UBC Graduate Research

Design Before Extinction Buchanan Dee, Brendan 2020-12

Your browser doesn't seem to have a PDF viewer, please download the PDF to view this item.

Notice for Google Chrome users:
If you are having trouble viewing or searching the PDF with Google Chrome, please download it here instead.

Item Metadata

Download

Media
42591-Buchanan_Dee_Brendan_ARCH_549_Design_extinction_2020.pdf [ 161.14MB ]
Metadata
JSON: 42591-1.0397340.json
JSON-LD: 42591-1.0397340-ld.json
RDF/XML (Pretty): 42591-1.0397340-rdf.xml
RDF/JSON: 42591-1.0397340-rdf.json
Turtle: 42591-1.0397340-turtle.txt
N-Triples: 42591-1.0397340-rdf-ntriples.txt
Original Record: 42591-1.0397340-source.json
Full Text
42591-1.0397340-fulltext.txt
Citation
42591-1.0397340.ris

Full Text

Design Before Extinction Brendan Buchanan DeeiBrendan Buchanan DeeBachelor of Arts, McGill University (2015)Submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Master of Architecture and Landscape Architecture in the Faculty of Graduate Studies, School of Architecture and Landscape Architecture, Dual Degree program.Committee:Adam Rysanek, architecture (chair)Fionn Byrne, landscape architectureTijana Vujosevic, architectureJennifer Cutbill, externalDesign Before Extinctionii iiiAbstract The Holocene Extinction is upon us—around the world, animal and plant species are dying out at an extraordinary rate, earning the designation of a mass extinction. The situation is dire as efforts to curtail climate change and habitat loss continue to fall far short of the action needed slow the rising extinction rate. In the expansion of our own habitat, the built environment, humans have transformed the planet according to our desires and ethics, wielding the power to both improve and destroy the places around us. The built environment is a record of our treatment of other species, a collective project shaped by ideologies, aesthetics, and economies. Architecture and landscape architecture are complicit in the phenomenon of extinction, responsible for normalizing designs and cultural ideals that have contributed to the decline of other species and cultures through captivity, habitat loss, and lack of representation.This thesis examines the historical relationship of the built environment to biodiversity in three local sites of conflict: the captive display of cetaceans, the hardening of the coastline, and invisibility of deep-sea environments. Each history is followed by an intervention presented as a critique of existing practices, speculating as how we might realign both our values and our built environment in response to mass extinction.iv vAbstract  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . iiiContents . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .vList of Figures . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . viAcknowledgments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . xiBackground . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1Positionality and Place  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1Extinction and Architecture . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2Essays . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3Authenticity . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4Records of Diversity . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6Nature and Technology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .12Drawing Gardens . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16Vancouver Aquarium . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .21Cetaceans in Captivity  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 30Xwáýxway Park  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 75Seawalls and Culture . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 76Glass Sponge Reef . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 127Nonhuman Infrastructure . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 128Bibliography . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 152Contentsvi viiList of FiguresFig 1  View through Beaty Biodiversity Museum to AERL quadrangle - photograph Buchanan Dee, 2020 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7Fig 2  Storage cabinets at the Beaty Biodiversity Museum - photograph  Buchanan Dee, 2020  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9Fig 3  Rufe Gibbs Hall (circa 1960)     City of Vancouver Archives: CVA 1435-574 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .22Fig 4  Guest map (1980), Vancouver Aquarium, Les Zoos dans le Monde  dashed: alteration by author � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � �22Fig 5  Skana and the construction site (1970)     City of Vancouver Archives: 134-170 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .24Fig 6  Guest map (1980), Vancouver Aquarium, Les Zoos dans le Monde  dashed: alteration by author � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � �24Fig 7  Ampitheatre with killer whale show (1986)    Jewish Museum and Archives of BC: L.11690 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .26Fig 8  Guest map (1980), Vancouver Aquarium, Les Zoos dans le Monde  dashed: alteration by author � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � �26Fig 9  Guest map (1985), Vancouver Aquarium, Les Zoos dans le Monde  dashed: alteration by author � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � �28Fig 10  Moby Doll at the Jericho Beach pen (1964)    BC Lookbook: #26 Moby Doll revisited . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31Fig 11  Orca lifted by sling into the Vancouver Aquarium (1970)   City of Vancouver Archives: CVA 134-009 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .33Fig 12  Entrance to the Vancouver Aquarium - site visit (Sept 2, 2020)  Buchanan Dee, 2020 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .35Fig 13  Visitor map during the Covid-19 pandemic (2020)   Vancouver Aquarium, 2020: https://www.vanaqua.org/application/files/4915/9561/4516/Opening_Map-July23.pdf . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .37Fig 14  Orca perspective from interior of habitat    Buchanan Dee, 2020 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .38Fig 15  Underwater observation gallery     Buchanan Dee, 2020 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 40Fig 16  Underwater observation gallery, captive breeding program  Buchanan Dee, 2020 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .42Fig 17  Underwater observation gallery, dolphins and porpoises post-2001  Buchanan Dee, 2020 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .44Fig 18  Landscape section from Burrard Inlet to Coal Harbour   Buchanan Dee, 2020 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .46Fig 19  Vancouver Aquarium section, 1970     Buchanan Dee, 2020 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .48Fig 20  Vancouver Aquarium section, 1980     Buchanan Dee, 2020 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 50Fig 21  Vancouver Aquarium section, 1985    Buchanan Dee, 2020 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .52Fig 22  Vancouver Aquarium section, 2001    Buchanan Dee, 2020 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .54Fig 23  Vancouver Aquarium section, 2020, existing    Buchanan Dee, 2020 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .56Fig 24  Vancouver Aquarium section, 2020, closure of the exhibit   Buchanan Dee, 2020 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .58Fig 25  Vancouver Aquarium section, 2021, void basin     Buchanan Dee, 2020 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 60Fig 26  Vancouver Aquarium section, 2021, renovation demolition   Buchanan Dee, 2020 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .62Fig 27  Vancouver Aquarium section, 2021, rainfall    Buchanan Dee, 2020 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .64Fig 28  Vancouver Aquarium section, proposed design, 2022   Buchanan Dee, 2020 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .66Fig 29  Perspective of former underwater observation gallery, proposed design, 2022 Buchanan Dee, 2020 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 68Fig 30  Perspective, proposed design, 2022    Buchanan Dee, 2020 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .70Fig 31  Proposed design integrated with hydrology and history. Isometric SW, 2021 Buchanan Dee, 2020 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .72Fig 32  Drawing of Xwáýxway (Whoi-Whoi) by August Jack Khatsahlano (1934), Conversations with Khatsahlano (1955: 24D) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .77Fig 33  Beach at Xwáýxway (1910),     City of Vancouver Archives: 2011-010.1790 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .79Fig 34  Plans for the construction of the seawall (1921)   City of Vancouver Archives: 49-C-5, file 2. Board of Parks and Recreation . . . . . . . . . . 81Fig 35  Seawall looking west towards former beach of Xwáýxway - photograph Buchanan Dee, 2020  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .82Fig 36  Section isometric, rock beach       Buchanan Dee, 2020 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .84Fig 37  Section isometric, rock wall infilling       Buchanan Dee, 2020 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .86Fig 38  Section isometric, clam gardening       Buchanan Dee, 2020 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 88Fig 39  Isometric NE, Xwáýxway  [illustration based on map by Khatsahlano (1934)] Buchanan Dee, 2020 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 90Fig 40  Section, Xwáýxway  midden over photograph    Buchanan Dee, 2020 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .92Fig 41  Colonial settlers mining the Xwáýxway midden (1888),    City of Vancouver Archives: SGN 91 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .94Fig 42  Gravel road covering remains of the Xwáýxway midden (1917),   City of Vancouver Archives: St Pk P139 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .95Fig 43  Midden road, 1888 - section isometric       Buchanan Dee, 2020 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .96Fig 44  Xwáýxway  Park - regional map     Buchanan Dee, 2020 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 98Fig 45  Seawall construction, 1921 - section isometric    Buchanan Dee, 2020 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .100Fig 46  Seawall beach erosion, 1921 - section isometric   Buchanan Dee, 2020 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .102Fig 47  Seawall reinforcement, 1970s - section isometric   Buchanan Dee, 2020 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .104Fig 48  Current condition, 2020 [based on Parks Board proposal] - section isometric Buchanan Dee, 2020 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .106Fig 49  Extent of seawall - regional map     viii ixBuchanan Dee, 2020 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .108Fig 50  Build Out strategy, 2021 [based on Parks Board proposal] - section isometric  