the playground and using the rowboats—were a substantial use of the park even on a cloudy day.

As we have observed, people tended to congregate around statues/attractions and where there were places to sit. If we compare the two statues, Balto and Shakespeare, it is evident that Balto receives more attraction due to its location. Unlike the Shakespeare statue, Balto is situated along an intersection where people walk along and can pass by easily. Because of its convenient place, more people will be likely to stop and take pictures of it. On the other hand, the Shakespeare statue is more isolated across a larger space. Furthermore, it is in the middle of the park, where there are no other identifiable landmarks, thus, people would have less of an incentive to visit this statue. In addition, people generally hang out and walk near the perimeters of the park, especially around the entrances and exits. For instance, there were kids playing soccer right near the entrance of 65th street. There are noticeably less and less people deeper in the park, unless they are at a specific landmark (like the Bethesda Fountain). Along with people density around statues and attractions, people tended to spend time where there were places to sit—particularly benches and the fountain edge.

It is necessary to view our data in the context of the environment in which it was gathered; the footage in Whyte’s film, after all, seemed to have been captured in relatively pleasant weather. We, on the other hand, made our observations on a wet, chilly morning with a gray sky that constantly threatened rain. Needless to say, this greatly impacted the data we gathered.There are some weather conditions that compel people to the outdoors just for the sake of being outdoors; this weather was not that weather and so while the park was by no means empty it was considerably less utilized than it would be if it had been warmer and sunnier. In the early morning there seemed to be three main types of people: dog-walkers, joggers and tourists. While technically all three of these activities count as leisure, it should be noted that all three groups were there with a personal mission: the dog walkers to exercise their pets, the joggers to exercise themselves and the tourists to see a cultural landmark. These were all activities that took place along paths as opposed to through fields or other open spaces.

Presumably because they were only able to spend a limited amount of time in the city, tourists had the most impetus to visit the park despite the poor weather and this was reflected in the demographics we recorded. While we did witness businessmen eating lunch later in the day, we saw primarily tourists. The tourists engaged in a wide range of activities including taking pictures, basic strolling/sightseeing, public displays of affection and chasing pigeons.This prevalence of tourists perhaps contributed to the traverse being one of the more heavily populated spots we saw, as many modes of transportation on the traverse cater to tourists. We witnessed many horse carriages, rickshaws, taxis and foreigners on rented bicycles. This is notable because it meant that people preferred staying dry and having a limited tour of the Park to getting wet and/or lost in an attempt to delve further in, or that they had no desire to go deeper into the park. Regardless, it signaled that populations tend to be higher near pathways and perimeters than in fields or other areas that are less easily navigable.

A primary concern for those in Central Park, at least on a Wednesday morning, is that exertion of effort is kept to a minimum and that movement be efficient. Thus, people tended to stay along the major routes of traffic and towards the perimeter of the park so as to guarantee that they did not waste time or energy. There seemed to be a lack of unpurposed wandering, with people going places with the intention of doing something.

People are drawn to structures; this is particularly true of tourists and on rainy days. Benches were doubly appealing to many people because they offered not only a place to sit and rest but a place to sit and rest near a pathway (or in the case of the Benches near Bethesda fountain, a destination). While not heavily populated Wednesday morning, the area is usually busy. Bethesda fountain is popular because it presents itself as an idyllic backdrop for tourists to lunch, rest and take pictures. People can not only admire the architecture, but they can do so while sitting on the fountain rim and eating a churro from a nearby stand (which they did). Bethesda also offers novelty recreation in the form of taking rowboats out onto the pond, and perhaps by extension the novelty recreation of watching rowboats on the pond. The fountain is successful in garnering human interaction because features ample room for lounging and allows for you to touch the water (it’s always nice to be able to touch the water); we saw this when we observed a high school group led by a teacher.

The number of people congregating in such places compounds because others come to offer services to the crowds. Food vendors often set up in places with heavy foot traffic because these areas attract the most potential customers, and in turn more people tend to frequent these areas because they know food is readily available there. Likewise, musicians tend to pick crowded areas because it will afford them the most listeners and, they presumably hope, the most patrons.

Statues also held appeal, but this was affected to a large degree by their accessibility; as pointed out before, Balto is far more popular than Shakespeare. This is not only because Balto, situated near the perimeter, is more geographically accessible than Shakespeare, situated towards the middle, but because Balto is physically more accessible. It’s relative smallness, the prime seating it offers and the fact that it is easily climbed by most people makes interaction with the Balto statue relatively constant; over and over again, people sit on it or stand next to it so often that the statue’s back and ears are shinier than the rest of the piece.

On our walk over to the West Side, we also came across the Tots playground, which was heavily populated. The farther West we headed, the more children seemed to be supervised by well-off parents than by nannies. At the Tots playground, for example, we saw many affluent-looking adults playing with young children. The playground had the amenities that a playground usually does, and the children were using the swings and such in the manner that children normally do. The parents were socializing with each other to various degrees, with some engaging in what seemed to be extended conversation while others focused solely on the children they were with. The children followed a similar pattern of varied socialization. The playground was popular because it was made specifically for children to interact with. The same can be said for the petting zoo.

