To save content items to your account,
please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies.
If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account.
Find out more about saving content to .
To save content items to your Kindle, first ensure no-reply@cambridge.org
is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings
on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part
of your Kindle email address below.
Find out more about saving to your Kindle.
Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations.
‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi.
‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.
In McMurdo Sound, Antarctica, fine-scale bathymetry is poorly defined, and benthic communities at water depths over 30 m have not been well described. We describe the benthic communities on two previously unknown bathymetric highs, sampled in 2012 and 2014, using scuba divers, a remotely operated vehicle, and a specially designed time-lapse camera system (SeeStar). One site (Mystery Peak) was capped by a dense thicket of the sponge Homaxinella balfourensis, a temporally variable community that likely formed in response to iceberg disturbance. Below the H. balfourensis cap (at 40 m) and at the second site (Tongue Peak, 70 m), the communities conformed to a known ecological pattern driven by food availability from benthic diatoms. Overall, mixed hydroids and bryozoans were the dominant organisms, and at greater depths the sponge Rosella podagrosa also became abundant. Over time, there were only minor changes in these communities on isolated bathymetric highs. Ice is a physical factor that interacts with depth and influences benthic communities through disturbance by icebergs and anchor ice, and through food supply by sea ice coverage. The SeeStar time-lapse camera system performed exceptionally and opens up opportunities for new winter observations in the Antarctic.
The relationships between nature, self and place are often expressed in the context of solitude, where nature is a receptacle of personal meanings. In this chapter we discuss these personal meanings of nature and extend it to explore aspects of environmental psychology.
How well do we know nature? We might start by considering the nature of our wisdom about and our intuitive understanding of nature. How far does our search for knowledge remove our intuitive knowledge? This question brings to mind the dialogue between Fuchsia and Steerpike in Mervyn Peake’s Titus Groan (Peake, [1946]1968: 274) where Fuchsia feels she doesn’t know anything about nature: “I don’t understand it. I only look at it.” Steerpike’s reply is to the effect that you must understand what you love so much: “You look as though you understand.” Fuchsia says she feels she doesn’t understand wise things and the interesting reply from Steerpike is that is that her knowledge is intuitive: “You have no need of book learning and such like. You only have to gaze at a thing to know it.” We might indeed ponder how the understanding of nature from ‘books and learning’ compares with and relates to our naïve knowing gaze – and how well they each serve us. In this chapter (Section 3.2), we enter a woodland with an ecologist – with all their books and learning – and, by contrast, in Section 5.4 we enter a woodland to gaze around without one.
Cultural associations with nature can be readily found in literature and in art. For example, a poet may write about, or an artist may depict, ‘dappled sunlight in woods’, giving us a benign association of somewhere we may enjoy and perhaps thus cherish. On the other hand, there may be writing about ‘tangled, impenetrable forest’ and visual depictions of darkness and shadows under trees, giving more negative connotations. Such associations can be interpreted in terms of not only showing how we see nature but also as giving insights into how we treat it.
Why do we1 want to keep anything? Surely it is because it means something to us? Isn’t it because we value qualities like usefulness and the ways in which we can cherish memories and meaningful associations? We may keep things which make life easier, help us in day-to-day living and might assist us in some future difficult time. We may also value those things with enriching associations – something we found on a memorable day; something which appealed to us for its form and beauty, its intricacy, diversity or simplicity; something inherited from an ancestor or given to us by a friend or parent. Or it can be something we did not know about but which we found out about in the media or which a teacher, parent or mentor told us was rare, valuable, a privilege to have. Thus, the meaning can be discovered by yourself or a meaning can be given to you by someone else which then becomes significant to you. Whatever the many reasons for keeping something, it is the value and the meanings which make us cherish it: the meanings vary widely, but meanings there have to be. Hence the subtitle of the book: Perspectives on Meanings and Motivations. Meanings are the key.
We tend to think that diversity is good, and indeed we seem to find it psychologically attractive and intellectually interesting. But what does biodiversity mean? It can be applied to some form of enumeration – the number of species – or simply be used as a portmanteau word, referring to ‘wildlife’. In thinking about what biodiversity means, tellingly, Perlman and Adelson (1997): 25) ask: “If biodiversity is good, is more biodiversity always better than less biodiversity?”. Why does having more species matter? In Chapter 1 we asked whether functionality was really the key to why species matter – after all, different species can perform similar functions. And if the functionality of an ecosystem varies, then the system is different – but again we conflate such changes with worth and value judgements. Preference and prejudice seem to confound our thinking.
The quotation “Civilization is in a race between education and catastrophe” is attributed to the writer H. G. Wells (1866–1946). While often quoted, the actual source of the quotation seems elusive, but I feel that it is relevant here. However, in the context of climate change, as in many other contexts, ‘education’ is much more than about being informed. It is also about ‘education to be wary’ – wary of the easy narrative, the received wisdom, the manufactured dissent and the fact that nothing enhances self-justification as much as a bogeyman – whether an actual person or an assumed problem. Further, I would add ‘education to think carefully’, to question, to realise that you might be being manipulated, to realise how you are being positioned, to read widely, to gain as many views as possible, to be open and to think for yourself. H. G. Wells continued, “Let us learn the truth and spread it as far and wide as our circumstances allow. For the truth is the greatest weapon we have.”
It seems that there is a decreasing place for nature. World wildlife populations ‘fall by 58% in 40 years’ runs the BBC News headline for 26 October 2016 at www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-37775622. The assessment from the Intergovernmental Science-Policy Platform on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services (IPBES, meeting 29 April–4 May 2019 in Paris) showed a widespread global loss of habitats and species (UN, 2019: www.un.org/sustainabledevelopment/blog/2019/05/nature-decline-unprecedented-report). The report is the most comprehensive ever completed and draws from scientists and indigenous and local knowledge. Key conclusions are that current efforts to conserve the earth’s resources are likely to fail without radical action and about one million species are at risk of extinction – one in four of the existing species. Crop security is threatened long-term. Marine pollution has increased tenfold since 1980 (https://news.un.org/en/story/2019/05/1037941). Many of these points are also endorsed in the World Wildlife Fund (WWF)’s Living Planet Report 2020: https://livingplanet.panda.org/en-gb. Selected, summarised key points are shown in Box 6.1.
How we view nature transforms the world around us. People rehearse stories about nature which make sense to them. If we ask the question 'why conserve nature?', and the answers are based on myths, then are these good myths to have? Scientific knowledge about the environment is fundamental to ideas about how nature works. It is essential to the conservation endeavour. However, any conservation motivation is nested within a society's meanings of nature and the way society values it. Given the therapeutic and psychological significance of nature for us and our culture, this book considers the meanings derived from the poetic and emotional attachment to a sense of place, which is arguably just as important as scientific evidence. The functional significance of species is important, but so too is the therapeutic value of nature, together with the historic and spiritual meanings entwined in a human feeling for landscape and wildlife.