Buchanan Dee, 2020 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 110Fig 51  Build Up strategy, 2120 [based on Parks Board proposal] - section isometric  Buchanan Dee, 2020 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 112Fig 52  Xwáýxway  Park - regional map     Buchanan Dee, 2020 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 114Fig 53  Current condition, 2020 [based on Parks Board proposal] - section isometric  Buchanan Dee, 2020 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 116Fig 54  Adaptive retreat, 2021, proposed design - section isometric   Buchanan Dee, 2020 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 118Fig 55  Clam garden terracing, 2120, proposed design - section isometric   Buchanan Dee, 2020 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .120Fig 56  Clam garden terracing, 2021, proposed design - isometric    Buchanan Dee, 2020 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 122Fig 57  Clam garden terracing, 2120, proposed design - section perspective   Buchanan Dee, 2020 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 124Fig 58  Glass sponge refuges - regional map     Buchanan Dee, 2020 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 131Fig 59  Fraser Ridge Reef with freighter traffic zone - plan    Buchanan Dee, 2020 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 132Fig 60  ROV visiting glass sponge reef in the Hecate Strait, 1987 - perspective Buchanan Dee, 2020 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .134Fig 61  Fraser Ridge Reef, Aphrocallistes vastus and Heterochone calyx - isometric Buchanan Dee, 2020 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .136Fig 62  Oil spill at Fraser Ridge Reef - isometric SW    Buchanan Dee, 2020 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .138Fig 63  Glacial till beneath Fraser Ridge Reef - section    Buchanan Dee, 2020 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .140Fig 64  Retired freighter positioned above marine sediments - section  Buchanan Dee, 2020 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 142Fig 65  Formation of artificial glass sponge reef - section   Buchanan Dee, 2020 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .144Fig 66  Artificial glass sponge reef - regional map    Buchanan Dee, 2020 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .146Fig 67  Artificial glass sponge reef - landscape section N-S   Buchanan Dee, 2020 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .148x xiI am grateful to my committee, family, and friends who listened, questioned, and motivated me throughout this project. Adam, for your thought-provoking discussions and your ongoing guidance. Fionn, for your critical thinking and representational expertise. Tijana, for your enthusiasm and insight on history, theory, and precedents. Jennifer, for your careful analysis and the perspective of an unsettled settler.  Special thanks to:Barbara BuchananHalley SveinsonEsther BogorovZoe PearceKaren TomkinsEmma Metcalfe-HurstAlicia KingdonMichelle Gagnon-CreeleyEmma DurhamAcknowledgments1My name is Brendan Buchanan Dee. I was born in Vancouver and grew up in the city, but it is not my ancestral home. I was raised in a multicultural family that immigrated to Vancouver. My father’s family moved here from the Philippines and are Filipino-Chinese. My mother’s side came from Iowa, descendants of German and Romanian Jews. Although I am not a direct descendant of colonial settlers of Vancouver, I am a settler in Canadian society. I have lived most of my life in the unceded territories of the Musqueam, Tsleil-Waututh, and Squamish First Nations whose land includes the city of Vancouver and UBC. Throughout this research project I have sought to learn more about the context in which my designs are located and reflect on my role as a designer in this place. In examining the history of Stanley Park the research intersected with the sociocultural and economic forces that not only threaten other species but also other cultures. This brought my attention to the colonial settlement of Vancouver and the erasure of Indigenous cultures and their built environments, a troubling history intertwined within the design of this city. I must acknowledge that direct engagement with the Squamish Nation was beyond the scope of the project and portrayals of Squamish history are based on secondary sources in text and drawing. The historical research and design speculation that follows is my attempt as a settler at learning from the Indigenous land management practices that have nurtured this place since time immemorial, seeking knowledge and ethics that might inform the future treatment of Vancouver’s built environment. Positionality and PlaceBackground2 3The Holocene Extinction is upon us—around the world, animal and plant species are dying out at an extraordinary rate, earning the designation of a mass extinction. The situation is dire as efforts to curtail climate change and habitat loss continue to fall far short of the action needed slow the rising extinction rate. In the expansion of our own habitat, the built environment, humans have transformed the planet according to our desires and ethics, wielding the power to both improve and destroy the places around us. The built environment is a record of our treatment of other species, a collective project shaped by ideologies, aesthetics, and economies. Architecture and landscape architecture are complicit in the phenomenon of extinction, responsible for normalizing designs and cultural ideals that have contributed to the decline of other species and cultures through captivity, habitat loss, and lack of representation.Extinction remains elusive as a subject of architectural inquiry, relegated to the periphery in a discipline with an anthropocentric worldview exceeding architectural notions of space, time, and stakeholders. Mass extinction shares the “representational dilemma” of climate change, a condition in which conventional images limit the ability to grasp the extent of the issue.1  1  Scott, Emily Eliza. “Archives of the Present-Future: On Climate Change and Representational Breakdown.” In Climates: Architecture and the Planetary Imaginary, 130–40. New York: Columbia Books on Architecture and the City, Lars Müller Publishers, 2016. https://www.averyreview.com/issues/16/archives-of-the-present-future.Extinction and ArchitectureEssaysRecords of DiversityNature and TechnologyDrawing GardensAuthenticity4 5AuthenticityThe conditions of captivity and display of animals in zoos and aquaria remains an ongoing architectural dilemma, shaped by advancements in finance, technology, and shifting baselines of the public opinion. Regent’s Park Zoo in London, the oldest zoological garden in the world, has experienced this phenomenon on multiple occasions with the design of exhibits lauded in their time only to later fall out of fashion. When it opened in 1828, the Regent’s Park Zoological Garden was considered revolutionary, the first institution devoted to the scientific observation of animals.1 By comparison, its predecessor, the menagerie, more closely resembled a cage, an instrument designed for constraint and recreational observation. Regent’s Park Zoo became the model among the zoological societies of 19th century Europe, sparking the construction of similar institutions throughout the continent and colonies.2 But the cost of scientific observation on top of operating costs for food, care, specialized equipment and maintenance proved to be too burdensome to retain for private use by Fellows of the Zoological Society of London and paid admission was introduced in 1847 to secure funding.3 This new source of revenue provided not only the resources needed to continue and expand operations but would introduce the factors of spectacle and public scrutiny that continue to shape the discourse.     In the late 19th century, zoos, menageries, and circuses were in competition with each other to draw crowds to see their exotic collections. Carl Hagenbeck Jr (1844-1913), a fishmonger turned animal merchant first exhibited his collection in a circus but it was his decision to add humans to his show that would forever change the aesthetics and ethics of display.4 To differentiate his show, he conceived of an exhibit for thirty reindeer that would be tended by Sami herders from Lapland.5 When it went on display in 1874 touring Hamburg, Berlin, and Leipzig, the show was barely profitable due to the winter weather but enough to be followed up by the display of people of Nubian, Sudanese, Inuit, and Sri Lankan ancestry among others.6 By today’s standards, Hagenbeck’s human zoos are an abomination, an extension of the colonial practice of displaying new subjects from conquered lands. Hagenbeck was aware of his image in the public eye and sought 1  Nigel Rothfels, Savages and Beasts: The Birth of the Modern Zoo (Johns Hopkins University Press, 2002), 31–31, http://muse.jhu.edu/book/3441.2  Rothfels, 31–32.3  “Happy Birthday to Zoo…,” Zoological Society of London (ZSL), accessed April 27, 2020, https://www.zsl.org/ zsl-london-zoo/news/happy-birthday-to-zoo.4  Rothfels, Savages and Beasts, 81.5  Rothfels, 81–82.6  Rothfels, 81–88.to differentiate his operation by claiming “the transparent lack of artifice characterizing his shows” without humans behind bars, where “cultures” as opposed to “savages” were on display.7 But it was his obsession with creating “authenticity” that really set him apart. He sought to recreate the places where the people in his shows came from, by showcasing foreign mannerisms, cuisine, clothing, technology, and dance among other cultural creations.8 He extended this attention to his animal exhibits, finding new ways to disguise enclosures and simulate natural habitats. But the pinnacle of Hagenbeck’s design would come much later with the inauguration of Tierpark Hagenbeck in 1907 outside of Hamburg. The design used moats and artificial landforms to separate animals from visitors, with enclosures dimensioned according to his animals’ ability to jump or swim. From certain vantage points the exhibits became visually connected creating the illusion of an exotic landscape, which he called the panoramic zoo. The notion of a cageless zoo heralded a new era in captive exhibit design, with the ambition to disguise the instruments of captivity—at least from the eyes of the observer. 7  Rothfels, 88.8  Rothfels, 89.6 7Records of DiversityThe Cabinet of Curiosity is an enduring archetype for the display of collections, maximizing the effect of diversity and abundance within limited space. Most natural history museums descend from this prototype, applying taxonomic classification to spatial organization and developing standards to preserve their large collections. This model safeguards biological specimens to be studied by future generations but does not capture the broader ways in which biodiversity and extinction affect our lives. The mass extinction crisis implores us to reinterpret historical typologies of collection and exhibition, but we must also forge new ways to engage with biodiversity both in and beyond context of the institution. The Beaty Biodiversity Museum (2005-2009) by Patkau Architects addresses the pedagogical, logistical, and scholarly needs of the University of British Columbia by synthesizing the display of natural history museum with specimen storage facilities and active research laboratories. In doing so, the building bridges public education with scientific inquiry and museological curation. The defining feature of the biodiversity museum is the display, storage, and study of dead flora and fauna—a subject that is simultaneously beautiful and macabre. The architects’ sensitivity to the deceased collections is evident in the building’s tectonics, materiality, and organization. The building is distinguished from its site context by its low, horizontal profile forming the western wing of the Aquatics Ecosystems Research Laboratory quadrangle, an enclosed space removed from the rush of Main Mall. The building is transparent, the façade wrapped in glass suspended between slender columns. From Main Mall, one peers down at the museum’s “glass lantern” wherein the skeleton of a blue whale levitates between the surface and the subterranean. The building’s form is subdued and minimal— the architecture retreating so that the collection is not overshadowed. Upon entry one descends into a sunken atrium encased in polished concrete and flooded with natural light. Here the neutral, solemn material selection and exaggerated circulation create a sense of gravitas. Passing into the collection, one experiences vertical compression while the atrium’s void is replaced with dense stacks and dim lighting expressing the extension into the Earth. The collections are positioned in monolithic rows that integrate storage with displays and circulation voids. The uniformity of the collection storage flattens the hierarchy of species that humans project onto nature. Beetles and mosses receive equal treatment to fish, birds, and mammals.fig 1.    View through Beaty Biodiversity Museum to AERL quadrangle - photograph Buchanan Dee, 2020The mass extinction is a race against time posing new challenges in collecting and recording Earth’s biodiversity, compelling designers to consider new ways to construct spaces that might help us grasp the crisis. Design has the profound capacity to create spaces that provoke a sense of mourning, contemplation, and connection. The Mass Extinction Memorial Observatory (MEMO) project designed by David Adjaye, seeks to memorialize 860 animal species that have gone extinct since the dodo.9 The building is situated on the cliffs of Portland, UK with a spiralling form referencing a snail species whose fossils are abundance in the nearby Bower’s Quarry.10 The circulation and a central aperture for sunlight creates a contemplative experience reminiscent of Frank Lloyd Wright’s Guggenheim Museum, but instead of artwork visitors encounter reliefs of the extinct species carved into the walls. Adjaye’s design for the memorial to biodiversity presents a way through which architecture can use tectonics, materiality, and site to evoke a symbolic space for mourning the loss of other species.   The phenomenon of extinction contains a series of nested predicaments. Species are distributed unevenly around the world in time and space, as are the threats to their continued existence. Artist Michael Wang calls attention to the realities of captive populations and local extinction in the exhibits, Extinct in the Wild (2017) and Extinct in New York (2019). Human preferences for certain species have produced situations where species no longer exist in their native habitat, but populations remain in captivity. This might occur with efforts to preserve species facing imminent habitat loss, the development of captive breeding program, or popularity within the pet trade. Wang staged an exhibition featuring species that are close to or already in this situation, some of which might be found in your local pet store.11 Extinct in the New York presents another condition, that of local extinction, a notion more related to human perceptions of territorial boundaries. For this exhibit, Wang reviewed the historical journals and datasets of naturalists who recorded species within the boroughs of New York City that do not exist there today. He then collected these species from further afield and brought them back together for the exhibition, recreating a historical ecology. These live exhibits draw attention to the unique spatial and temporal processes unfolding within the broader extinction crisis that transcend typical notions of habitat.  9   staff Adjaye Associates, “MEMO Project,” Adjaye Associates, 2013, https://www.adjaye.com/projects/civic-buildings/mass-extinction-monitoring-observatory-memo/.10 Adjaye Associates.11  Michael Wang, “Extinct in the Wild,” 2017, https://michaelwang.info/Extinct-in-the-Wild.8 9fig 2.    Storage cabinets at the Beaty Biodiversity Museum - photograph  Buchanan Dee, 2020 By engaging our other senses, we might better understand how to record aspects of biodiversity that cannot be derived through the collection of specimens. Forgotten Songs (2009) is an installation by artist Michael Thomas Hill hanging above a laneway in Sydney’s Central Business District. The cages commemorate fifty bird species that lived in the region prior to British colonization, linking Australia precolonial ecology to present.12 Speakers within the cages play recordings of these species with bird calls changing throughout the day. These calls correspond to the diurnal and nocturnal rhythms of the species adding a daily ritual to the experience. Biodiversity is a phenomenon that greater than physical traits of evolution, as we are experiencing the loss of rich, multi-sensorial ways in which plants and animals interact with the world. Architecture and landscape architecture must recognize an inherent bias for visual media but also the opportunity that lies in experimenting with our other senses to design meaningful spaces and experiences to respond to the mass extinction crisis.     12   Michael Thomas Hill, Forgotten Songs, 2009, Installation, 2009, https://www.cityartsydney.com.au/artwork/forgotten-songs/.10 11Nature and TechnologyNew kinds of problems—like climate change, for instance—pose special challenges insofar as they bring together the large and the small, the near and the far, the fast and the slow, the weak and the strong, making a mess of existing scalar conventions�13 Rania Ghosn & El Hadi Jazairy examine the typology of the aquarium in the essay, Leviathan in the Aquarium. They attest that “within such a complex web of environmental relationships between facts, uncertainties, emotions, and actions, the aquarium brings remote scales, uncertain futures, or intangible science concepts, such as climate change, to the personal realm.”14 To engage the world in such a way, through selective reduction and amplification is to construct a representation of a larger concept. Stan Allen’s describes a similar process in his writings on diagrams, explaining that “a diagram is a graphic assemblage that specifies relationships between activity and form, organizing the structure and distribution of functions” which he describes as “architecture’s best means to engage the complexity of the real.”15 According to Allen, diagrams are interdisciplinary, as “the diagram does not point towards architecture’s internal history as a discipline, but rather turns outward, signaling possible relations of matter and information.”16 Employing Donna Haraway’s process of ‘worlding’, Ghosn & Jazairy consider this conceptual model of aquarium to be a space for “actively reimagining a nonanthropocentric world.”17 Ghosn & Jazairy submit that the “the purpose of worlding is not to predict the future, let alone to fix it, but to raise questions on the present relations between humans and the world they inhabit.”18 From this perspective, the design of an aquarium is a provocation intended to produce meaningful reflection and discourse on humans and oceans.  This critical agenda has been pursued in the work of Cristina Díaz Moreno and Efren Garcia Grinda of amid.cero9 who operate at the intersection of architecture, nature, and culture. Their speculative project, Carboniferous Forest, is a response to what they regard as the architectural stagnation of greenhouses and interpretation centres which they lament for their 13  Adrian Lahoud, “Scale as Problem, Architecture as Trap,” in Climates: Architecture and the Planetary Imaginary (Zurich: Lars Müller Publishers, 2016), 111–18.14  Rania Ghosn and El Hadi Jazairy, “Leviathan in the Aquarium,” Journal of Architectural Education 71, no. 2 (2017): 273, https://doi.org/10.1080/10464883.2017.1340777.15  Stan Allen, “Diagrams Matter,” ANY: Architecture New York 23 (1998): 17.16  Stan Allen, 17.17  Rania Ghosn and El Hadi Jazairy, “Leviathan in the Aquarium,” 274.18  Rania Ghosn and El Hadi Jazairy, 274.“heavy handed didacticism and kitsch theming of nature.”19 Their work demonstrates a parametric approach to design, driven by a cosmopolitical worldview which has produced architectural works that appear to come from other realms—a seemingly appropriate fit for a greenhouse designed to showcase species that evolved during the Carboniferous, 359 to 299 millions years ago. Their concept seeks “assembly of living species and visitors that would generate an ecosystem in appreciation of the indoor climate, substrate and topography… The architecture here is based not on an imitation of nature, but on self-generated systems that produce a configuration whose geometry and appearance are consistent with the species contained.”20 The detail of their drawings achieves a level of complexity and exactness beholding algorithmic marvel but visitor engagement with these prehistoric plants remains conventional. Circulation confined to narrow routes hugging the perimeter of the structure and a winding path through the forest to a water feature grotto. Although beautifully crafted, the Carboniferous Forest demonstrates the use of visual rhetoric to uphold a technocratic worldview that continues to frame captive enclosure as a technological problem rather than an ethical dilemma.  Technology has been synonymous with greenhouse design throughout its history, pushing limits of spans, surfaces, and facades. By comparison to its contemporaries, the Masoala Rain Forest Hall (2013) at Zurich Zoo resembles an inflatable tennis court covering. Closer inspection reveals a finely detailed structure encompassing a rain forest habitat from northeastern Madagascar, enhancing one’s awareness of the technological and the natural. But the geometry of this architectural structure is not what that makes this exhibit so innovative, to see that one must examine the forest. Seeing animals in the wild has no replacement, but this exhibit begins to simulate that experience. But the designer of the exhibit, Gunther Vogt, did not seek to replicate what exists in Madagascar. Rather, he designed an amplified reality. Under the dome, life occurs in such densities and diversities that would not occur in the wild—although the inhabitants remain elusive, often keeping to the treetops. A large portion of the habitat lies beyond the visitor’s pathway, providing animals with places of retreat from human interaction, a design which gives them a degree of agency in how seen they wish to be, a feeling we might equate to our right to privacy. They do, however, venture within range of the public path to visit one of the feeding posts. What’s curious though, is that this typology of captive exhibition does not guarantee a sighting of a red ruffed lemur. The cost of admission in this 19   Cristina Díaz Moreno and Efrén Garcia Grinda, “Carbonipherous Forest,” amid.cero9 Project Description, 2011, http://www.cero9.com/project/carbonipherous-forest/.20  Cristina Díaz Moreno and Efrén Garcia Grinda.12 13paradigm incorporates an element of chance. Animals that are not under constant watch are less stressed and typically healthier, impacting their lives and behaviour.21 Additionally, this recreates the element of surprise which makes seeing wild animals a thrilling and memorable experience. Each visit becomes a roll of the dice, the chance to see something you didn’t see last time. One can speculate as to the economics of the design, though I suspect that this model could increases sale of memberships.The illusion of nature is achieved not through mimicry of nature but adaptation to context. Vogt describes that his vision for the Masoala Rain Forest Hall is an abstraction of Madagascar, crafted to a predominantly European audience whose cultural perception of a beautiful forest remains fixed on the medieval forest:It’s not really a rainforest� It’s a trick� So just to translate this beautiful rainforest in Madagascar, it’s quite boring if you walk there� There’s nothing growing on ground� It’s because there is no light� So, we translated it into a European understanding of a so-called beautiful forest�22Working with species selection, arrangement, and scheduled care, Vogt has exaggerated the Masoala that exists in Madagascar, concentrating what would be found in a much greater range, composing densities, varieties, and species to appeal to a visitor. In doing so, Masoala places emphasis on the exhibition of an ecosystem rather than species. This depiction of nature encapsulates a broader ecological awareness that counters human preference for the species we deem more exotic, intelligent, or beautiful. This model might be framed as a response to the selection bias of captive species which disproportionately favour charismatic megafauna such as pandas and the big cats.23 This design literally and metaphorically captures the idea of an ecosystem as an interconnected entity, pointing to a typological shift in zoo design away from the single species exhibit. Captive exhibits are complicated, controversial, and interdisciplinary designs at the intersection of architecture, science, and ethics. They are microcosms of non-uniform transformation embedded with imperfect artifacts of abstraction, addition and erasure. Zoos, aquaria, and greenhouses are 21  Eduardo J. Fernandez et al., “Animal–Visitor Interactions in the Modern Zoo: Conflicts and Interventions,” Applied Animal Behaviour Science 120, no. 1–2 (August 2009): 3, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.applanim.2009.06.002.22  Gunther Vogt, Traveling Landscapes, 2020, https://www.gsd.harvard.edu/2020/03/exhibition-preview-first-the-forests-on-view-through-march-15-in-the-druker-design-gallery/.23  Cornelius Holtorf, “The Zoo as a Realm of Memory,” Anthropological Journal of European Cultures 22 (March 1, 2013): 107, https://doi.org/10.3167/ajec.2013.220107.designed to house and exhibit other species but serve as architectural records of societal relationships to nature, displaying technological, environmental, and ethical knowledge. Changes in public opinion are manifested in typology and detail, jointly impacting the experience of captive species and human observers. The value of the zoo, aquarium, and greenhouse does not reside in their replication of nature, rather, it is their ability to amplify phenomena such as diversity, complexity, and activity that occur at scales of time and space that are beyond normal human perception. 14 15Drawing GardensThere is a certain defining scale that makes a structure a building� This, I suspect, is considerably reducing the potential of architecture� How can the potential of architecture be expanded? Seamless gradations can be found among the various scales that spaces have� For instance, we can detect extremely delicate gradations within nature� The world of quanta and atoms, a world inhabited by very small creatures and bugs, the world we live in, the world we can only talk about in a global scale� Between all of these exist infinite worlds, composed of seamless serial gradations of all scales�24Junya Ishigami challenges the disciplinary boundaries of architecture by drawing plants. The fine linework of his architecture often fades to the background as people, plants, animals, and objects populate a kawaii universe. In his drawings of the Row House, plants are drawn with simple linework at an ambiguous scale, at which the rough shape of leaves and their arrangements are shown but details such as leaf margins, venation, and thorns are not. There is a sense of disproportion between the image and reality that combines with shakiness in the linework that instills hesitation and naïvety in the drawing.25 By drawing in a reality reminiscent of childhood fantasy, Ishigami’s designs are unburdened by convention and measurement. He defies the use of absolute scales between the drawings and the objects they represent, ambiguity that obscures the exactness of the scene. These drawings exemplify the use of association, scale, and gradient between objects used to construct an image of diversity and complexity.The gradation of scales in nature described by Ishigami find parallel in the theories developed by Jakob von Uexküll. Uexküll conceived of the concept of umgebung (surroundings) and umwelt (environment), a unique relationship between a species and the physical world determined by their anatomical sensing of their surroundings.26 According to Uexküll, the way humans see and interpret space are fundamentally different from that of other species, based on the interactions between our bodies and environment. Uexküll’s illustrated the umgebung and umwelt of a honeybee to portray his theory, with umwelt emphasizing the instrumental view of the world specific to what 24  Junya Ishigami, Small Images, Contemporary Architect’s Concept Series 2 (LIXIL Publishing, 2008), 119.25  Olivier Meystre, Pictures of the Floating Microcosm: New Representations of Japanese Architecture (Zurich: Park Books AG, 2017), 142.26   Jakob von Uexküll, A Foray into the Worlds of Animals and Humans with a Theory of Meaning, trans. Joseph D. O’Neil (Minniapolis: Minnesota University Press, 2010).the bee would find useful in its environment.27 Lola Sheppard expands on Uexküll’s worldview, positing that his notion “of environments as webs of overlapping rather than isolated bubbles” disputes both role and scale of architecture in the production of environment.28 The plants and household items scattered throughout the Row House invite a similar reading of space, one defined by association of objects forming constellations of use in the observer’s mind. In writing about his drawings, Ishigami aspires to “conceive architecture on another plane altogether… laying down an infinite gradation of scales and creating a most ambiguous, indefinite gathering of spaces that emerge both as part and as entire form of that gradation.29 These gradations of space are expressed through the implied boundaries and relationships that emerge between plants, objects, and architecture. Ishigami supposes that by disrupting “bordering conditions for that scale that makes a structure, architecture could be made much more permissive.”30 Upon re-inspection, Ishigami’s representation of plants becomes an instrument of architectural provocation.Sheppard points to the work of Gilles Clément in bringing about earlier rebellion using plants to challenge landscape architecture’s fixed aesthetics.31 Clément’s extensive botanical knowledge informed his practice and theories, including the concept of the Garden of Movement. The philosophical design calls for a garden to emerge through little to no intervention by the gardener who yields to “species that settle there in an autonomous way.”32 Sheppard reminds us that Clément’s gardens were controversial when introduced in the mid-1980s as they severed aesthetic outcomes from the designer’s intent.33 Stan Allen’s traces the origin of a similar concept to Postwar American art with experiments in chance, contingency, and entropy among postminimalism artists.34 What distinguishes Clément from these earlier artworks is the direct application of this concept to living material, letting biology and ecology interact as agents of randomness. At the core of Clément’s philosophy was the movement of plants that separates them from mere objects, stating that “[t]o ignore this movement means seeing the plant as a finite object, and it also means historically and biologically isolating it from the context that permits its 27  Lola Sheppard, “Environment-Webs,” in Bracket—at Extremes—Almanac 3 (Barcelona: Actar, 2015), 48.28  Lola Sheppard, 48.29  Junya Ishigami, Small Images, 119.30  Junya Ishigami, 119.31   Lola Sheppard, “Environment-Webs,” 49.32   Alessandro Rocca, ed., Planetary Gardens - The Landscape Architecture of Gilles Clément (Milan: Birkhäuser, 2007), 13.33  Lola Sheppard, “Environment-Webs,” 119.34  Stan Allen, “Field Conditions,” Architectural Design 66 (1996).16 17people are actively engaged in the maintaining the aesthetic of the garden. In contrast to the Garden of Movement, the aesthetics of Oudolf’s gardens depend on regular human intervention, fostering new connections to plants and community through collective maintenance.   In the context of the Anthropocene and the mass extinction crisis, we must reflect on the images of diversity and nature that we are absorbing and creating. Plants and animals within architectural and landscape images communicate complex ideas about the relationship between humans, culture, and nature. Gardens are territories that embody these diverse aesthetic and ethical traditions and will remain controversial by nature of their cultural, pedagogical, and technological differences. We must be cognizant of the values and philosophies expressed in gardens and architecture however subtle they might seem.existence.”35 At the heart of Clément’s philosophy was the acknowledgement that plants are living beings that expand and contract with seasonal change and competition, movements that should invited to create  the garden. The Garden of Movement is shaped by the will of the plants, generating new spaces and circulations for visitors. Clément writes that “where you could pass yesterday, today the way is blocked, while another passage has opened up in a place that used to be impenetrable.”36 Clément’s philosophy appeals to one’s biophilic sensitivities, welcoming nature back into the garden. But this vision of nature is not without cultural bias. The Garden of Movement encapsulates a concept of a nature in which humans are external, a notion deeply rooted in European mythology and theology.37 Human intervention becomes an act of disturbance, interfering with the forces of untouched nature. This philosophy is more radically expressed in Clément’s design for Derborence Island, an artificial outcrop rising seven metres above the ground, purposefully made inaccessible to the public.38 Set within Parc Henri Matisse in Lille, France, the separation between nature and humanity is intensified between Deborence Island and its urban context. The separation of humanity from nature has been used repeatedly throughout history to displace and erase Indigenous people and culture from the land. The Garden of Movement does not share the territorial aspirations, but it privileges a reading of nature as separate from humans.Piet Oudolf’s work represents another direction in the aesthetics of the plants and the garden. These living paintings of herbaceous perennials take on the appearance of an unusually abundant meadow. Oudolf uses matrix planting in designing planting beds, building up diversity and complexity in layers in space and time that are revealed through seasonal change. The highly scripted compositions require ongoing ‘edits’ to maintain their aesthetic. The selective preservation of dead plant material such as ornamental stalks and seed pods have become a signature of Oudolf’s designs, capturing the passage of time and the cycle of life and death. Maintaining the aesthetic of the High Line, a collaboration with James Corner Field Operations and Diller Scofidio + Renfro, depends on a full-time crew of eleven horticulturalist and gardeners alongside volunteers from the Friends of the High Line.39 Although Oudolf’s bespoke gardens lie far beyond the resources of most communities, they illustrate a model in which 35  Rocca, Planetary Gardens - The Landscape Architecture of Gilles Clément, 49.36  Rocca, 219.37  Rob Aben and Saskia de Wit, The Enclosed Garden (Rotterdam: 010 Publishers, 1999), 22–28.38  Rocca, Planetary Gardens - The Landscape Architecture of Gilles Clément, 122.39  ASLA staff, “Spring Cutback: A Model for Maintenance,” The Field (blog), April 23, 2015, https://thefield.asla.org/2015/04/23/spring-cutback-a-model-for-maintenance/.18 1920 21Vancouver AquariumXwáýxway ParkGlass Sponge ReefDesign Before Extinction197022 23fig 3.    Rufe Gibbs Hall (circa 1960)     City of Vancouver Archives: CVA 1435-574fig 4.    Guest map (1980), Vancouver Aquarium, Les Zoos dans le Monde  dashed: alteration by author197024 25fig 5.    Skana and the construction site (1970)      City of Vancouver Archives: 134-170fig 6.    Guest map (1980), Vancouver Aquarium, Les Zoos dans le Monde  dashed: alteration by author26 27fig 7.    Ampitheatre with killer whale show (1986)    Jewish Museum and Archives of BC: L.11690fig 8.    Guest map (1980), Vancouver Aquarium, Les Zoos dans le Monde  dashed: alteration by author198028 29fig 9.    Guest map (1985), Vancouver Aquarium, Les Zoos dans le Monde  dashed: alteration by author198530 31Cetaceans in CaptivityThe initiative behind the creation of the Vancouver Aquarium began in 1950 with the formation of the Vancouver Public Aquarium Association.40 Construction broke ground in Stanley Park and the facility opened to the public on June 15, 1956, becoming the first in public aquarium in Canada.41 Among the hundreds of species represented by the aquarium today, the most controversial of its residents were the cetaceans, the group of marine mammals including whales, dolphins, and porpoises. The Vancouver Aquarium has been shaped by its relationship with these animals, manifested in the architecture of observation and captivity. The Vancouver Aquarium gained international attention when it became the first aquarium to capture and sustain the display an orca in 1964. Moby Doll was harpooned off Saturna Island and kept in a makeshift enclosure at the Burrard Drydocks.42 The spectacle drew enormous crowds to see the mysterious and ferocious ‘killer whale’. Moby Doll was a sensation, but little was known about the diet and care of orcas and Moby Doll only survived for three months.43 The short-lived display was considered enough of a success for the Vancouver Aquarium to finance the sourcing of another orca. Skana, an orca from the resident K-pod was captured in February 1967, followed by Natsidalia and Hyak 2 in April 1968.44 Skana was first kept in the BC Tel marine mammal pool while Natsidalia passed away in November 1968 before being transferred out of the harbour.45 The orca exhibit drew major crowds to the Vancouver Aquarium and the display of beluga, narwhals, dolphins, and porpoises followed.The BC Tel pool volume sustained a juvenile orca, but the animal’s growth and need for companionship required more space. This led to the construction of a purpose-built orca enclosure consisting of a large pool, 7m-deep, accompanied by an amphitheatre and underwater viewing gallery.46 In this setting visitors were treated to performances that demonstrated the agility and intelligence of orcas. In due time, the space 40  “Vancouver Public Aquarium Association - City of Vancouver Archives,” accessed May 1, 2020, https:// searcharchives.vancouver.ca/vancouver-public-aquarium-association.41  Vancouver Aquarium staff, “The History of Canada’s Largest Aquarium,” Vancouver Aquarium, 2020, https://www.vanaqua.org/about.42  Jason M. Colby, Orca: How We Came to Know and Love the Ocean’s Greatest Predator (Oxford University Press, 2018), 66.43 Colby, 66.44 Colby, 114.45 Colby, 138.46  Jean Sorensen, “Vancouver’s Aquarium,” Canadian Consulting Engineer (blog), 2007, https://www.canadianconsultingengineer.com/features/vancouver-s-aquarium/.fig 10.    Moby Doll at the Jericho Beach pen (1964)    BC Lookbook: #26 Moby Doll revisited32 33was considered too small for its inhabitants, necessitating the expansion of the exhibit to its current size of 1-million US gallons.47 But beyond the spatial requirements of the orcas, the aquarium began facing pressure as perception of the animals was changing. They were no longer seen as killers but were found to be highly social animals that live in families like our own.  The ethics of capture, display, and education have been with interwoven with the institution since the beginning. The facilities and programming have undergone a series of transformations to accommodate the shifting baselines in the ethics of captivity. In 1967, Vancouver Aquarium became the first facility displaying live animals to hire full-time professional naturalists that bolstered the aquarium’s reputation for educational and scientific pursuits.48 In 1975, the American Zoo and Aquarium Association accredited the Vancouver Aquarium, becoming the first aquarium to meet the AZA inspection requirements for animal welfare and commitment to global conservation.49 Despite improvements the facilities, the public’s attitude towards the exhibition of cetaceans shifted over time. The program of the aquarium responded to this ethical shift by changing their focus from performance to conservation. The Vancouver Parks Board, the owner of the property on which the Vancouver Aquarium is built, passed a bylaw in 1996 that barred the aquarium from capturing wild cetaceans for display.50 Captive breeding through partner institutions became the long-term goal for continued display without wild-caught animals. The birth of orca and beluga calves were widely celebrated but were soon followed by premature deaths that eroded public support. In response, the aquarium decided to end the display of orcas. In doing so, the Vancouver Aquarium was among the earlier institutions to phase out the captivity of orcas, though it continued to display smaller cetaceans including dolphins, belugas, and porpoises. The last orca at the Vancouver Aquarium was Bjossa, who had lived there since 1980.51 She was transferred to the Sea World San Diego in 2000, but soon passed away in 2001.52 After Bjossa departed in 2001, the orca habitat was transformed. 47  Sorensen.48  Chuck Davis, The Chuck Davis History of Metropolitan Vancouver (Madeira Park: Harbour Publishing Co. Ltd, 2011), 333.49  staff, “About Us.”50   Kendra Mangione, “Protest at Vancouver Aquarium Ahead of Park Board Vote on Whale Ban,” British Columbia, May 10, 2017, https://bc.ctvnews.ca/protest-at-vancouver-aquarium-ahead-of-park-board-vote-on-whale-ban-1.3408082.51   CBC, “BC Aquarium Closing Killer Whale Exhibit,” CBC News, April 28, 2000, https://www.cbc.ca/news/ technology/b-c-aquarium-closing-killer-whale-exhibit-1.228137.52  “Staff Pays Tribute to Bjossa,” accessed May 1, 2020, https://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/national/staff-pays-tribute-to-bjossa/article18418856/.fig 11.    Orca lifted by sling into the Vancouver Aquarium (1970)   City of Vancouver Archives: CVA 134-009The amphitheatre was built over and replaced with a wooden walkway and the surrounded area was given a naturalistic appearance with plantings and faux sandstone. In the early 21st century, the debate surrounding cetaceans in captivity became mainstream. The documentary, Blackfish, spotlighted the controversy and politicians began weighing in on the matter. Additional deaths of juvenile belugas and dolphins led to the Vancouver Parks Board commissioners banning the Vancouver Aquarium’s cetacean breeding programs altogether in 2014.53 By this time, the dilemma of cetaceans in captivity expanded beyond Vancouver. In 2019, Bill S-203, the Ending the Captivity of Whales and Dolphins Act, passed in the Parliament of Canada, ending the legal captivity and breeding of cetaceans for commercial purposes.54 Today, the aquarium is left with one cetacean, a rescue dolphin named Helen.Until the arrival of the Covid-19 pandemic, the Vancouver Aquarium remained one of the most popular attractions in the city. But in March of this year, the aquarium was forced to close to the public for the first time in its history. Cut off from visitor revenue, the aquarium was facing bankruptcy after a few weeks. The aquarium is the product of a positive feedback loop based around our attraction to charismatic megafauna: popularity funds expansion, expansion attracts more visitors. Over the years, the aquarium has grown into an economic engine for its parent company, OceanWise, funding its research, rescue, and outreach endeavours but with the closure this funding model has collapsed. 53  Michelle Ghoussoub · CBC News · Posted: May 18, 2019 1:34 PM PT | Last Updated: May 19, and 2019, “Vancouver Aquarium Sues City, Park Board over Cetacean Ban | CBC News,” CBC, May 18, 2019, https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/british-columbia/vancouver-aquarium-sues-city-park-board-over-cetacean-ban-1.5141737.54   Wilfred P. Moore, “An Act to Amend the Criminal Code and Other Acts (Ending the Captivity of Whales and Dolphins),” S-203 § (2019), https://www.parl.ca/legisinfo/BillDetails.aspx?Language=E&billId=8063284.34 35fig 12.    Entrance to the Vancouver Aquarium - site visit (Sept 2, 2020)  Buchanan Dee, 2020   EXITENTERVisitor Map  We’ve missed you!Guests have up to 1.5 hours to follow a one-way flow through 86 indoor and outdoor exhibits on the Vancouver Aquarium’s main level. Food and beverage is available at our Upstream Café in the Aquarium or on the lower plaza outside, at the Ocean Wise Café. The Gift Shop has access from the Bill Reid Plaza only.#vanaqua@vanaquaAVAILABLE SERVICES• Adult-Change Table• Gender Neutral Washrooms• Free Wi-Fi Family WashroomWashroomFood & BeverageLEGENDAn attempt was made over the summer to reopen with a one-way route, but the scheme was not profitable enough to sustain public operations. The aquarium closed again on September 7th and remains closed to this day. A notice on aquarium’s website informs visitors that the institution is using the time to focus on its transformation, leaving one to speculate about the future of the aquarium. At the Vancouver Aquarium, the historic enclosure at the centre of the politics of captivity and the display of biodiversity is transformed once again. Under economic and ethical pressures, the artificial enclosure is no longer financially viable and is decommissioned. Without animals on display the design ceases to function as a viewing device and emptiness becomes its defining feature. As the water level is lowered the underwater gallery is exposed revealing the former space of the face-to-face encounter. The space that once enabled the gaze becomes a place of contemplation where a transparent boundary once separated human and nonhuman.36 37fig 13.    Visitor map during the Covid-19 pandemic (2020)   Vancouver Aquarium, 2020: https://www.vanaqua.org/application/files/4915/9561/4516/Opening_Map-July23.pdffig 14.    Orca perspective from interior of habitat    Buchanan Dee, 202038 39At the Vancouver Aquarium, the historic enclosure at the centre of the politics of captivity and the display of biodiversity is transformed once again. Under economic and ethical pressures, the artificial enclosure is no longer financially viable and is decommissioned. Without animals on display the design ceases to function as a viewing device and emptiness becomes its defining feature. As the water level is lowered the underwater gallery is exposed revealing the former space of the face-to-face encounter. The space that once enabled the gaze becomes a place of contemplation where a transparent boundary once separated human and nonhuman.fig 15.    Underwater observation gallery     Buchanan Dee, 202040 41fig 16.    Underwater observation gallery, captive breeding program   Buchanan Dee, 202042 43fig 17.    Underwater observation gallery, dolphins and porpoises post-2001  Buchanan Dee, 202044 45Stanley Park Zoo1888-1996BC Hydro Salmon Stream1998Vancouver Aquarium1956fig 18.    Landscape section from Burrard Inlet to Coal Harbour   Buchanan Dee, 2020Coal Harbour8,208,000L per day95L/sBurrard Inlet46 47Mechanical systems were overhauled too. Freshwater recovered from the filtration process was directed to an artificial salmon stream flowing into Coal Harbour. fig 19.    Vancouver Aquarium section, 1970     Buchanan Dee, 2020197048 49Since the arrival of the Skana, the Vancouver Aquarium has undergone significant renovation to accommodate the ethical response of the public.01510mfig 20.    Vancouver Aquarium section, 1980     Buchanan Dee, 2020198050 51The era of performance and spectacle was orchastrated by the amphitheatre.01510mfig 21.    Vancouver Aquarium section, 1985  Buchanan Dee, 2020198552 53The expansion of the habitat gave the impression that space was the limiting factor. After Bjossa departed in 2001, the orca habitat was transformed. 01510mfig 22.    Vancouver Aquarium section, 2001  Buchanan Dee, 2020200154 55The amphitheatre was built over and replaced with a wooden walkway and the surrounded area was given a naturalistic appearance with plantings and faux sandstone. 01510mfig 23.    Vancouver Aquarium section, 2020, existing    Buchanan Dee, 2020202056 5701510mfig 24.    Vancouver Aquarium section, 2020, closure of the exhibit   Buchanan Dee, 2020202158 59Facing imminent closure, the Vancouver Aquarium closes its largest exhibit, the former orca habitat. Helen is transferred to an open water sanctuary for marine mammals unfit for release. 01510mfig 25.    Vancouver Aquarium section, 2021, void basin     Buchanan Dee, 2020202160 61The pump supplying water from Burrard Inlet is shut off and seawater is drained out of the pool revealing the immense volume. Without a cetacean at its centre, our gaze is drawn to the void. 01510mfig 26.    Vancouver Aquarium section, 2021, renovation demolition   Buchanan Dee, 2020202162 63The  sandstone walls are demolished, and the rubble is pushed in.01510mfig 27.    Vancouver Aquarium section, 2021, rainfall    Buchanan Dee, 2020202164 65Over the course of the year, rainwater and runoff begins to fill the basin.01510mfig 28.    Vancouver Aquarium section, proposed design, 2022   Buchanan Dee, 2020202266 67The acrylic windows that once separated human and orca are removed. Water now laps at the edges of the frames.01510mfig 29.    Perspective of former underwater observation gallery, proposed design, 2022 Buchanan Dee, 202068 69The acrylic windows that once separated human and orca are removed. Water now laps at the edges of the frames. Animals from around the park are drawn to the new lake where they come and go as they please.fig 30.    Perspective, proposed design, 2022     Buchanan Dee, 202070 71The underwater gallery is sealed off from aquarium and a new passageway is cut through the concrete permitting the public to enter from outside.fig 31.    Proposed design integrated with hydrology and history. Isometric SW, 2021 Buchanan Dee, 202072 73The lake rejoins the watershed, returning to the hydrology of the park. Vancouver AquariumXwáýxway ParkGlass Sponge ReefDesign Before Extinctionfig 32.    Drawing of Xwáýxway (Whoi-Whoi) by August Jack Khatsahlano (1934), Conversations with Khatsahlano (1955: 24D)76 77Seawalls and CultureThe Squamish have lived off the land and sea in the place now settled as Vancouver since time immemorial. One of their largest villages existed on the northern shore of what is now Stanley Park, a place known as Xwayxway.55 Despite the myth of pristine wilderness that remains to this day, Stanley Park was a culturally modified environment that was transformed by the Squamish over millennia. At Xwayxway the community harvested clams from beach at low tide, with the best clams collected in winter “when the long run out of the tide took the water away out and they got their clams out in the deep part of the beach right where the Lumberman’s Arch is.”56  This harvest was created through clam gardens and midden building that cycled nutrients between land and sea.57 Where the ocean receded to at low tide, rocks were piled into retaining walls that stretched along the coast.58 With the cycle of the tides, sediment was trapped behind the wall, modifying the slope of the beach to an optimal angle for clam growth.59 The abundance of shellfish created an abundance of shells that were taken to the forest and distributed in great mounds called middens. This enriched the soil encouraging the growth of cedar trees and runoff from the midden stimulated clam development.60 The midden was deeply connected to culture and midden burials were also practiced.61 Through the creation of clam gardens and middens, the Squamish established an ecological management system guided by reciprocity between living beings that allowed them to prosper in Xwayxway for at least three thousand years. The colonial settlers acquired the land for Stanley Park from the government in 1887 and were quick to displace the Squamish. By this time, the midden of Xwayxway had amassed to four acres in size to a depth of 2-metres.62 The colonial settlers did not see the cultural significance of the midden nor the 55  Sean Kheraj, Inventing Stanley Park: An Environmental History (Vancouver, CANADA: UBC Press, 2013), 24, http://ebookcentral.proquest.com/lib/ubc/detail.action?docID=3412848.56 James Skitt Matthews, “Conversations with Khahtsahlano, 1932-1954,” n.d., 271.57 Matthews, 293.58  Darcy L. Mathews and Nancy J. Turner, “Ocean Cultures,” in Conservation for the Anthropocene Ocean (Elsevier, 2017), 169–206, https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-12-805375-1.00009-X.59  Kees Lokman and Karen Tomkins, “Clam Gardens: An Alternative Approach to Coastal Adaptation,” Journal of Architectural Education 74, no. 1 (January 2, 2020): 129–32, https://doi.org/10.1080/10464883.2020.1693840.60  Mathews and Turner, “Ocean Cultures,” 189.61   Jean Barman, Stanley Park’s Secret: The Forgotten Families of Whoi Whoim Kanaka Ranch and Broughton Point (Madeira Park: Harbour Publishing, 2005), 21.62  Barman, 21.ecological benefits of the cultural practice; they regarded it as a ‘garbage dump’, a moniker that remains to this day on the sole plaque on the former village site. The settlers mined the midden, crushing up the shells, bones, and artifacts within and used the remnants to pave a road for the new park.63 The colonial road was established through the destruction of Indigenous culture, a tabula rasa so that Stanley Park could open the following year in 1888.64 According to an 1891 report, “three miles [were] graveled... the material being clam-shells, which packed closely present a remarkable white appearance, adding greatly to the attractiveness of the park.”65 The effect, however, would not last long as the white road was obscured by mud and covered with gravel the following year.66  The white road followed the coastline, erasing the original terrain. The road brought great crowds to Stanley Park, but conflict soon arose between motorists, bicyclists, and pedestrians.67 The waterways around the park were congested too. The waves generated from port traffic began to erode the coastline, washing away the beaches and threatened the structure beneath the road.68 To remedy the problems of congestion and erosion, the seawall was constructed, creating a separate space for pedestrians while protecting the coastline from erosion.69 The road was later covered with asphalt, the smooth road added to the leisure the scenic drive. Although humans have benefited from the creation of the seawall, the design has disrupted a dynamic boundary essential for coastal ecology of the park. The hard wall protects what is behind it, but the beach was left exposed. On a typical beach, waves are attenuated by shallow slopes but with the seawall the force of waves is directed downwards, scouring the footing and eroding the beach. Over the year, this process has removed an important habitat between land and sea for birds, mammals, and sea life. Since its foundation in Stanley Park, the seawall typology has been implemented throughout the city, forming 22-km path from Coal Harbour to Kitsilano with a hard edge between land and sea.70 The seawall has become intertwined with the cultural identity of Vancouver, representing the civic 63  Barman, 21.64  Kheraj, Inventing Stanley Park, 17.65  Barman, Stanley Park’s Secret: The Forgotten Families of Whoi Whoi Kanaka Ranch and Broughton Point, 21.66  Barman, Stanley Park’s Secret: The Forgotten Families of Whoi Whoi Kanaka Ranch and Broughton Point.67  Kheraj, Inventing Stanley Park, 80.68  Kheraj, 15.69  Kheraj, 13.70    Parks Board Committee Meeting, “Stanley Park Seawall Repairs - Phase 2” (Vancouver Parks Board, December 17, 2018), https://vancouver.ca/parks-recreation-culture/stanley-park-seawall-restoration.aspx#:~:text=Construction%20for%202019%20is%20complete,be%20completed%20in%20April%202020.&text=Phase%202%20of%20Stanley%20Park,will%20begin%20in%20March%202019.fig 33.     Beach at Xwáýxway (1910),     City of Vancouver Archives: 2011-010.179078 79values of oceanside public space and active transportation. Despite these cultural benefits, we must recognize that the seawall as it exists today will not be possible in the future. The seawall is already inundated by extreme tides and the integrity of the structure continues to fail, requiring temporary closure, all the while sea-level rise looms on the horizon.71   Stanley Park is much more than a large urban park, it is a symbolic representation of Vancouver’s cultural values and environmental ethics. The park supposedly reflects a city that prides itself in its connection to the wilderness, outdoor recreation, and environmentalism and yet the defining feature of Stanley Park, the seawall, is in abject opposition to the environmental ethics held by its citizens. The cultural values of seaside public space and outdoor recreation currently outweigh our commitment to the environment.  It is time that we recognize Stanley Park for what it is: a walled fortress where land is cut off from sea. Maintaining the status quo is the current vision for the future of the seawall. In 2018, the Parks Board presented two strategies to respond to sea-level rise: building out and building up.72 These defensive, hardline strategies reveal the lengths to which humans will go to maintain the status quo while the Earth undergoes extraordinary changes. Our long-term commitment to the seawall requires critical examination and consideration of alternative responses to sea-level rise. In the following proposal, the history of the Squamish and colonial settlement of Stanley Park informs a 100-year transformation for the park’s coastline. The design re-purposes the seawall to restore the connection between land and sea by implementing a coastal adaptation strategy in response to sea-level rise. Indigenous ecological infrastructure is used to accommodate sea-level rise and control beach erosion through clam garden terracing. 71   Parks Board Committee Meeting, “Stanley Park Seawall Repairs - Phase 2” (Vancouver Parks Board, December 17, 2018)72  Parks Board Committee Meeting, “Stanley Park Seawall Repairs - Phase 2” (Vancouver Parks Board, December 17, 2018)fig 34.     Plans for the construction of the seawall (1921)    City of Vancouver Archives: 49-C-5, file 2. Board of Parks and Recreation fonds80 81fig 35.     Seawall looking west towards former beach of Xwáýxway - photograph Buchanan Dee, 2020 82 831.5m HWL (1921)0.0m ELfig 36.    Section isometric, rock beach       Buchanan Dee, 202084 85One of Squamish transformations to the environment was the creation of clam gardens and middens. 0 1 5 10moptimal clam habitat 1.5m HWL (1921)0.0m ELfig 37.    Section isometric, rock wall infilling       Buchanan Dee, 202086 87Where the ocean receded to at low tide, rocks were piled into retaining walls that stretched along the coast. With the cycle of the tides, sediment was trapped behind the wall, lowering the slope to an ideal angle for clam growth.0 1 5 10moptimal clam habitat 1.5m HWL (1921)0.0m ELfig 38.    Section isometric, clam gardening       Buchanan Dee, 202088 890 1 5 10mfig 39.    Isometric NE, Xwáýxway  [illustration based on map by Khatsahlano (1934)] Buchanan Dee, 202090 91fig 40.    Section, Xwáýxway  midden over photograph    Buchanan Dee, 202092 93fig 41.    Colonial settlers mining the Xwáýxway midden (1888),    City of Vancouver Archives: SGN 91fig 42.    Gravel road over remains of Xwáýxway midden (1917) with annotations by author City of Vancouver Archives: St Pk P13994 951.5m HWL (1921)0.0m ELfig 43.    Midden road, 1888 - section isometric       Buchanan Dee, 20201888The settlers mined the midden, crushing up the shells, bones, and artifacts within and used the remnants to pave a road for the new park. Through the destruction of Indigenous culture, the colonial road was established. 96 970 1 5 10mfig 44.    Xwáýxway  Park - regional map     Buchanan Dee, 202098 993 miles (4.8km)road paved with X̱wáýx̱way middenmiddenPápiy̓eḵskwtsa7sCh’elxwa 7elch Áx̱achu7Slhxí7elshSch’ílhusSquamish ReserveCapilano 5Ch’a 7ensX̱wáýx̱wayChaythoos0 100 500 1000mN1.5m HWL (1921)0.0m ELfig 45.    Seawall construction, 1921 - section isometric    Buchanan Dee, 20201921The waves generated from port traffic began to erode the coastline, washing away the beaches and threatened the structure beneath the road.100 1011.6m HWL (2020)0.0m ELfig 46.    Seawall beach erosion, 1921 - section isometric    Buchanan Dee, 20201921102 1031.6m HWL (2020)0.0m ELfig 47.    Seawall reinforcement, 1970s - section isometric    Buchanan Dee, 20201970The road was later covered with asphalt, the smoothness added to the leisure the scenic drive. While humans have benefited from the seawall, the design has disrupted a dynamic boundary essential for coastal ecology.104 1051.6m HWL (2020)0.0m ELfig 48.    Current condition, 2020 [based on Parks Board proposal] - section isometric Buchanan Dee, 20202020106 1070 1 2 3 5 10km4NSince its foundation in Stanley Park, the seawall typology has been implemented throughout the city, forming 22-km path from Coal Harbour to Kitsilano with a hard edge between land and sea.fig 49.    Extent of seawall - regional map     Buchanan Dee, 2020108 1091.6m HWL (2020)0.0m ELfig 50.    Build Out strategy, 2021 [based on Parks Board proposal] - section isometric  Buchanan Dee, 20202021110 1111.6m HWL (2020)2.6m HWL (2120)Parks Board Proposal (2018)2120: 1m sea-level rise 0.0m ELfig 51.    Build Up strategy, 2120 [based on Parks Board proposal] - section isometric  Buchanan Dee, 20202120112 13fig 52.    Xwáýxway  Park - regional map     Buchanan Dee, 2020114 1150 100 500 1000mN1.6m HWL (2020)2.6m HWL (2120)0.0m ELfig 53.    Current condition, 2020 [based on Parks Board proposal] - section isometric  Buchanan Dee, 20202020The speculative design of this story considers an alternative future for the seawall: a strategy of adaptive retreat. Instead of investing in maintenance of the failing infrastructure, the seawall is decommissioned. 116 117optimal clam habitat (2020) 1.6m HWL (2020)0.0m ELfig 54.    Adaptive retreat, 2021, proposed design - section isometric    Buchanan Dee, 20202021The outer wall is excavated and repositioned, allowing the land to subside. 118 1191.6m HWL (2020)2.6m HWL (2120)0.0m ELoptimal clam habitat (2120) fig 55.    Clam garden terracing, 2120, proposed design - section isometric   Buchanan Dee, 20202120As the sea rises, the water moves toward the land. The midden is released and reconnected with the ocean, creating the conditions for future generations of clams to prosper. 120 121fig 56.    Clam garden terracing, 2021, proposed design - isometric    Buchanan Dee, 2020122 123fig 57.    Clam garden terracing, 2120, proposed design - section perspective   Buchanan Dee, 2020124 125126 127Vancouver AquariumXwáýxway ParkGlass Sponge ReefDesign Before ExtinctionNonhuman InfrastructureThe last story considers other forms of life at the limits of human knowledge, reflecting on the deep-sea environments that are beyond the reach of most people and experience a lack of visibility. Hexactinellid glass sponges were believed to be extinct until they were found by scientists in the deep coastal waters of British Columbia in 1987.1 Glass sponges provide valuable habitat for other animals and have the extraordinary ability to filter water through their metabolic processes. Although they only cover 0.2% of the seafloor of the Strait of Georgia and Howe Sound, glass sponges are estimated to clean 1% of the volume of this water daily.2 Glass sponge reefs have since been located near Metro Vancouver and have been protected by marine refuges such as the Fraser Ridge Reef, an outcrop in the Fraser River.3 However, the long-term health of this unique ecosystems is threatened by proximity to human activity as disasters in the ocean cannot be contained by the delineation of boundaries.73  Manfred Krautter et al., “Discovery of a ‘Living Dinosaur’: Globally Unique Modern Hexactinellid Sponge Reefs off British Columbia, Canada,” Facies 44, no. 1 (January 2001): 265–82, https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02668178.74  A. Dunham et al., “Assessing Condition and Ecological Role of Deep-Water Biogenic Habitats: Glass Sponge Reefs in the Salish Sea,” Marine Environmental Research 141 (October 2018): 94, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.marenvres.2018.08.002.75  Amanda S. Kahn et al., “Benthic Grazing and Carbon Sequestration by Deep-Water Glass Sponge Reefs: Deep-Water Glass Sponge Reefs,” Limnology and Oceanography 60, no. 1 (January 2015): 78–88, https://doi.org/10.1002/lno.10002.128 1290 1 2 3 5 10km4NPassage  Island  ReefsFraser Ridge ReefDorman PtVancouver’s footprint extends far beyond the boundaries of land. Our wastewater flows into the Salish Sea and the fleet of cargo ships extends our consumption of resources around the globe.   fig 58.    Glass sponge refuges - regional map      Buchanan Dee, 2020130 13149°09.187’N123°22.587’W 49°09.389’N123°22.622’W49°09.634’N123°23.048’Wfreighter trac separation zone trac flow49°09.646’N123°23.543’W49°09.211’N123°23.567’Wfreighter trac separation zone submarine cablelimit of routeing measure1191marea = 0.81km²601m689m807m377mWe use lines to delineate boundaries and control space on the ocean, but this surface-level representation obscures what lies below. fig 59.    Fraser Ridge Reef with freighter traffic zone - plan    Buchanan Dee, 2020132 133In 1987, surveyors of the Canadian Hydrographic Service were mapping the Pacific seafloor when their sonar recorded something strange: fuzzy mounds appearing 200m below sea-level. Unsure of the anomaly, they sent down an ROV to investigate. The machine descended into darkness and startled the humans who had happened upon a sublime city of clouds, frills, and goblets.fig 60.    ROV visiting glass sponge reef in the Hecate Strait, 1987 - perspective  Buchanan Dee, 20201987134 135fig 61.    Fraser Ridge Reef, Aphrocallistes vastus and Heterochone calyx - isometric Buchanan Dee, 2020Before the sighting, glass sponges were presumed extinct, known only to science from fossil reefs in Europe. For humans, the encounter meant the rewriting of natural history, but the sponges were utterly indifferent. These fragile survivors of previous mass extinctions had already met us; our prawn traps and trawling nets preceded the scientists. 136 13749°09.187’N123°22.587’W49°09.389’N123°22.622’W-167m49°09.634’N123°23.048’W49°09.646’N123°23.543’W49°09.211’N123°23.567’W-187m-181m-204m-183mfig 62.    Oil spill at Fraser Ridge Reef - isometric SW    Buchanan Dee, 2020Glass sponges were here all along, building their cities before our own. Whereas trees sequester CO2 from the air to grow wood, these creatures absorb silica from the ocean to make glass. We have created refuge areas to safeguard the future of these creatures, but these lines provide no protection for the fluid environment.139– 50m– 100m– 150mfig 63.    Glacial till beneath Fraser Ridge Reef - section    Buchanan Dee, 2020The sponges moved in when the glaciers receded 9000 years ago, building on islands of solid glacial till surrounded by shifting marine sediments. Free-floating offspring establish themselves on ancestral scaffolding, creating megastructures over millennia. 141– 50m– 100m– 150mfig 64.    Retired freighter positioned above marine sediments - section  Buchanan Dee, 2020If we are serious about our commitment to the planet and the long-term survival of other species, we must retire the fleet of freighters that continue to be one of the worst sources of greenhouse gas emissions. 143– 50m– 100m– 150mfig 65.    Formation of artificial glass sponge reef - section   Buchanan Dee, 2020This retirement strategy extends the life of the freighters, scuttling them to form an artificial reef. The machines that once threatened these creatures become the bedrock for future generations. 144 1450 1 2 3 5 10km4NPassage  Island  ReefsFraser Ridge ReefDorman PtVancouverMusqueam 2Kitsilano 6Sea Island 3Squamish 5Mission 1DowntownUBCLions GateWWTPRichmondBowen IslandIona WWTPWest VancouverNorth VancouverHorseshoe BayPortsc̓ əwaθən məsteyəxʷ (Tsawwassen)(Katzie)scəwaθenaɁɬ təməxʷsəlilwətaɁɬ təməxʷ (Tsleil-Waututh)Skwxwú7mesh-ulh TemíxwSkwxwú7mesh-ulh Temíxw(Stó:lō)S’ólh TéméxwHul’qumi’num Treaty Group (Squamish)xʷməθkʷəy’əmxʷməθkʷəy’əm (Musqueam)Stz’uminusStz’uminus(Tsleil-Waututh)KwantlenXwáýxwayfig 66.    Artificial glass sponge reef - regional map    Buchanan Dee, 2020The sunken ships form an arc connecting the existing refuge sites. The path passes through overlapping Indigenous territories representing a proposal that would require the support of multiple nations and partners.146 147fig 67.    Artificial glass sponge reef - landscape section N-S   Buchanan Dee, 2020If we might learn anything from glass sponges—animals with no brain, no nerves, and no mobility—it is a lesson about our own impermanence. If sponges had eyes, our civilization would be but a blink.148 149BibliographyAben, Rob, and Saskia de Wit. The Enclosed Garden. Rotterdam: 010 Publishers, 1999.Adjaye Associates, staff. “MEMO Project.” Adjaye Associates, 2013. https://www.adjaye.com/projects/civic-buildings/mass-extinction-monitoring-observatory-memo/.Allen, Stan. “Field Conditions.” Architectural Design 66 (1996).Apter, Emily. “Planetary Dysphoria.” Third Text 27, no. 1 (2013): 131–40.Barman, Jean. Stanley Park’s Secret: The Forgotten Families of Whoi Whoim Kanaka Ranch and Broughton Point. Madeira Park: Harbour Publishing, 2005.CBC. “BC Aquarium Closing Killer Whale Exhibit.” CBC News, April 28, 2000. https://www.cbc.ca/news/technology/b-c-aquarium-closing-killer-whale-exhibit-1.228137.Colby, Jason M. Orca: How We Came to Know and Love the Ocean’s Greatest Predator. Oxford University Press, 2018.Cristina Díaz Moreno and Efrén Garcia Grinda. “Carbonipherous Forest.” amid.cero9 Project Description, 2011. http://www.cero9.com/project/carbonipherous-forest/.Davis, Chuck. The Chuck Davis History of Metropolitan Vancouver. Madeira Park: Harbour Publishing Co. Ltd, 2011.Dunham, A., S.K. Archer, S.C. Davies, L.A. Burke, J. Mossman, J.R. Pegg, and E. Archer. “Assessing Condition and Ecological Role of Deep-Water Biogenic Habitats: Glass Sponge Reefs in the Salish Sea.” Marine Environmental Research 141 (October 2018): 88–99. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.marenvres.2018.08.002.Fernandez, Eduardo J., Michael A. Tamborski, Sarah R. Pickens, and William Timberlake. “Animal–Visitor Interactions in the Modern Zoo: Conflicts and Interventions.” Applied Animal Behaviour Science 120, no. 1–2 (August 2009): 1–8. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.applanim.2009.06.002.Gunther Vogt. Traveling Landscapes, 2020. https://www.gsd.harvard.edu/2020/03/exhibition-preview-first-the-forests-on-view-through-march-15-in-the-druker-design-gallery/.Zoological Society of London (ZSL). “Happy Birthday to Zoo….” Accessed April 27, 2020. https://www.zsl.org/zsl-london-zoo/news/happy-birthday-to-zoo.Hill, Michael Thomas. Forgotten Songs. 2009. Installation. https://www.cityartsydney.com.au/artwork/forgotten-songs/.Holtorf, Cornelius. “The Zoo as a Realm of Memory.” Anthropological Journal of European Cultures 22 (March 1, 2013): 98–114. https://doi.org/10.3167/ajec.2013.220107.Junya Ishigami. Small Images. Contemporary Architect’s Concept Series 2. LIXIL Publishing, 2008.Kahn, Amanda S., Gitai Yahel, Jackson W. F. Chu, Verena Tunnicliffe, and Sally P. Leys. “Benthic Grazing and Carbon Sequestration by Deep-Water Glass Sponge Reefs: Deep-Water Glass Sponge Reefs.” Limnology and Oceanography 60, no. 1 (January 2015): 78–88. https://doi.org/10.1002/lno.10002.Kheraj, Sean. Inventing Stanley Park: An Environmental History. Vancouver, CANADA: UBC Press, 2013. http://ebookcentral.proquest.com/lib/ubc/detail.action?docID=3412848.Krautter, Manfred, Kim W. Conway, J. Vaughn Barrie, and Matthias Neuweiler. “Discovery of a ‘Living Dinosaur’: Globally Unique Modern Hexactinellid Sponge Reefs off British Columbia, Canada.” Facies 44, no. 1 (January 2001): 265–82. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02668178.Lahoud, Adrian. “Scale as Problem, Architecture as Trap.” In Climates: Architecture and the Planetary Imaginary, 111–18. Zurich: Lars Müller Publishers, 2016.Lokman, Kees, and Karen Tomkins. “Clam Gardens: An Alternative Approach to Coastal Adaptation.” Journal of Architectural Education 74, no. 1 (January 2, 2020): 129–32. https://doi.org/10.1080/10464883.2020.1693840.Lola Sheppard. “Environment-Webs.” In Bracket—at Extremes—Almanac 3, 45–52. Barcelona: Actar, 2015.Mangione, Kendra. “Protest at Vancouver Aquarium Ahead of Park Board Vote on Whale Ban.” British Columbia, May 10, 2017. https://bc.ctvnews.ca/protest-at-vancouver-aquarium-ahead-of-park-board-vote-on-whale-ban-1.3408082.Mathews, Darcy L., and Nancy J. Turner. “Ocean Cultures.” In Conservation for the Anthropocene Ocean, 169–206. Elsevier, 2017. https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-12-805375-1.00009-X.Matthews, James Skitt. “Conversations with Khahtsahlano, 1932-1954,” n.d., 515.May 18, Michelle Ghoussoub · CBC News · Posted:, 2019 1:34 PM PT | Last Updated: May 19, and 2019. “Vancouver Aquarium Sues City, Park Board over Cetacean Ban | CBC News.” CBC, May 18, 2019. https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/british-columbia/vancouver-aquarium-sues-city-park-board-over-cetacean-ban-1.5141737.Moore, Wilfred P. An Act to amend the Criminal Code and other Acts (ending 152 153the captivity of whales and dolphins), S-203 § (2019). https://www.parl.ca/legisinfo/BillDetails.aspx?Language=E&billId=8063284.Olivier Meystre. Pictures of the Floating Microcosm: New Representations of Japanese Architecture. Zurich: Park Books AG, 2017.Parks Board Committee Meeting. “Stanley Park Seawall Repairs - Phase 2.” Vancouver Parks Board, December 17, 2018. https://vancouver.ca/parks-recreation-culture/stanley-park-seawall-restoration.aspx#:~:text=Construction%20for%202019%20is%20complete,be%20completed%20in%20April%202020.&text=Phase%202%20of%20Stanley%20Park,will%20begin%20in%20March%202019.Rania Ghosn and El Hadi Jazairy. “Leviathan in the Aquarium.” Journal of Architectural Education 71, no. 2 (2017): 271–79. https://doi.org/10.1080/10464883.2017.1340777.Rocca, Alessandro, ed. Planetary Gardens - The Landscape Architecture of Gilles Clément. Milan: Birkhäuser, 2007.Rothfels, Nigel. Savages and Beasts: The Birth of the Modern Zoo. Johns Hopkins University Press, 2002. http://muse.jhu.edu/book/3441.Sorensen, Jean. “Vancouver’s Aquarium.” Canadian Consulting Engineer (blog), 2007. https://www.canadianconsultingengineer.com/features/vancouver-s-aquarium/.staff, ASLA. “Spring Cutback: A Model for Maintenance.” The Field (blog), April 23, 2015. https://thefield.asla.org/2015/04/23/spring-cutback-a-model-for-maintenance/.“Staff Pays Tribute to Bjossa.” Accessed May 1, 2020. https://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/national/staff-pays-tribute-to-bjossa/article18418856/.staff, Vancouver Aquarium. “The History of Canada’s Largest Aquarium.” Vancouver Aquarium, 2020. https://www.vanaqua.org/about.Stan Allen. “Diagrams Matter.” ANY: Architecture New York 23 (1998): 16–19.Uexküll, Jakob von. A Foray into the Worlds of Animals and Humans with a Theory of Meaning. Translated by Joseph D. O’Neil. Minniapolis: Minnesota University Press, 2010.“Vancouver Public Aquarium Association - City of Vancouver Archives.” Accessed May 1, 2020. https://searcharchives.vancouver.ca/vancouver-public-aquarium-association.Wang, Michael. “Extinct in the Wild,” 2017. https://michaelwang.info/Extinct-in-the-Wild.154 155

Cite

Citation Scheme:

        

Citations by CSL (citeproc-js)

Usage Statistics

Share

Embed

Customize your widget with the following options, then copy and paste the code below into the HTML of your page to embed this item in your website.
                        
                            <div id="ubcOpenCollectionsWidgetDisplay">
                            <script id="ubcOpenCollectionsWidget"
                            src="{[{embed.src}]}"
                            data-item="{[{embed.item}]}"
                            data-collection="{[{embed.collection}]}"
                            data-metadata="{[{embed.showMetadata}]}"
                            data-width="{[{embed.width}]}"
                            data-media="{[{embed.selectedMedia}]}"
                            async >
                            </script>
                            </div>
                        
                    
IIIF logo Our image viewer uses the IIIF 2.0 standard. To load this item in other compatible viewers, use this url:
https://iiif.library.ubc.ca/presentation/dsp.42591.1-0397340/manifest

Comment

Related Items