While the case is certainly different on a beautiful day, the fields were literally empty except the mowers cutting grass. Our study was also disrupted by the closing off of the field for maintenance, but even when it did seem to be open no one was on it. The weather was ill-suited to the activities people generally partake in in Sheep’s Meadow, such as sunbathing or playing Frisbee. Nobody wants to lay in wet grass. The wide courtyards also lost their appeal in such weather, as far fewer people were there than would be expected. With the exception of Bethesda Fountain, the function and usage of wide open spaces with nothing in them is heavily dependent on the weather; in sun, such areas are welcomed but in worse weather they are bleak and generally neglected in favor of the pathways and perimeters.

The central conclusion of Whyte’s analysis of urban planning concerned the utilization of urban spaces based on their location and construction. Whyte postulated that broad open spaces with a lack of seating were not conducive to a persistant presence of pedestrians.  He insisted that in order for a public space to “work” the design needed to be from the bottom up; the way people use spaces must be considered and understood before the building of those spaces.  Based on the data we collected, central park is rather successful in its design and the only potential improvement would be the construction of additional sitting areas for people.  Though the weather was not optimal for acute observations, the park seemed to foster a range of activities and served its purpose well, essentially needing minimal improvements.

Owen makes the argument that Central Park serves as a barrier and impedes movement horizontally across the city. He claims that large, open spaces like those found in Central Park discourage pedestrian traffic, and compares the space in Central Park busy sidewalks found in other areas of the city. He notes, as does Whyte, that the majority of popular areas are surrounded by storefronts and lively attractions. Tall buildings, varied scenery, and the presence other people, Owen argues, make a location much more inviting and easy to walk through. He compares the distance across Central Park to the distance from Grand Central to Times Square, noting that although the distances are similar, few people are comfortable walking through Central Park even though they would gladly walk down the livelier street.

View Central Park Wild Animals in a larger map
The animals native to the North America are the mallard duck, the painted turtle, Canada Goose, Eastern Gray Squirrel, and millipede. The mallard duck is a native species to North America, Europe, and Asia. It is an invasive species to New Zealand and Australia. Anas platyrhynchos hybridizes with endemic duck species, some of which are now threatened with extinction. The Painted Turtle is the most widespread native turtle of North America. The turtle is classified as G5 (demonstrably widespread) in its Natural Heritage Global Rank, and the IUCN (International Union for Conservation of Nature) rates it as a “Least Concern” species. The Canada Goose is a native species of North America, and are not endangered because they can be commonly found in urban and rural parks. The Eastern Gray Squirrel is a tree squirrel native to North America, and are not endangered. They are a prolific and adaptable species that thrive in human settlements and dense woodland. The Narceus americanus is a native millipede to North America.

The invasive animals are the Lumbricus terrestris (earthworm), honey bee, feral rock pigeon, and house sparrow. The Lumbricus terrestris is a large reddish earthworm native to Europe. In parts of Europe, it is locally endangered due to predation by the New Zealand and Australian Flatworm that was introduced there. Apis mellifera is a species of honey bee that are native to Europe, Asia, and Africa. It is considered as an invasive species to North America since it was introduced in the early 1600s. Parasites are the primary reason honeybees are endangered. They live off the honeybee and slowly kill the bee, allowing the infestation to increase and affect the whole colony. They are also endangered due to a variety of man-made problems, including habitat destruction and the misuse of pesticides. The feral rock pigeon is an invasive species that originated from Europe, North Africa, and Asia. Pigeons living in the US arrived with the settlers of Virginia in the early 1600s. They are not endangered, and usually reach their highest densities of population in central parts of cities. The House Sparrow is an invasive species that originated in the Middle East and spread, along with agriculture, to Eurasia and North Africa. The house sparrow has been introduced to many parts of the world and can spread quickly; they are extremely common and are not endangered.

The animals we identified all have their habitat requirements met in central park and each serve a function in the ecological neighborhood.  The mallards and Canada Geese both require wetlands and are omnivores, consuming both plant life, small insects, and fish.  The painted turtle lives in slow-moving fresh water and consumes aquatic vegetation, algae, and small water creatures.  All three of these can be found in Turtle Pond, and the birds can be found in other bodies of water in the park.  The pigeons and sparrows both tend to live in proximity to humans.  They both feed on small seeds or, particularly in cities, on food left by humans such as crumbs and litter.  Pigeons nest on ledges such as those provided by buildings, bridges, or rock formations while sparrows prefer to nest in holes such as crevices in houses and cavities in trees.  The squirrels live in trees and make dens upon large tree branches and within the hollow trunks of trees.  They are scatter hoarders and bury food in small bundles over a large area. They eat a variety of food including bark, and many different seeds and nuts.  The earthworm lives in garden and agricultural soils where it makes deep burrows and comes to the surface to feed.  The honey bees require an abundance of flowering plants and suitable places to build hives, both of which are found in central park due to the large number of flowering trees and perennial flowers.  The millipedes are native species and feed on organic matter in the soil.

Base on our observations, the most common animals are the feral rock pigeons, house sparrow, and eastern gray squirrel. We witnessed at least 5 of these different animals during our exploration. We saw a few Canada Goose and Mallard in the pond while we walked by the bridge and the fountain, and some honey bees when we went close up to flowers. In the pond, we also saw a few painted turtles swimming and laying on rocks. Lastly, we only saw one earthworm and millipede because we actually dug the soil to see if there were any creatures.

The animals we found were all relatively small and benign to human activity. Our readings have detailed early settlers commitment to ridding the area of species they thought posed a threat, and with the way the city has formed many of these species stand no chance at ever reappearing in the city. Take, for example, a hypothetical reinstitution of a wild wolves in Central Park; it would never happen, because the animals are considered dangerous to human welfare, nor would the park in it’s current form be able to sustain a large wild wolf population even if conservators tried.

The conditions that make the park unsuitable for many animals have allowed other species to flourish in their absence. Due to a lack of predators, certain species have populated beyond control and have become ubiquitous both in and outside the park. The feral rock pigeons we observed serve as the most obvious example: they require little in the way of environmental conditions and have few dietary restrictions, enabling them to adapt to life in all corners of Manhattan. Thus, they have spread to areas uninhabitable by most other non-human animals and dominated the landscape.

In reality, most processes in Central park and the surrounding area are influenced by humans, even if indirectly. In her talk Felicity Arengo mentioned that extinction is a natural part of evolution and that we are currently undergoing the sixth major one in history; she also made sure to stress, however, that while past major extinctions have been caused by catastrophes such as meteors, in this one humans are the catalysts. Our modification of the environment to suit our purposes inevitably destroys the habitats of other species and upsets ecosystems.

View MHC 200 in a larger map

The Shortleaf Pine tree is native to North America; it is not federally protected, but it is protected in Illinois as an endangered species. The Tamarack tree is native to North America; it is not federally protected, but it is protected in Maryland as an endangered species, and in Illinois and Rhode Island as a threatened species. The Rock Elm is native to North America; it is not federally protected, but it is protected in Illinois as an endangered species, and in New York and Ohio as a threatened species. The American Elm, Canada Plum and Northern Pin Oak trees are native and not endangered. The English Elm, London Plane, Norway Maple, European Linden and Ginkgo trees are invasive and not endangered.

Without going up to each tree and examining it, it was difficult for our group to determine how common each tree was in Central Park. We did identify two English Elms, one well inside the park, one on the bordering street. Although not noted or identified multiple times, we did encounter what we believed to be a few London Plane and Short Leaf Pine trees throughout the exploration.

There was markedly less diversity amongst street vegetation than that in the park and this is due to two reasons. The first is that the street exists primarily as a thoroughfare for humans and is therefore paved and carved into a grid in order to facilitate the movement of traffic and business. This utilitarian landscape does not provide much room for nature, and so there are far fewer trees on the street than there are in the park. Unsurprisingly, less trees equal less room to diversify amongst species. The second reason is complimentary to the first one, and this is that the park is meant to simulate a pastoral-rural landscape and provide an escape from the industrialism that pervades the rest of the city. From a purely aesthetic viewpoint, diversity is attractive; if everything looked exactly the same, there would be no impetus to wander throughout the park. As land protected from development, the park is also a massive space dedicated to trees, allowing for the incorporation of many more species than the roads mentioned above, which have only small allotments for trees.

The primary usage of a space dictates how an environment forms, and particularly how nature is incorporated into an infrastructure. There is less diversity in the street because not only because there is less room but because the street was not built for trees, and the conditions it creates are not suitable for all species. The Park, on the other hand, has many different “environments” that can accommodate both more trees and more types of trees.

Central Park is representative of a diverse range of species; there were many types of vegetation there. Whether they are natural to the habitat or contribute to a healthy ecosystem is a different question, but statistically speaking, the park has a lot of different types of trees. It could, I suppose have more, since it’s such a large area, but to the eye of anyone but a trained arborist the Park seems to sustain an adequate amount of diversity.

The streets of the Upper East Side do offer a decent amount of shade, for what it’s worth. The trees tend to be one of a few types of trees (elm, linden or gingko) that can be easily contained/maintained and are able to thrive despite heavy pollution. It may seem silly to celebrate the fact that there are trees there, but many neighborhoods in New York City have no trees at all.

View Larger Map
This is the geo-cache we found. It is stationed at 40.769200, -73.972650. We couldn’t find the exact box, but it is near the parkway and surrounded by trees. This is what it looks like: