UBC Theses and Dissertations

UBC Theses Logo

UBC Theses and Dissertations

The visual landscape and resource inventories Howie, Francis Gordon 1972

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

Item Metadata

Download

Media
831-UBC_1972_A6 H69.pdf [ 13.02MB ]
Metadata
JSON: 831-1.0101634.json
JSON-LD: 831-1.0101634-ld.json
RDF/XML (Pretty): 831-1.0101634-rdf.xml
RDF/JSON: 831-1.0101634-rdf.json
Turtle: 831-1.0101634-turtle.txt
N-Triples: 831-1.0101634-rdf-ntriples.txt
Original Record: 831-1.0101634-source.json
Full Text
831-1.0101634-fulltext.txt
Citation
831-1.0101634.ris

Full Text

THE VISUAL LANDSCAPE AND RESOURCE INVENTORIES by FRANCIS GORDON HOWIE B.Sc. ( H o n s . ) , U n i v e r s i t y o f E d i n b u r g h , 1970 A THESIS SUBMITTED I N PARTIAL FULFILMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF M a s t e r o f F o r e s t r y i n t h e Department o f F o r e s t r y We a c c e p t t h i s t h e s i s as c o n f o r m i n g t o t h e r e q u i r e d s t a n d a r d THE UNIVERSITY OF BRITISH COLUMBIA J u n e , 1972 In presenting this thesis in partial fulfilment of the requirements for an advanced degree at the University of British Columbia, I agree that the Library shall make i t freely available for reference and study. I further agree that permission for extensive copying of this thesis for scholarly purposes may be granted by the Head of my Department or by his representatives. It is understood that copying or publication of this thesis for financial gain shall not be allowed without my written permission. Frank Howie' Faculty of Forestry The University of British Columbia Vancouver 8, Canada ABSTRACT Appreciation of the landscape has occurred throughout human history. Only in recent times, however, has the majority of the population, and then only in the richer "developed" countries, had the leisure time to enjoy i t . Formerly the landscape was merely the hack-drop to t o i l except for the few individuals granted, through c i r -cumstances, time they could spend "unproductively." By contrast, today we have a situation where landscape has become the land's newest resource, eagerly sought out and argued for by increasing numbers of people. This thesis is an analysis of landscape as a resource. Recog-nising the comparative new-ness of the f i e l d and the consequent pro-lif e r a t i o n of exploratory studies on i t s many aspects, the present work does not pretend to extend the f i e l d into higher realms of learning: i t is an attempt to review and correlate the more relevant areas of significance. Among them are the development of attitudes towards the landscape, the basic visual elements of the landscape and how they are perceived and subsequently modified by preconceptions, and the present-day situation where attempts are being made to accurately describe and quantify the landscape resource and evolve a discipline of visual resource management. TABLE OF CONTENTS Page ABSTRACT i i TABLE OF CONTENTS i i i LIST OF TABLES , v LIST OF FIGURES v i LIST OF PHOTOGRAPHS v i i ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS v i i i Chapter I LANDSCAPE AS A RESOURCE 1 1.1 Introduction 1 1.2 Attitudes Towards the Landscape 2 1.3 Awakening of Public Concern 6 1.1+ Present Day Pressures 7 1.5 The Winds of Change 10 1.6 Getting Organised - Environmental Design 13 Chapter II BASIC VISUAL FACTORS AFFECTING THE LANDSCAPE WE SEE 23 2.1 Introduction 23 2.2 Form 23 2.3 Line 30 2.4 Space 32 2.5 Light 38 2.6 Scale 1+5 2.7 Observer Position 55 2.8 Motion and Sequence 62 2.9 Composition 65 - i i i -Chapter III VISUAL PERCEPTION AND THE LANDSCAPE j6 3.1 Psychological Background 7 6 3.2 Visual Perception 78 3.3 The Eye 79 3.4 Field of Vision 8l 3.5 Influence of Motion 8l 3.6 Other Factors in Perception 86 3 . 7 Interpretation of the Visual Information 90 Chapter IV DESCRIPTION AND ASSESSMENT OF LANDSCAPE AND SCENERY 93 4.1 Landscape and Scenery 93 4.2 Landscape and Aesthetics 95 4.3 Use of the Landscape 97 4.4 Misfits in the Landscape 100 4.5 Landscape Description and Classification 105 BIBLIOGRAPHY 123 - i v -T.TST OF TABLES TABLE PAGE 1. Suggested Criteria for Interstate Highway Construction 18 2. Scenic Easement 21 3. Identification and Inventory of Natural Landscape and Man-Made Features 120 - v -LIST OF FIGURES FIGURE PAGE 1. Four Alternatives in the Development of a H i l l 28 2. The extent of a visual objective (vertical angle) 59 3. The extent of a visual objective (horizontal angle) 60 k. "The span of a man's outstanding arms is equal to his height" 67 5. Heirarchy of Human Needs 77 6. The right eye of a man: a horizontal section 80 7. The flow of the optic array during locomotion in a t e r r e s t r i a l environment 83 8. The flow velocities in the optic array reflected from the surface of the earth 83 9. Lateral f i e l d of vision and focussing distance Qh 10. Attentional demand 87 11. Cue arousal 89 12. Absolute altitude and relative r e l i e f 111 13. Landscape resources for recreation 116 — v i LIST OF PHOTOGRAPHS PHOTOGRAPHS PAGE 1. seemingly inappropriate landscape elements..." 9 2. Stereoscopic view of a distant object 25 3. The HBgdallstopper, a man-made h i l l 29 4. Line in the landscape - avalanche paths 31 5. "Fish-eye" spherical perspective (vertical view) 39 6. "Fish-eye" spherical perspective (horizontal view) 39 7. Scale in the landscape (micro-landscape) kf 8. Scale in the landscape (macro-landscape) hf 9. Scale in the landscape - reference objects 48 10-13. Transition of landscape factors 50 14-16. Transition of landscape features 52 17-24. Change of relative scale 53 25-27- Change of photographic image scale through increasing lens power 56 28-30. Perspective manipulation through increasing lens power 57 31. Observer superior position 6l 32. A 180 degree horizontal view 72 33. an abandoned croft evokes a variety of responses." 101 34. a tranquil scene of old barns and machinery..." 103 35-37. Ground photographs and air photograph of the same landscape character l l 4 - v i i -ACKNOWLEDGMENTS This thesis is very much a personal endeavour so I take f u l l responsibility for a l l errors and ommissions. Considering the freedom I experienced to pursue my own interests, and the remoteness of this thesis from the traditional forestry f i e l d , I wish to extend my thanks to the Faculty of Forestry for providing an environment that made such a study possible. Despite this personal freedom, however, my thoughts were certainly influenced by individuals met during my spell at the University of British Columbia and their help and inspiration reveals i t s e l f in this work and beyond. First among them i s my supervisor, Dr. D. S. Lacate who deserves far more than the cliche' "without whose advice and financial assistance this work could not have been completed." Secondly, I thank the members of my committee who helped me in more ways than they may realise. Thirdly I thank my fellow graduate students, of Room 192 and beyond, whose friendships w i l l be among my pleasantest memories of U.B.C. And f i n a l l y I thank my typist, whose perserverance when time was short was a constant source of amazement. - v i i i -Chapter 1 LANDSCAPE AS A RESOURCE 1.1 Introduction Today, concern for the environment under the all-embracing term con-servation, has become part of our everyday conversation. The word was f o r -mally introduced i n t o North America by G i f f o r d Pinchot, whose i n s p i r a t i o n and guidance was c r u c i a l i n turning the atti t u d e s of Americans from a philosophy of abundant resources to one of a r e a l i s a t i o n that wise steward-ship was e s s e n t i a l . In 1907» Pinchot wrote, "Suddenly the idea flashed through my head that there was a unity i n t h i s complication - that the r e l a t i o n of one resource to another was not the end of the story. Here were no longer a l o t of d i f f e r e n t , independent and often antagonistic questions, each i n i t s own separate l i t t l e i s l a n d , as we have been i n the habit of thinking. In place of them, here was one sing l e ques-t i o n with many parts. Seen i n t h i s new l i g h t , a l l these separate questions f i t t e d into and made up the one great c e n t r a l problem of the use of the earth for the good of man." (Pinchot, 19^7) Having o u t l i n e d the concept, Pinchot now sought a word to sum i t up, and a discussion with f o r e s t e r Overton P r i c e brought up the f a c t that the B r i t i s h organised government forests i n India were c a l l e d "conservancies." Li k i n g the word, Pinchot introduced i t formally and thus gave a name to the idea that had run through the writings of Thoreau and Marsh. At that time conservation seemed t o many, "a subversive compound of socialism and sentimentality: today i t i s almost synonymous with p r a c t i c a l p a triotism." (Lowenthal, 1967) In f a c t today i t i s apparently no longer c o n t r o v e r s i a l : farmers and f o r e s t e r s , businessmen and wilderness society - 2 -members are a l l in favour of i t , though disagreements do arise over specific examples of i t s practise. But i t is precisely these disagreements that hinder what is the only satisfactory solution, namely the understanding and integration of a rational attitude towards the environment into our basic philosophies and actions as human beings. Environmental responsibility must take i t s place alongside the other basic issues requiring attention, the Malthusian wars, pestilences and plagues that s t i l l beset us. 1.2 Attitudes towards the landscape The aesthetic appreciation of the landscape, whether i t be wilderness, garden, rural or urban, is but one aspect of the conservation movement. While i t has certainly been prevalent among individuals at a l l stages and in a l l cultures of human development, i t is only within the most recent times that any but a small minority of the population, at least in Western countries, have had the leisure time or the economic opportunity, and partly as a consequence the interest, to regard the aesthetics of the landscape as a subject for enjoyment, far less something to be fought over. Therefore i t is a premise here that, given the necessary opportunity for leisure, the appreciation of the natural landscape is a basic human response. What is the historical evidence for this opinion? The B i b l i c a l view of the natural landscape, referred to as the "wilderness," was that of a sanctuary, a place where one could be alone with one's thoughts, and where, under the harshest of circumstances, one could find escape from the evils of society (Nash, 1967). Yet i t is highly unlikely that this is the origin of our changing attitude towards nature. While a good Christian was supposed to remain aloof from the pleasures of - 3 -society, this did not mean that he could take alternate pleasure in the beauties of nature: rather, the good Christian was to forget about a l l earthly pleasures be they man-made or natural, and look only towards beatification in the a f t e r - l i f e . For the t o i l i n g masses this made accep-tance of their earthly lot more tolerable and incidentally helped keep them in check, secure in the knowledge that they would get their rewards later. It did however spoil the pleasures of those few who were free from the drudgery of productive labour, and sensitive enough to be aware of the possi b i l i t i e s on their doorstep, as i t were, right here on earth. Thus in Renaissance times, in 1335, Petrarch climbed Mount Ventaux solely, i t seems, for the pleasure of i t (Cowan, 1968 ). To a friend he wrote, "The great sweep of view spread out before me, I stood like one dazed." Seeing clouds beneath him and the snow-capped Alps on the horizon, he was clearly uplifted in the way many of us are today in similar c i r -cumstances, but while today we are free to react as we wish, Petrarch, good Christian that he was, was disheartened to read in Saint Augustine's "Confessions" that enjoyment of scenery was a sinful departure from proper thought. Even earlier than this, in Classical times, Homer certainly was not troubled by feelings of guilt towards his appreciation of nature, but for both he, and the later Latin poets V i r g i l and Horace, i t was the cleared agricultural land rather than wilderness that they praised. What of cultures beyond the West? Surely the Chinese are noted for their long history of sensitivity towards the natural scene? Certainly their landscape paintings, especially those of the Sung dynasty, indicate a profound awareness of natural beauty. But their poetry of the same period reveals a delight in nature which is frequently marred by a pathetic note - k -(Tuan, 1971)- I t may d e r i v e from r e c o g n i t i o n of the t r a n s i e n c e of things hut f r e q u e n t l y i t stems from t h e i r own fortunes i n l i f e . Thus the Chinese poets belonged t o the s c h o l a r s h i p - o f f i c i a l c l a s s , and l i v e d i n the c a p i t a l c i t y enjoying i t s g l o r i e s , u n t i l the day when they f e l l out of favour with the emperor. Then they were o b l i g e d t o go the w i l d s (that i s , the provinces) and i t was there t h a t they sang of t h e i r love f o r the mountains and mists of the n a t u r a l scene. Yet throughout i s a note of f r u s t r a t i o n and disappointment. And l i k e w i s e i n the West: thus Emerson (1950) cannot p r a i s e " l i g h t , wave, rock and b i r d " without r e v e a l i n g i n the next l i n e h i s i r r i t a t i o n w i t h men, "the money-loving herd". I t would c e r t a i n l y be i n t e r e s t i n g , as Y i - F u Tuan suggests, to l i s t a l l nature poems which appear t o owe t h e i r o r i g i n a l i n s p i r a t i o n not t o love of the n a t u r a l scene but t o f r u s t r a t i o n w i t h the ways of men. Continuing on these l i n e s , one i s f o r c e d t o wonder whether the current d e s i r e t o "get back t o the l a n d , man", ( i n popular language), i s a genuine case o f " t o p o p h i l i a " (Tuan) or a convenient escape from the c i t i e s at a time when they most r e q u i r e a t t e n t i o n r a t h e r than abandonment. In the v i s u a l a r t s , t o o , w h i l e there i s an e a r l y expression of love of nature i n the p l a n t ornaments t h a t began to appear on c a p i t a l l e t t e r s and i n the margins of 13th century manuscripts, i n the growing p o p u l a r i t y of the s h e l t e r e d garden as an a r t i s t i c theme, and i n the appearance i n the 15th century of the f i r s t modern landscapes, nature was s t i l l l a r g e l y de-p i c t e d i n a background r o l e . Thus i n the e a r l y landscape p a i n t i n g s , the a r t i s t , w h i l e showing humble respect f o r every d e t a i l of the landscape, ( C l a r k 1966), d i d not depict these landscapes f o r themselves, and u s u a l l y i l l u s -t r a t e d a theme w i t h human f i g u r e s prominent. While Europeans were beginning t o show some s e n s i t i v i t y towards the - 5 -e n v i r o n m e n t , i n t h e f a c e o f t h e ra v a g e s o f t h e p a s t , t h e new f r o n t i e r s o p e n i n g up a b r o a d , as i n N o r t h A m e r i c a , were seen as s o m e t h i n g t o be tamed and s u b j u g a t e d , and i t was w i t h no l e s s t h a n r e l i g i o u s f e r v o u r t h a t l a n d , w i l d l i f e , and n a t i v e p e o p l e s were a t t a c k e d , s u b j u g a t i o n o f t h e w i l d e r n e s s and a l l t h a t i t s t o o d f o r b e i n g t h e n a t i o n a l goal.; C l e r e l de T o q u e v i l l e i n 1831 w r o t e , "The Ame r i c a n s t h e m s e l v e s n e v e r t h i n k about ( t h e w i l d s ) , t h e y a r e i n s e n s i t i v e t o t h e wonders o f i n a n i m a t e n a t u r e . . . T h e i r eyes a r e f i x e d upon a n o t h e r s i g h t , t h e . . . march a c r o s s t h e s e w i l d s , d r a i n i n g swamps, t u r n i n g t h e c o u r s e o f r i v e r s , p e o p l i n g s o l i t u d e s , and s u b d u e i n g n a t u r e . " ( C l e r e l de T o q u e v i l l e , 19^6). Y e t w h i l e i t i s c u r r e n t l y f a s h i o n a b l e t o a t t a c k t h i s h i s t o r i c a l f a c t , i t i s t r u e t h a t out o f i t grew a s o c i e t y w i t h s u f f i c i e n t l e i s u r e f o r a l m o s t a l l i t s members t o d i s s o c i a t e t h e m s e l v e s a t l e a s t t e m p o r a r i l y f r o m a s t r u g g l e f o r s u r v i v a l , a n e c e s s a r y c o n d i t i o n t o t h e p r e s e n t v i e w o f n a t u r e as a s o u r c e o f a e s t h e t i c p l e a s u r e . (Though i t must a l s o be added t h a t t h a t same s o c i e t y i s now a t a p o i n t where i t s own b e s t i n t e r e s t s a r e t h r e a t e n e d f r o m many f r o n t s a t l e a s t p a r t l y due t o t h e i s o l a t i o n f rom n a t u r e t h a t i t made p o s s i b l e ) . F o r t u n a t e l y f o r t h e New W o r l d , t h e European Romantic p e r i o d c o i n c i d e d w i t h t h e g r e a t p e r i o d o f i t s e x p l o r a t i o n a n d , t h r o u g h t h e new w o r l d v i e w i t e ngendered, t h e b i o l o g i c a l and g e o l o g i c a l wonders o f t h e c o n t i n e n t were r e c o g n i s e d . S i m u l t a n e o u s l y , an i n c r e a s i n g p r o p o r t i o n o f t h e p o p u l a t i o n was becoming i s o l a t e d f r o m d i r e c t c o n t a c t w i t h f r o n t i e r c o n d i t i o n s , c r e a t i n g a s i t u a t i o n where t h e n a t u r a l scene became a n o v e l t y , s o m e t h i n g t o be sought o u t . I t was now an e x c i t i n g a l t e r n a t i v e t o t h e r o u t i n e o f c i t y l i f e , and f o r t h e f i r s t t i m e , n o t s o m e t h i n g t o be d e s t r o y e d b u t t o be t r e a s u r e d f o r r e c r e a t i o n . T h o r e a u , B r y a n t , C o l e , Parkman, Cooper and o t h e r s l e d i n de-v e l o p i n g a new s e n s i t i v i t y among N o r t h Americans f o r t h e l a n d , and C a t l i n (1926) - 6 -summed up t h e a t t i t u d e i n s a y i n g , "... The f u r t h e r we become s e p a r a t e d f r o m t h a t p r i s t i n e w i l d e r n e s s and b e a u t y , t h e more p l e a s u r e does t h e mind o f e n l i g h t e n e d man f e e l i n r e c u r r i n g t o t h o s e s c e n e s . " 1.3 Awakening o f P u b l i c C o ncern The f i r s t m a n i f e s t a t i o n o f o r g a n i s e d p u b l i c o p i n i o n i n s o c i e t y ' s a t t i t u d e s t o w a r d s n a t u r e was t h e growth o f s o c i e t i e s d e d i c a t e d t o t h e def e n c e o f t h e r e m a i n i n g p o c k e t s o f w i l d l a n d . Thus i n t h e l a t e 19th c e n t u r y t h e S i e r r a C l u b was formed " t o e x p l o r e , e n j o y and p r o t e c t t h e n a t i o n ' s s c e n i c r e s o u r c e s " , and t h i s can be seen i n r e t r o s p e c t as a landmark on t h e r o a d t o t h e f o r m a l and s o p h i s t i c a t e d c o n c e p t o f w i l d e r n e s s as a v a l u a b l e and t h o r o u g h l y d e s i r a b l e use o f n a t i o n a l l a n d s . From t h e i r b e g i n n i n g s , " a m e n i t y " s o c i e t i e s have e v o l v e d a l o n g s e v e r a l b r a n c h e s , and t h r o u g h p a s t (and c o n t i n u i n g ) e x c e s s e s , have l e d many c r i t i c s t o v i e w t h e i r members as m e r e l y m i s g u i d e d i n d i v i d u a l s w i t h m i s p l a c e d s e n -t i m e n t s b a s e d s o l e l y on d e f e n c e o f t h e s t a t u s quo and o p p o s i t i o n t o p r o g r e s s and change. Among t h e many charges l a i d a g a i n s t them may be q u o t e d t h e case o f t h e endeavours o f t h e B r i t i s h F o r e s t r y Commission t o once more make t r e e c o v e r a s i g n i f i c a n t component o f t h e B r i t i s h l a n d s c a p e . A f f o r e s t a t i o n ( o r r e a f f o r e s t a t i o n ) i s g e n e r a l l y f i e r c e l y r e s i s t e d b y a m e n i t y s o c i e t i e s as an i n t r u d e r i n t o t h e n a t u r a l scene and even as e a r l y as t h e l8th c e n t u r y , W i l l i a m Wordsworth r e f e r r e d d e s p a i r i n g l y t o t h e new ( p r i v a t e ) p l a n t a t i o n s o f t h e Lake D i s t r i c t as " v e g e t a b l e m a c h i n e r y " ( F a i r b r o t h e r , 1970). I n c o n t r a s t , now t h a t some o f t h e e a r l y p l a n t a t i o n s a r e r e a c h i n g m a t u r i t y , t h e r e a r e i n d i c a t i o n s o f im p e n d i n g o p p o s i t i o n t o h a r v e s t i n g o f them and r e v e r s i o n once more t o b a r e h i l l s i d e s . B e f o r e d i s m i s s i n g s u c h v iews as "merely s e n t i m e n t a l " some r e g a r d ought - 7 -t o be p a i d t o them. A f u r t h e r example of a strong movement by amenity s o c i e t i e s i s i n the defence of the o l d patchwork network' o f hedgerows t y p i c a l of the farming d i s t r i c t s of southern England. In f a c t , t h i s i s a r e l i c of the En-c l o s u r e Acts which superimposed the q u i l t w o r k p a t t e r n over the former open f i e l d landscape and which i n many d i s t r i c t s i s now incompatible w i t h l a r g e s c a l e a r a b l e farming methods. When the Enclosure Acts were imposed i n the l8th century they were attacked by such as S i r Humphry Repton (Repton, 1907)» who regarded them as "a crude i m p o s i t i o n on the s u b t l e t i e s of the n a t u r a l scene", yet today they are cherished and defended against the demands of modern s o c i e t y . Yet are such defensive a c t i o n s merely defence of the status quo? A c l o s e r examination suggests t h a t the o l d patchwork p a t t e r n i s favoured because i t has a more human s c a l e where evidence of d i r e c t handling by i n d i v i d u a l s over generations gives a f a m i l i a r , i n t i m a t e s c a l e and a sense of intimacy and compromise between man and the l a n d ( F a i r b r o t h e r , 1970), l a c k i n g i n the new landscape of mechanisation. C e r t a i n l y i t must be borne i n mind t h a t , l i k e the F o r e s t r y Commission p l a n t a t i o n s , the new f i e l d p a t t e r n i s immature and raw and given m a t u r i t y w i l l s o f t e n , but the main poin t i s t h a t landscape be seen as a dynamic t h i n g , subject t o change through i t s own n a t u r a l forces and by the hand of man. 1.4 Present Day Pressures P a r t i c u l a r l y i n densely populated areas such as England, H o l l a n d , Den-mark, Connecticut, New York and the Lower Mainland of B r i t i s h Columbia, i t i s important t o r e a l i s e t h a t a l l l a n d could be used and there i s no longer room f o r " d e r e l i c t " land or unused la n d . Due t o intense pressures f o r use we must decide now which l a n d i s to remain i n or be maintained i n a n a t u r a l - 8 -or "near natural" state and which is to be intensively used, and therefore subject to change through the continuing developments of technology. In fact, i® a l l areas, except those which we set aside as nature reserves, ecological reserves, Wilderness Areas (U.S. Government Wilderness Act, 1964) and (some) National and Provincial parks, change w i l l inevitably come along with unwelcome and seemingly inappropriate landscape elements, such as nuclear power stations in remote parts of the Scottish Highlands (Photograph l ) . Rather than waste energy trying to prevent the inevitable, the better course is to ensure that the change is to something s t i l l har-monious with the landscape; or, i f the change is of great dimensions, then a new and harmonious landscape be created around i t . Just as there is no longer room for unused land, we ought to be similarly intolerant of i n e f f i c -iently used land, which includes visually disturbing land uses. For example, while before the Industrial Revolution, work and leisure existed in not only separate classes but also in separate areas, leading to a dangerous division of the landscape, no longer is this adequate where space is limited. A l l land uses must pay more than mere l i p service to aesthetics, as the region is increasingly recognised as a single inter-related environment and not a collection of separate areas in an insulating matrix where, i f things go wrong, we can look in the other direction. With an increasingly mobile public few areas are beyond reach, and further developments in recreational and a l l - t e r r a i n vehicles, coinciding with increasing interests in wilderness hiking and ski-touring, and a desire for more areas previously "sealed off" to be open to the public, w i l l further displace the "out-of-sight-out-of-mind" attitude. In terms of the management of publicly owned lands, w i l l this increasingly sensitive public demand an end to what Galbraith has called "private affluence and public squalor"? (Galbraith, 1958). This syndrome is probably a result of the old idea of "them and us": to a public PHOTOGRAPH I . .. seemingly inappropriate landscape elements. - 10 -largely occupied with a struggle for material wealth and status, the care of a landscape with which they had made no contact was the responsibility of "them", the government, or whoever the government entrusted with the use of the land. 1.5 The Winds of Change The f i r s t segments of the public to appreciate what this amounted to were those individuals who organised the f i r s t opposition to "them," the preservation/conservation/natural history/amenity/national trust and similar societies. While i n i t i a l l y the members were the proverbial " l i t t l e old ladies" and "tweedy gentlemen," their membership now embraces a cross-section of society and the significance of their work should not be under-estimated. Fairbrother (1970) gives an interesting account of their development, starting from the f i r s t stage, that of the "reversers": the early amenity movement simply wished to put back the clock to pre-industrial times, over-looking the fact that such an attitude was hopeless as only a tiny minority of the population would tolerate such. While they must be given credit for the fact that they were the initiators of what has become the conser-vation movement, i t is probably because of them that even today the conser-vation movement is s t i l l referred to by some as " e l i t i s t " . Neuhaus (1971) for example, writes , "Conservation has been the particular cause of those who wish to ward off the invasion by the great unwashed of humanity. It is essential to 'our quality of life'that preserves be estab-lished to keep the poor at a distance'.' While excusable coming from one with only a superficial knowledge, such writers are, in fact, missing the point: the "ecology movement" is simply - 11 -one component o f the wider c r i s i s f a c i n g humanity which can, u n f o r t u n a t e l y , he used hy any p o l i t i c i a n s who want t o a v o i d t a l k i n g ahout war, poverty, housing, education and h e a l t h . In context, i t i s seen as a component of the "growing awareness" of our many r e s p o n s i b i l i t i e s , and the need f o r a considerable s h u f f l i n g of our e x i s t i n g s o c i e t a l set-ups. Fairbrother;'s next stage i n the e v o l u t i o n o f the amenity s o c i e t i e s i s t h a t of the "shunters". They are more r e a l i s t i c , but l e s s sympathetic, seeing such innovations as more e l e c t r i c i t y as e s s e n t i a l , but d e s i r i n g that the concomitant pylons and so on be erected i n "someone e l s e ' s " a r e a . The next stage she c a l l s the " t r a n s l a t o r s " whom she regards as the most advanced, i n c o r p o r a t i n g changes brought through c o n t i n u i n g t e c h n o l o g i c a l progress i n t o , but w i t h l e a s t harm t o , the landscape. A comparison may be made here w i t h Reich's (1971) three stages of "consciousness" as a p p l i e d t o a l l of s o c i e t y , or r a t h e r , a l l of American s o c i e t y . To summarise b r i e f l y , h i s f i r s t stage of American s o c i e t y was th a t of "Consciousness I " : the i n d i v i d u a l i s t i c , s e l f - r e l i a n t t h r i f t y c i t i z e n who, w h i l e e s s e n t i a l to the e v o l u t i o n o f the United States from i t s beginnings t o i t s present s t a t e i n such a short p e r i o d o f time, has hung on i n t o the present day, unable t o accept t h a t the American dream co u l d s h r i v e l i n t o a c r u e l and rapacious myth. "Consciousness I I " sought t o reform the system through r e g u l a t i o n , planning and p u b l i c i n t e r e s t corporations and ended up by completing the corporate t e c h n o l o g i c a l s t a t e , which Reich (and many of the " a l t e r n a t e c u l t u r e " ) see as so complex as to be i n s e n s i t i v e t o human values and inhumane. Indeed, he env i s i o n s i t having p e r f o r c e given r i s e to "Consciousness I I I , " the present "new generation" who r e j e c t the values of past generations and manipulation o f t h e i r l i v e s f o r a t r u e sense of s e l f , p e r s o n a l goals and open, honest r e l a t i o n s h i p s w i t h others. - 12 -While regarded by many as "-anti-technology", and t h e r e f o r e i d e n t i c a l w i t h F a i r b r o t h e r ' s " r e v e r s e r s " , a c l o s e r examination of the ConsciousnessIII philosophy shows i t to be c l o s e s t to the " t r a n s l a t o r s " , advocating simply a harnessing and r e - d i r e c t i n g of technology towards new and more v a l i d g o a l s , and always at a r a t e w i t h which people and the landscape can cope. Indeed, the era of the amenity s o c i e t i e s may now be at an end: i f Consciousness I I I represents a r e a l movement among people at l a r g e and i s able t o shake o f f i t s image as a "youth o n l y " movement and extend i n t o a l l s e c t o r s of s o c i e t y , then i n f a c t , a l l of s o c i e t y w i l l be an "amenity s o c i e t y " i n a d d i t i o n t o the many other values i t w i l l h o l d as b a s i c code. Indeed, t h i s i s probably e s s e n t i a l , the a l t e r n a t i v e outcome being a back-l a s h by " s t r a i g h t s o c i e t y " against Consciousness I I I , and a r e v e r s i o n t o e s t a b l i s h e d values. For r e a l success i n the present case o f the landscape f i e l d , the p u b l i c as a whole must f e e l p a r t of the p l a n n i n g process, as i t has not done i n the past. For instance w h i l e p h y s i c a l p l a n n i n g i n the modern sense s t a r t e d i n B r i t a i n i n the e a r l y 20th century, i t apparently needed a stimulus provided by the second World War, and was only made e f f e c t i v e by the 19^7 Town and Country Planning Acts ( F a i r b r o t h e r , 1970). Yet 20 years l a t e r i t was c l e a r , and was so s t a t e d by a Government White Paper - 19&7, that the p l a n n i n g process, as o u t l i n e d i n the a c t , was meeting much r e s i s t a n c e , was overloaded and subject t o delays and cumbersome procedures, was more of a negative c o n t r o l t o undesirable development than a p o s i t i v e stimulus t o a good environment, had inadequate p a r t i c i p a t i o n by the i n d i v i d u a l c i t i z e n and p a i d i n s u f f i c i e n t regard t o h i s i n t e r e s t s . The s o l u t i o n suggested was to have a S t r u c t u r e Plan f o r any development, approved by Westminster as regards i t s i n t e g r a t i o n w i t h n a t i o n a l p l a n n i n g , supplemented by a " l o c a l p l a n " by the l o c a l a u t h o r i t i e s showing the d e t a i l e d working out of the p o l i c y . - 13 -An improved landscape, then, lie s in wider public participation i n the planning process and not in the amenity societies, however important they have been and continue to be. It i s , however, unrealistic (and un-reasonable) to expect even an enlightened public to hold the aesthetics of the environment or the ecological "rightness of f i t " of various developments, in quite as high regard as do the amenity and conservation societies, except in those segments of the total environment where aesthetics or wilderness are, by common agreement, the primary objectives. In the great majority of areas, function and efficiency w i l l be the dominant re-quirements, as previously, but heavily influenced by ecological, aesthetic and social factors, making true social cost the ultimate criterion rather than simple economic cost of a development. For the landscape that most people live in today has a great many more workaday functions, and once again, except i n special areas, landscape design can no longer be the fine art that i t was in the l8th century in the days of Brown and Repton. Today i t must be an applied art, and while the function of design in applied art is s t i l l to give pleasure, i t must do so by making use pleasant. Getting organised - Environmental design I f , as here, we regard landscape as an expression of the total environ-ment, translating a wide range of abstracts such as land-use, population density, settlement pattern, t r a f f i c flow, local conditions and so on into physical r e a l i t i e s , environmental design organises these parts into a unified whole. Dober (1969) defines design structure as: "the organising principle through which parts and pieces are brought together into a unified shape and form... In environmental planning design structure is art with social purpose. Its objective i s the establishment of visual order in response to the technical re-quirements of developing the physical forms of community l i f e in a - Ik -manner that allows, over time, accomodation to diversity, increase and change while maintaining coherence in the whole." Art! Introducing the idea of art into a world divided between nature and man, and a f i e l d dominated by technology, tradition and economics, introduces much controversy: "Fear and timidity enter, great conflicts of mysticism and reason occur, and the bugaboos of design crop up: 'unnatural', 'arbitrary', 'self-conscious', 'contrived'. Is the world of art separate from., and in conflict with the world of nature? Is nature the most perfect art? Does 'nature know best'? Can we have art disconnected from nature?" (Eckbo 1969) Susan Langer (Eckbo 1969) considers that "the whole function of a work is to symbolise subjective experience - that i s , to formulate and convey ideas of sentience and emotion." By this, landscape could not be a work of art; art being limited to objects or to acts of communication. Frank Avray Wilson (Eckbo 1969), however, considers that "Art is nothing more than the accentuation of an innate human propensity for symbolic expression and communication... The final test of the value of any art is this: can i t help us to reach that state of sensitivity and inspired vision which w i l l pro-gressively enable us to convert our whole environment into one vast work of art? For that is the challenge facing us. Once nature provided us with this all-embracing milieu; now that we have ousted nature, we must set about providing ourselves with a new environment which is as inspiring, as harmonising and as mentally integrating as was once nature, and this we now know is eminently possible." The many definitions of art seem however to centre around a creative act whose effects expand among people and endure in time. The creative act establishes new relations, adds new dimensions, new qualities, and new arrangements. But what i s the role of art in the landscape, particularly the "working" landscape, where science, or rather technology, has long been considered appropriate for setting the guidelines for decisions? - 15 -"Science is the skeptical and questioning search for knowledge and understanding of the world around us; art the search for creative decisions on new forms and arrangments, based on visions derived from that new knowledge." (Eckbo 19&9) Art, in fact, includes every creative act of man, being not in the activity but in the creative s p i r i t brought to i t , and the creative quality of i t s production. The development of the present day world can be thought of as a result of the interaction of three basic sets of forces: 1. Those representing the status quo in both society and nature, resisting change except at their own rate; 2. The forces of curiosity represented today by science, but always, right from man's beginnings, by the relentless human s p i r i t con-stantly questioning; and 3. The creative forces of man seeking not only answers to this question but decisions based on these answers. The "pure" scientist and the artist represent change while society (in general) and nature represent the status quo. Yet compared to the re-lative s t a b i l i t y of nature, society, particularly modern society surely represents change? True, but society only allows certain traditionally selected fields to motivate i t . For instance, innovations in medicine, engineering, science and business are welcomed, yet similarly new concepts in other fi e l d s , among them the environmental and social, are greeted with skepticism and doubt. Art is "O.K." but in the right place and at the right time. In fact, western society is basically afraid of art and attempts to confine i t to the roles of entertainment or therapy. This contrasts with the views of many of the great thinkers fromCaudwell to Kepes who saw science and art as the two principle and inseparable creative thrusts of mani's - 16 -e f f o r t s to improve v i t a humana, both being v i t a l to f u l l i n t e l l e c t u a l emotional understanding; nature, a world of sensation, and science of i n t e l l e c t with art the bridge between the two. Where, then, does design f i t i n t o t h i s puzzle? I f ar t i s the creative segment of the problem so l v i n g decisions, then design might be seen as the problem s o l v i n g and decision making process. That many of the e f f e c t s of decisions concerning the landscape are less than wholly s a t i s f a c t o r y , represents a f a i l u r e by the i n d i v i d u a l s d i r e c t l y responsible and the society that permitted i t to happen, to f u l l y develop the p o t e n t i a l i t y of creative decision making. Some of the problems that require s o l u t i o n may, however, be of such a magnitude as to require a scale of decision making beyond that capable by the e x i s t i n g i n s t i t u t i o n a l pattern of soci e t y . In such instances there are two possible r e s u l t s : 1. The problems are simply t o l e r a t e d and attempts made to minimise t h e i r e f f e c t s . This i s the approach of the shunters, or Consciousness II i n d i v i d u a l s , as explained previously. 2. Society i t s e l f changes s i g n i f i c a n t l y to f u l l y solve them, as the tra n s l a t o r s or Consciousness I II i n d i v i d u a l s claim i s necessary for the s o l u t i o n of many of society's present great problems. In the past, s o c i e t i e s have f a l l e n because of t h e i r i n a b i l i t y to match the scale of new problems, and t h e i r unwillingness to change while there was s t i l l time, and i t remains to be seen whether our present society w i l l evolve or r e s i s t change. An i n d i c a t i o n that society i s adapting i t s e l f to the new requirements l i e s i n a comparison of the changing attitudes towards highway design over a short period of two decades. In 1950, Clarkson and Bruce (1950) l i s t e d the relevant factors f o r highway construction and lo c a t i o n as follows: - 17 -develop regional p o t e n t i a l ; serve maximum population; reduce earth work; minimise gradients; avoid swamps; avoid h i l l s ; avoid e r r a t i c gradient change; avoid f l o o d susceptible areas; avoid r a i l r o a d cross; have good foundations; minimise land cost; minimise length; provide best opportunities for property development. They also emphasize that attention should be paid to minimising costs of earthworking, structures, pavements, drainage, f a c i l i t y r e l o c a t i o n , land and r i g h t of ways, f u e l , t i r e s , o i l , v e h i c l e depreciation and maintenance and duration of the operation. In short, at that time the emphasis was strongly on the i n t r i n s i c engineering f a c t o r s . At the present time, by contrast, Highways Departments i n various States i n the U.S.A., among them New York, C a l i f o r n i a and Wisconsin, have o f f i c i a l l y included i n t h e i r c r i t e r i a f o r highway route s e l e c t i o n s o c i a l , e c o l o g i c a l , a g r i c u l t u r a l and aesthetic factors alongside the t r a -d i t i o n a l ones. McHarg (1969) gives a comprehensive l i s t of what he considers important c r i t e r i a f o r highway route s e l e c t i o n (Table l ) sharply contrasting with Clarkson and Bruce's c r i t e r i a . While McHarg has been c r i t i c i s e d as being overly concerned with " e x t r i n s i c " f a c t o r s , t h i s might be a n t i c i p a t e d as c r i t i c i s m by the "old guard" of innovations, and such opposition w i l l probably fade with time. By taking a Consciousness III point of view we can simply say that h i s c r i t e r i a are d i f f i c u l t to dispute, but for the present purpose i t i s of i n t e r e s t to analyse the s i t u a t i o n f u r t h e r . The problems design sets out to solve are the r e s u l t of r e l a t i o n s between people and between people and nature. It deals with such problems i n ways that may be c r e a t i v e , and i t s success i s measured by the completeness with which i t analyses and solves the problem. Complete and sound design processes must determine the r e l a t i o n s h i p between necessity and choice ( o b j e c t i v i t y and s u b j e c t i v i t y ) i n each s p e c i f i c problem. In f a c t , engineering i t s e l f i s a design process which dominates c e r t a i n types of f u n c t i o n a l problems but environmental design i s the parent process which - 18 -TABLE 1 SUGGESTED CRITERIA FOR INTERSTATE HIGHWAY ROUTE SELECTION BENEFITS AND SAVINGS \ Price Benefits Reduced time distance Reduced gasoline costs Reduced o i l costs Reduced t i r e costs Reduced vehicle depreciation Increased t r a f f i c volume Increase in Value (Land & Bldgs): Industrial values Commercial values Residential values Recreational values Institutional values Agricultural land values Non-price Benefits Increased convenience Increased safety Increased pleasure Price Savings Non-limiting topography Adequate foundation conditions present Adequate drainage conditions present Available sands, gravels, etc. Minimum bridge crossings, culverts, and other structures required Non-price Savings Community values maintained Institutional values maintained Residential quality maintained Scenic quality maintained Historic values maintained Recreational values maintained Surface water system unimpaired Groundwater resources unimpaired Forest sources maintained Wildlife resources maintained COSTS Price Costs Survey Engineering Land and building acquisition Construction costs Financing costs Administrative costs, Operation and maintenance costs Reduction in Value (Land & Bldgs): Industrial values Commercial values Residential values Recreational values Institutional values Agricultural land values Non-price Costs Reduced convenience to adjacent properties Reduced safety to adjacent populations Reduced pleasure to adjacent populations Health hazard and nuisance from toxic fumes, noise, glare, dust. Price Costs D i f f i c u l t topography Poor foundations Poor drainage Absence of construction materials Abundant structures required Non-price Costs Community values lost Ins titutiohal values lost Residential values lost Scenic values lost Historical values lost Recreational values lost Surface water resources impaired Groundwater resources impaired Forest resources impaired Wildlife resources impaired (from McHarg, 1969) - 19 -includes engineering. It must be the decision of the environmental de-signer to say when engineering c r i t e r i a must be dominant and when subor-dinate. At present the problem basically is that regardless of l i p service to the contrary, the policy makers concerned with such decisions are rarely designers and seldom even interested in the qualitative aspects of design. Thus problems which are in fact highly complex in terms of choice of form and arrangement such as drainage basin planning, community planning and landscape design are drastically reduced to, respectively, problems of flood control, land subdivision and erosion control, the "pipes and plumbing" approach. Design problems f a l l into three categories, namely, functional (what is i t for?); technical (how to do i t ? ) ; and visual or sensory (how does i t strike you?). Thus the traditional engineering approach tends to concentrate on the f i r s t two, assuming that the third w i l l take care of i t s e l f (or at most can be attended to afterwards •* the "cosmetic" approach). On the other hand, the non-engineering approach concentrates on the visual or sensory f i r s t or; else solves the f i r s t two in order to get at the most important. A better framework, however, would consider each project individually and, as emphasised previously, would then, from an environmental design viewpoint of the total landscape, in which a l l c r i t e r i a , technical, eco-logi c a l , aesthetic, economic and social are considered, decide the heirarchy of emphasis. The foregoing has traced the development of attitudes towards the en-vironment up to the present day where the visual or sensory role or the land-scape is now, once again considered important, though now for the whole of society and not the small leisure class as in past ages. Today there is a situation where the visual quality is taken into account in road design and - 20 -location on an increasing scale,for example where land on account of i t s visual quality is either "bought outright for protection against undesirable developments or else has a "Scenic Easement" placed on i t . In the State of Wisconsin the Scenic Easement legalities have been brought to a high level wherein the government places restrictions on development of a piece of land of recognised scenic value where such might impair i t s scenic quality, in exchange for a payment to the landowner in compensation. (Table 2). Yet despite the sophistication of the idea of preservation of land for scenic purposes or of the laws connected with i t , identification of the resource i t s e l f (or environmental design) must be brought to a similar level of expertise, and the steps towards this recognition form the subject of the next section of the present work. - 21 -TABLE 2 SCENIC EASEMENT Whereas, the State o f Wisconsin d e s i r e s t o preserve, p r o t e c t and improve where necessary f o r sc e n i c purposes, a panoramic view of the and t o prevent any f u t u r e development which may tend t o d e t r a c t therefrom. This Indenture, made by granto r , hereby conveys and warrants to the State of Wisconsin, grantee, f o r the sum of ($ ) d o l l a r s , s c e n i c r i g h t s i n p e r p e t u i t y as h e r e i n a f t e r p r e s c r i b e d , i n and t o the f o l l o w i n g described p a r c e l o f r e a l e s t a t e i n County, State of Wis-c o n s i n , t o w i t : THE RIGHTS HEREBY ACQUIRED DO NOT GRANT THE PUBLIC THE RIGHT TO ENTER THE ABOVE-DESCRIBED AREA FOR ANY PURPOSE. THE RIGHTS HEREBY ACQUIRED DO NOT GRANT THE STATE OF WISCONSIN, OR ITS AGENTS RIGHT TO ENTER THE ABOVE-DESCRIBED AREA EXCEPT FOR THE PURPOSE OF INSPECTION AND ENFORCEMENT OF SAID RIGHTS, OR AS SPECIFICALLY SET FORTH HEREIN. P o s i t i v e or S p e c i f i c Rights Conveyed The s p e c i f i c r i g h t s and i n t e r e s t s hereby ac q u i r e d are as f o l l o w s : 1. The r i g h t f o r the State o f Wisconsin, i t s agents and c o n t r a c t o r s , t o enter upon the easement area; a) To i n s p e c t f o r v i o l a t i o n s of the p r o v i s i o n s of t h i s easement and t o remove or e l i m i n a t e a d v e r t i s i n g d i s p l a y s , signs and b i l l b o a r d s , s t o r e d or accumulated junk automobiles, farm implements or pa r t s t h e r e o f , and other salvage m a t e r i a l s or d e b r i s , and to perform such s c e n i c r e s t o r a t i o n as may be deemed necessary or d e s i r a b l e . b) To p l a n t and/or s e l e c t i v e l y cut or prune tr e e s and brush to improve the s c e n i c view and t o implement disease-prevention measures. S p e c i f i c Rights R e l i n q u i s h e d The owner's r i g h t s t o engage i n s p e c i f i e d a c t i v i t i e s are acquired as f o l l o w s : 1. The r i g h t t o e r e c t , d i s p l a y , place or maintain upon or w i t h i n the sc e n i c area any s i g n s , b i l l b o a r d s , outdoor a d v e r t i s i n g s t r u c t u r e s or advertisement of any k i n d , except t h a t one ( l ) on-premise s i g n of not more than square f e e t i n s i z e may be erected and maintained to a d v e r t i s e the s a l e , h i r e or l e a s e of the p r o p e r t y , or the s a l e and/or manufacture o f any goods, products or s e r v i c e s upon the land. Any e x i s t i n g s i g n s , other than the one on-premise s i g n , and/or advertisements as described above s h a l l be t e r -minated and removed on or before . 2. The r i g h t t o dump or maintain a dump of ashes, t r a s h , r u b b i s h , sawdust, garbage, o f f a l , storage of v e h i c l e bodies or p a r t s , storage of farm implements or p a r t s , and any other u n s i g h t l y or o f f e n s i v e m a t e r i a l . 3. The r i g h t to cut or remove any t r e e s or brush. h. The r i g h t to cut or remove any t r e e s , except marketable timber and then only i n compliance w i t h l o c a l f o r e s t cropping p r a c t i c e s , however, at no time w i l l the sceni c area be denuded of t r e e s . 5. The r i g h t t o park t r a i l e r houses, mobile homes, or any p o r t a b l e l i v i n g - 2 2 -quarters. 6. The right to quarry, or remove, or store any surface or subsurface minerals or materials. 7. A l l rights except general crop and/or livestock farming (agricultural) within the f i r s t feet of the scenic area as measured normal to the (centerline) (reference line) (nearest edge of pavement) (right of-.way line) of the highway. 8 . A l l rights except general crop and/or livestock farming (agricultural). 9 - The right to develop the easement area except for limited residential development consistent with applicable state and local regulations. Such limited rights retained by the owner are as follows: a) Each single family residential lot fronting on and abutting (identify Highway) shall be limited to a minimum width of n feet as measured parallel to the highway; b) A total of single family residential lots is the maximum authorized for the easement area. 1 0 . The right to change the use of the easement area from residential to any other use. 1 1 . The right to change the use. of the easement area from commercial to any other use. Award of Damages for Scenic Rights by the State Highway Commission of Wisconsin (Section 8 4 . 0 9 ( 2 ) ) This Award of Damages is made pursuant to a relocation order of the State Highway Commission dated , 1 9 , and f i l e d in the office of the County Clerk of County, for Scenic Rights adjacent to Highway in said County. The State Highway Commission, having determined that i t is necessary to preserve, protect, and improve where necessary, for scenic purposes, and to pre-vent any future development which may tend to detract therefrom, has ordered the acquisition of Scenic Rights in the name of the State of Wisconsin in perpetuity as hereinafter prescribed. Said Scenic Rights affect real estate in which the following persons have an interest: The area encompassed by this acquisition is described as follows: (Courtesy the Bureau of Right of Way, Division of Highways, Wisconsin De-partment of Transportation) - 23 -Chapter II BASIC VISUAL FACTORS AFFECTING THE LANDSCAPE WE SEE 2.1 Introduction The discipline of design provides a convenient frame of reference for analysis of the visual factors basic to our recognition of the scenic re-source. Many of the art elements which are organised through rhythm, balance, emphasis, and proportion into a harmony of unity and variety are directly applicable to the landscape, and an understanding of them i s what determines whether the design process produces a successful solution to^a problem and/or an aesthetically pleasing product. The factors are of two sorts, those inherent in the landscape i t s e l f and those dependent on the position of the observer in the landscape, though the boundaries between them are not sharp. The character of the landscape is dependant on the existence of one or several of these factors or "dominance factors" (Bacon 1971)» and generally one predominates in a given situation. Co-dominance, where more than one feature or factor vie for attention, produces a less satisfactory view, though this point i s returned to later under "variety in the view". 2.2 Form "Forms are complete or nearly complete areas of material bounded by perimeter lines which may be either fixed or silhouette." (Eckbo 1969). Bacon (1971) defines i t as "the shape or structure of something as distin-guished from the material of which i t is composed" while Litton (1968) refers - 2k -to "the three dimensional convex elements of the geomorphic base". Form is the most basic aspect of the environment to which we react and is the structural framework of the landscape. It is most distinctly-revealed when contrast between the particular form and i t s surroundings is maximum, as through isolation, size, contour distinction or silhouette, or surface variations. Thus steep surfaces are prominent through their contrast with horizontal or gently sloping surroundings, or a mountain is conspicuous through near silhouette against a sky background. Contrast may also be provided by texture variation alone, thus high mountain peaks or near vertical surfaces are generally more sparsely vegetated than less steeply inclined surfaces so their forms are revealed by texture differences. Form should be clearly differentiated from "shape", the latter being a two dimensional manifestation of the former three dimensional quality. Thus, from a fixed viewpoint, shape and form co-incide, but when observer movement is introduced they diverge. Form is clearly a three dimensional property yet from a fixed viewpoint only a two dimensional presentation is provided for most landscape elements. Unless the element is within 500 feet of a human observer, the small se-paration of the human eyes does not permit a three dimensional view of i t to be obtained and so prevents a f u l l knowledge of i t s true form. A three dimensional or stereo view of a distant object can be obtained indirectly by, for example, effectively increasing the separation of the observer's eye through photographs taken from more widely separated points and subsequently viewed together (Photograph 2 ) , but generally, complete form is only de-termined from a change of observer position. Thus we find that a h i l l i s a composite of fixed shapes, and silhouetted forms which result from the varying three dimensional combinations of these as we move about, the s i l -- 25 -PHOTOGRAPH II A stereoscopic view of a distant object produced by exposing frame from widely separated points (approximately 100 yards) - 26 -houetted forms only remaining constant i f they are radially symmetrical and our viewing path is on a constant radius from their central axis. In the complexity of the real world these fixed and silhouetted forms are played against each other in highly variable patterns, and i t i s by learning to orientate ourselves within these patterns that we learn to move through the world. The forms of the major landscape elements such as mountain ranges or river valleys are generally beyond practical human manipulation, so our analysis of them i s only with a view to determining their potential effect on our planning of the landscape. Therefore we may play with them to obtain the greatest degree of harmony, whether the proposed landscape change be a major clear-cutting, the alignment of a new road or the siting of a structure. Thus the major planning successes of the past are clearly due to the adaptation of a structure or function to a major natural land form so that the best qualities of both are revealed, and complement one another as a balance of function and form (Simonds 196l). In the landscape there are also minor natural elements which can be manipulated, such as h i l l s , and streams, and in the developing of any natural landscape area there are four general approaches: a) Preservation of the natural form. The landscape character of a h i l l may be such that i t s preservation in i t s original form is appropriate. This may be because of i t s unique value as a nature/ecological, reserve, due to i t s plant communities or value as w i l d l i f e habit or, less commonly in Canada as opposed to Britain, i t s geological significance; or, i t may be a famous local landmark; or as in Japan, i t may shelter a village or town and have been l e f t undisturbed for centuries, by decree, in the best interests of the community. - 27 -b) Accentuation of the natural form. The original form of the h i l l might be accentuated by various de-vices so producing an actual or illusory increase i n , for example, height or ruggedness. . -c) Alteration of natural form. The basic landscape character of a h i l l might be changed to any degree, by varying intensities of application of treatments, and the end result can either be an improvement or a downgrading of the original. d) Destruction of the natural form. Grading might destroy the h i l l ; i t might be s p l i t by a road cut; i t might be submerged by flooding; or i t might be buried by major construction. Obviously in any of these instances i t s original landscape character need no longer be considered a design factor. The employment of any or a l l of these courses of action suggest many creative possibilities in the design of scenic t r a i l s or in the integrating of artifacts into the natural landscape. Their use is basic in traditional landscape gardening, and should be ful l y u t i l i s e d beyond the garden fence in the landscape i t s e l f . (Figure l ) . In addition, there i s , in fact, a f i f t h category of landscape form "manipulation," namely the addition of entirely new forms to the landscape. Thus, in Sweden, the H8gdalstopper, has been constructed outside Stockholm. This is an entirely man-made h i l l constructed out of waste material, and is now heavily used as a recreation area. (Photograph 3). Interestingly, rather than attempt to copy natural forms, the designers of this accepted that as the h i l l i t s e l f was entirely un-natural, they were therefore at liberty to mold i t into un-natural form, which they did, with bold use of geometric forms. The question of just what is "natural" or acceptable into the land-scape is discussed further later. - 28 -DESTRUCTION Figure I: The four alternatives in the development of a h i l l . (from Simonds, 196l) - 29 -PHOTOGRAPH 3 The H^gdalstopper, a man-made h i l l . (from Dober, 1969) - 30 -2.3 Line Forms, as they appear to an observer, are bounded by lines, though the Impressionist School of art challenged this view, refusing to paint lines around objects when none existed in reality, and instead painted "light i t s e l f " . Nevertheless, while this view is certainly valid in their par-ticular context, line does occur in nature. Line as rejected by the Impre-ssionist school exists for example, as the sharp junction between two materials such as the edge of a body of quiet water or the edges of components of a structure. These are fixed lines which do not change as we move, though differing aspects are presented to us; they are important in landscape design as they can give direction, continuity, movement and guidance to the observer as he scans (or walks or drives through) a landscape. The other type of line can be defined as something that appears linear rather than a boundary and not implied as previously, in the outline of a mass or the edge between two forms. Thus this second type of line i s found in tree trunks, twigs, and branches and avalanche paths. (Photograph h). Line in the abstract has certain predictable impacts on the human intellectual-emotional response. (Simonds 196l). Thus i f the abstract expression of a given line contradicts the planned expression i t should only be used with care. In nature the horizontal line (and form) is commonest, especially in the background, as horizon, shoreline, mountain ranges, and forests viewed from a distance. Man has his t o r i c a l l y associated this line with s t a b i l i t y perhaps due to his subjection to gravity which gives him greatest s t a b i l i t y in the horizontal position. By contrast, the vertical l i n e , most commonly seen in the fore-ground, is associated with excitement and i n s t a b i l i t y , and is revealed in avalanche paths, waterfalls and tree trunks, a l l subject to gravity and either created by i t or engaged in re-- 31 -PHOTOGRAPH k Line i n the landscape - avalanche paths - 32 -sistance to i t . Management activities can frequently contrast with the predominant line in the landscape and thus look imposed and out of place. Thus a power line ascending apparently vertically up a predominantly horizontal range of h i l l s contrasts highly with the predominant l i n e , generally to the de-triment of the view for most observers. And, moreover, natural examples of line generally are gently curving and complex as in Photograph k of avalancht paths. Space "Much of the art and science of land planning is revealed to the land planner when he realises that he i s dealing not with areas but with volumes or spaces." (Simonds 196l). Thus a road is not simply a strip of tarmac on a plane but a series of different volumes consisting of the road sur-face and the air space and components above i t . These volumes would be open where safety considerations or pleasant views required i t , closed in by screening where such was adviseable, varied in their form, texture, and colour for interest and r e l i e f from fatigue, and regulated so as to best complement the natural landscape and the structural elements of the road i t s e l f . Thus through a properly designed sequence of volumes the motorist would be en-abled to move rapidly, safely and freely as the contrived road would keep him relaxed yet alert. Space is defined by physical elements, only then achieving form, volume, comprehensibility and scale. The principal definers of space in nature are topography and trees and to these humans have added a multitude of a r t i -facts ranging from fences to the largest of buildings. Thus we have great powers of control over the spaces we can work with and so have the power to create a variety of reactions to them ranging from agoraphobia to clau-- 33 -strophobia. Indeed the psychological impact of spaces is very wide in i t s range: for instance, during the Spanish C i v i l War an architect was commi-ssioned to design a highly refined torture chamber which was "successful" through i t s maddeningly arranged volume (Simonds 196l). Thus i f we can contrive unpleasant volumes, the converse should also be possible. In nature, spatial definition comes from concave elements of the geo-morphic base, vegetative enclosure or both, and as such the dominant con-cept is one of bounded space rather than one of boundless expanse, i t s range being suggested by such familiar terms as valley, canyon, gorge, gully and meadow. Thus in contrast to architectural space which is precisely defined by floor, wall and ceiling planes, landscape space is far more subtle though s t i l l formed by the same elements of floor and wall planes but only rarely a "ceiling" plane, as when lowering clouds or a tree canopy provide one. As a result of the general absence of a ceiling the concept of "con-cavity" is predominant. Many different volumes may occur in the natural landscape, as in ar-chitectural constructions, and with each there is an associated emotional or psychological reaction. Certainly the emotions that may be el i c i t e d by manipulation of natural volumes are less predictable than by creation of precise architectural spaces but they exist nevertheless and we should be aware of them in the designed landscape. Indeed, the essence of a volume is i t s quality of imposed or implied space, affected by i t s quality and size. Thus a space may be static and hold interest or i t may open out, directing attention to i t s frame and beyond: i t may be developed as an optimum environment for an object or a use; or i t may be designed to stimulate a prescribed emotional response. As an example of the latter there is the situation where walls are high and the floor space limited in extent so spatial definition is maximised. In the natural landscape this occurs i n , - 3h -for example a forest of mature timber such as a redwood (Sequoia sem- peri virens (D.Don) Endl) or Douglas-fir (Pseudotsuga menziesii (Mirb.) Franco) stand, and such terms as "cathedral like","awe inspiring"or "sublime" are associated with i t (e.g. Cathedral Grove on Vancouver Island). In architec-ture such space is traditionally u t i l i s e d in the construction of churches or great debating halls where soaring forms are used i n contrast with low horizontal forms. Orientation is directed strongly upwards, symbolising the i n f i n i t e . Walls and floor can add to or detract from the recognition of spaces. Architectural space is the more clearly defined, thus whenever the natural materials approximate those used in architecture, space definition is i n -creased. Thus a steep c l i f f face is a precise boundary to a space, just as a floor is most clearly presented by, for example, a fl a t grass plane, a desert surface, or, most perfectly, by a water body. At the other extreme, walls may be subtly suggested by a more or less discontinuous forest edge or floor by a complex surface of shrubs, isolated trees, and rocks. Here too, by careful selection of materials, by planting of appropriate species of trees in varying densities, creative design of space can e l i c i t many emotional responses. As was emphasized previously, the public w i l l expect to use the landscape for a variety of "new" purposes, and particularly where use intensities are high, environments w i l l have to be purposefully created for them. Among the many psychological states the public w i l l seek in the landscape may be included relaxation, gaiety, contemplation, dynamism, sensuous love, and spi r i t u a l awe. A knowledge of the desirable c r i t e r i a for each enables the designer to plan for them in the creation of volumes in the landscape so e l i c i t i n g the appropriate conditioned response. - 35 -Relaxation Among the desirable qualities of a space designed for relaxation are simplicity, familiar objects, flowing lines, horizontality of the principal lines. Gaiety Freedom in space is the basic requisite, with movement and rhythm ex-pressed in structure. Contemplation The space should primarily provide a sense of isolation, privacy, detachment, security and peace. Sharp contrast should be avoided. Sensuous love Perhaps symbolic of the new frankness in recognising the many uses to which the public puts the landscape would be the design of areas for love. This has been suggested by a few bold writers -(Fairbrother 1970) and while l i k e l y to remain a secondary use, there are many areas where provision for such might be suggested. Examples would be primarily in the urban parks where the need to be alone is most strong yet most d i f f i c u l t to satisfy. Among the desirable qualities of such a space would be privacy, intimate scale, low ceiling and horizontal plane. At this point the danger of over planning might seem strong, and we might legitimately argue that in the natural landscape we are seeking a complete change of scene from the urban environment, free from any suggestions of urbanism and i t s associated regimentation. . This point is certainly valid and w i l l be returned to later, but the basic reason for the present discussion, that of pointing out the psychological response to differing spacial qualities, remains valid. Spiritual Awe An overwhelming scale, transcending normal human experience is the prime - 36 -motivator, enhanced "by soaring vertical lines contrasting with low horizontal forms, plus compositional order as by symmetry. As a generalization of the above psychological states induced by different volumes we might examine the definition of the volumes themselves. To have a significant space, enclosure is required. Thus in both North America and Europe city parks are usually merely f l a t grassy areas created solely by the fact that buildings have not been erected on them. Certainly they are functional, as for b a l l games, but they might be far more. Size, shape and character of the enclosure determine the true quality of the space - "openness, void or mere expanse are not enough; they may be only emptiness." (Simonds 196l). In the outdoor landscape there are an i n f i n i t e variety of volumes ranging from that limited only by the far horizon and the sky to the tiniest cleft i n a rock face, and the designer has a very wide range of materials with which to work, both natural and man-made. Thus the primary volume of a largely open urben park might be precisely defined by the masses and voids of the surrounding buildings and rows of clipped trees, while a more rural space might be only loosely defined by a grassy floor interspersed by boulders, open sky and tree canopies overhead, and irregularly spaced trees suggesting the walls. Yet each volume, controlled or free is defined by the same volumetric elements, the base plane, the overhead plane and the vertical space dividers. It is the type and degree of enclosure provided by these three elements that determines the nature of the induced human response. Complexity of enclosure induces excitement, diversion, curiosity, surprise and movement; simplicity induces relaxation and repose; while an open and free enclosure induces action and exuberance. - 3 7 -Spatial reactions are perhaps the most profound, contrasting with the p i c t o r i a l and the plastic. Thus a p i c t o r i a l object is two dimensional and apprehended statically and consciously from the outside; a.plastic object is three dimensional and convex and apprehended stereoscopically from the outside; while spatial objects or volumes are three dimensional and concave, and are apprehended kinetically and sub-consciously from within. Indicative of the increasing complexity is the success with which media can provide a reconstruction of them. Thus the p i c t o r i a l can be represented by con-ventional photography, reaching a present pinnacle in the projected image of a modern colour transparency; the plastic to a limited degree of success by stereo photography and increasingly by holography; while as yet there is no totally successful method of conveying the sense of being within a volume. "Wrap around" cinema screens which surround the viewer to a very limited degree are an early attempt. Static images completely surrounding the viewer have been displayed in numerous fairs and expositions but in most cases the base plane and overhead planes have been lacking. Multiple camera photography has been tried where simultaneously a battery of cine cameras expose film covering a f u l l 3 6 0 degree sphere which could then be combined onto a spherical screen surrounding the observer, but such is un-l i k e l y to have much commercial success, remaining only as a research or novelty device. A'version of i t does, however, appear to the general public in the form of the planetarium where the viewers are seated at the centre of a hemi-spherical screen onto which can be projected an accurate representation of the sky, complete with skyline, for a number of locations anywhere in the world. Despite i t s actual complexity, however, the night sky is far less d i f f i c u l t to portray satisfactorily than even simple day light environ-ments, as. a l l objects are at i n f i n i t y and only the simple overhead plane is represented, elements of the base plane and enclosing walls being conveniently - 38 -concealed by darkness. A further i n c r e a s i n g l y f a m i l i a r representation of a view of a hemis-phere i s provided by the " f i s h eye" lens. O r i g i n a l l y devised for s c i e n t i f i c purposes (for example a l l - s k y meteorological photographs), i t i s now widely av a i l a b l e on the amateur market and has been widely exploited i n adver-t i s i n g photography where the unconventional representations of f a m i l i a r ob-jects that i t made possible gave i t considerable (though ephemeral) popularity. The true f i s h eye lens provides on the f i l m i n the camera a c i r c u l a r image 180 degrees i n diameter and by p o i n t i n g i t v e r t i c a l l y upwards a view s i m i l a r to that presented i n a planetarium i s obtained, with the horizon recorded around the circumference of the c i r c u l a r image (Photograph 5 ) • When, however, the lens i s used f o r photographs taken more or less h o r i z o n t a l l y , very unfamiliar images of the world are obtained through the o p t i c a l bending of s t r a i g h t l i n e s i n t o curves (Photograph 6 ) , a necessary f a c t o r i n the r e -presentation of a hemisphere i n two dimensions. The d i f f i c u l t y experienced by inexperienced observers i n i n t e r p r e t i n g these images i s i n d i c a t i v e of our ingrained concepts of s p a t i a l q u a l i t i e s , and s i g n i f i c a n t l y , a number of the more succ e s s f u l f i s h eye photographs have r e l i e d on t h i s a b i l i t y to upset the viewer's f a m i l i a r responses. 2.5 Light By means of l i g h t we see the landscape. Light emitted from the sun s t r i k e s the many components of the landscape, i s absorbed, and i s re-radiated with a changed nature depending on the composition of the material r e f l e c t i n g i t . I t i s t h i s p ortion of the l i g h t we see. The b a s i c q u a l i t y of that re-radiated l i g h t i s i t s colour expressed i n terms of hue and value. Hue i s what we describe when we r e f e r to an object as blue, green, red, and so on, while value i s the q u a l i t y of being e i t h e r PHOTOGRAPH 5 "Fish-eye" spherical perspective (vertical view) PHOTOGRAPH 6 "Fish-eye"spherical perspective (horizontal view) - 40 -dark or l i g h t , on a scale from black to white through a series of inter-mediate grays. The pure hues which are familiar in the man-made world rarely occur in nature, with the exception of in the rainbow. The nearest approximations, as in the seasonal or temporary phenomena of spring green grass, autumn tree foliage of reds and yellows, some flowers, and the b r i l l i a n t blues of very clear skies, are therefore significant because of their r a r i t y , but even these are not true chromatic hues (Litton 1968) but heavy saturation of certain hues which have become visually dominant because of their contrast with the more common grayed hues of the landscape, caused by the presence of black, white or other colours. Colour has a strong psychological effect on us with which we are a l l familiar: for example, we associate the red end of the spectrum with warmth and the blue -end with coldness and depression, and Luscher (1971) has elaborated this in his "Luscher Colour Test", the principle of which is that accurate psychological information can be gained about a person through his choices and rejections of colours. We are "in the pink of condition", or "have the blues" and the psychological effect of colour has been greatly exploited by painters as in Picasso's Blue Nude or, indeed much of his "Blue Period." Indeed, stronger aesthetic or symbolic responses appear to be aroused by colour than by other forms of visual per-ception, and despite the fact that 1.5% of European males have some impairment of "colour blindness" in the red green section of the spectrum, (Hardy, ^ 1970) our fondness for colour is indicated by the almost complete replacement of black and white by -colour film in the "snapshot market". Further, from the f i r s t announcement of the invention of the Daguerrotype (the f i r s t true photographic device) on the 7th of January, 1839, there was a disappointment that i t was unable to record colours instead of translating them into shades of mono-chrome (Gernsheim 1965). - 41 -The generally muted colours of nature, contrasted with the wide range of man-made coloured materials that may be introduced into the landscape in the form of buildings, signs, cars and so on, which are increasingly resistant to muting by weathering, impose a responsibility upon us to use them with care in the designed landscape. That we are aware of and recoiling from the gaudiness of the commercial scene is perhaps indicated by our choice of more muted pastel shades for our private l i v e s , and the grays and browns of "pure" architecture, though this i s perhaps more l i k e l y a manifestation of our puritanical heritage (Eckbo 1969). Nevertheless, con-sidering the powerful effect upon us of colour, a knowledge of the creative possibilities of the use of colour in bringing harmony to the visual land-scape seems desirable. According to an early Chinese theory (Simonds 196l) man has become so accustomed to the colour schemes of nature that he is averse to any con-tradiction of their basic arrangement. Thus the base planes of a space should be of earthy colours, or occasionally of the blues and blue-greens of water, especially where walking is to be discouraged ( 1 ) , the walls of blacks, browns, deep reds and ochres reminiscent of tree trunks and the ceilings of colours found i n the sky. Fortunately this is but one of the colour theories so we should not feel too restricted in our interior decorating! Another theory would keep the volume enclosed neutral in colour allowing the objects or persons in the room to "glow" with their own colour: while yet another recommends that the space be infused with these hues and values that e l i c i t a prescribed intellectual-emotional response, so adding to that already induced by the space i t s e l f , as described previously. Another pro-poses that hues and values have no meaning except in combination and gain their impact through carefully devised relationships and this is perhaps most useful to us i n the context of the natural landscape. - 42 -The creative use of colour in landscaping has generally been confined to the choice of suitably coloured plant species, but man-made features with their possible very wide range of colour schemes deserve careful attention. Repton (1907) recommended an "invisible green" for farm buildings but Fairbrother (1970) considers that unless the green i s camaflouge khaki i t is generally a bad colour in >the landscape and that neutrals are better. These opinions do, however, indicate a desire to conceal artifacts, and while such an approach is certainly valid in some circumstances, there is every reason, in the right place, to make the buildings or whatever a visually satisfying adjunct to the landscape. Weiler(1970) has given recommendations for the blending of farm buildings into the landscape and now, with a range of standard basic components for buildings available in a choice of colours, improvements are imminent. Yet how is one to decide what colours are appropriate where? Certainly, reference to the importance and symbolic value of colour have been made through-out history, but the fineness of discrimination between colours of varying wavelength is not as fine as that of tonal gradation, and i t i s moreover confused by semantic problems of colour nomenclatures adopted by different societies. Colour sensitivity is also very variable, depending both upon the length of exposure ( c f . colour fatigue) and upon the different per-ceptual systems used under day and night conditions of illumination. Thus by day the eye is most sensitive to the green/yellow sector of the spectrum and at night to the blue/green sector. Indeed, at very low level of illum-ination colour sensitivity is not present, only grays being detectable, as the "cones" in the central portion of the retina, with which colour dis-crimination is associated, are less sensitive than the"rods", the primary detectors of light. - 1*3 -As an example of semantic problems we may note that Homer refers to the sky as black, and the sea as wine-dark, black or gray; yet never green or blue, and an Egyptian song to Isis compares hair to turquoise! (Anderson, 1961). Yet despite these problems, colours were probably f i r s t compared by reference to natural objects, as in green as grass or blue as the sky. An indication of the natural environment determining the dominant colour, li e s in the facts that in the writings of Wordsworth, who wrote in the pre-dominantly green English Lake D i s t r i c t , E l l i s (Anderson 196l) noted 100 references to colour, with 35 to green. Further, in the writings of northern poets in general, gray is a very frequently mentioned colour and to a lesser extent blue, but very rarely the "warmer" colours such as pink. Despite the importance of colour in symbolism, and the powerful emotional responses to i t , the use of colour symbol is often inconsistent. Apart from red which always seems to denote action, white cleanliness, and black misfortune, colour seems to mean only what a culture says i t means, the colour symbol being strongly imbedded in the fabric of the culture and the designer being unable to change ideas about i t . Thus in the replacement of old artifacts by the new, we ought perhaps to stay close to the colour schemes that have come to be associated with the land, so long as the land i t s e l f (or rather i t s use) have not been modernised: thus Fairbrother (19T0) considers the boldness of colour found in modern agricultural equipment to be very appropriate to modern farming i t s e l f with i t s wide spaces and simple lines. One of the few facts that can be stated about colour in the landscape is that the further away the object being viewed, the "bluer" i t looks, because particles of dust in the atmosphere scatter the blue end of the spectrum - hk -more than the red. One more common response to colour that may have i t s origins in this environmental effect is the fact that i f a two dimensional representation, for example, a colour transparency, of two coloured objects, one blue and the other red, both at the same distance from the observer, is examined, then the red object w i l l appear to be closer to the observer while the blue "recedes". This has given rise to the photographic cliche, beloved by amateurs and picture postcard photographers, of having a patch of red colour somewhere in the foreground of (every) picture to create an i l l u s i o n of depth. The incident light by which we see the landscape also has direction, and the direction of the light has a strong and direct effect on the detail visible in the landscape. From a given observer position a landscape may be back-lit, s i d e - l i t or f r o n t - l i t and over time may become each in turn as the position of the sun changes. In the most carefully designed landscape i t would be desirable to be aware of the most frequent period of viewing with respect to time and season, as, although there is no "best" illumination for a given landscape there is a c r i t i c a l period when certain features might be revealed to advantage or, alternatively, screened from view by shadows and so on. In general, back lighting gives the least c r i t i c a l view of a landscape as the observer is dazzled by the light: silhouettes are revealed most clearly then, however. Also, translucent objects such as thin-broad leaf foliage trees are shown to advantage and appear to contain their own source of illumination. Frontal lighting minimises shadows and allows a maximum amount of detail to be observed, though with least "modeling" of the surfaces. Side lighting, by contrast, emphasises texture and three dimensionality to a maximum degree when the angle of illumination (i.e. altitude of sun) is low. - 1+5 -As an example of what, perhaps, ought to be regarded as over exploitation of such matters, however, is the existence of a number of travel guides which, in addition to t e l l i n g the tourist exactly where he should stand and where point his camera, also l i s t the exact times and dates for the "best" photo-graphs of famous landmarks should be taken. While this approach w i l l certainly ensure the tourist of a satisfactory representation of the scene, i t does give rise to the increasingly noted phenomenon of the camera replacing the art of "seeing", where rather than taking time to absorb the information presented to his eyes and other senses, a photograph is taken and the tourist passes on. Perhaps the extrapolation of this is to a situation where active tourism ceases and returns us to the original situation where travel is done at home in front of a television screen. Scale The importance of the factor of scale in the landscape we see has already been alluded to; here scale w i l l be discussed as a "real" factor, that i s , the true magnitude of components of the landscape, and also as an apparent scale, where by means of changing viewpoint the apparent ratio between the components i s seen to vary - at one extreme a component being a dominant feature, at the other only part of the texture of the landscape. Scale is the relation between the dimensions of the parts and the whole in any part of the environment and gives the observer the sensations of bigness or smallness. There are many sources of scale, that is frames of reference of standard size with which unfamiliar objects are visually com-pared, among them "people, animals, and trees, or when the magnitude of the object is vast, the geomorphological features with which we are familiar. - k6 -Within the social landscape the human form is the normal reference and many guidelines have been developed upon i t (for example, the Vitruvian "anthro-pomorphic module") which w i l l be discussed later. But in the outdoors, scale is determined by the human form, plus the components of the landscape. Indeed the landscape has no scale u n t i l elements of recognisable scale, and intermediate between the landscape and human scale, are interposed in some way between scene and observer. Thus the mountains of Britain, though in fact small by North American standards, can present very imposing landscapes partly through the absence of tree cover to which the observer can relate the size of the mountains, and i t is for this reason that there is considerable valid opposition to afforestation or reafforestation in certain highly scenic locations. (Photographs 7» 8 & 9). Scale depends on two variables as follows: a) The observer distance from the component of the landscape under observation. For a given landscape and observer, there is generally an optimum proportion between the scale of the landscape, and the components of i t , and the observer w i l l try to position himself so as to obtain this. There is no single "best" viewing distance for a given landscape as viewers w i l l vary in their tastes as to which segment of the landscape they most desire to concentrate upon. Thus in a complex landscape of high mountain, forest, village and farmland, while each observer w i l l perceive the whole, his attention w i l l be directed to a particular segment, only a minority of viewers being i n -terested in the total landscape and the unity of land uses i t may or may B not reveal. However, in the selection of "viewpoints" i t may be possible to agree upon a compromise, particularly i f we remember that the modern observer is equipped with a variety of " f i l t e r i n g devices" such as binoculars PHOTOGRAPHS 7 & 8 True s c a l e i n the landscape cannot be determined u n t i l reference objects of known s i z e are present. Photograph 7 i s of s i x i n c h " r i v e r s " i n sand, w h i l e Photograph 8 i s of 3000 f e e t high mountains. - h9 -and interchangeable lens cameras, so introducing new factors at present l i t t l e documented. (Countryside Commission for Scotland, 1971). For discussion purposes the distance zones in the landscape have been divided into the familiar foreground, middleground, and background, and there is general agreement (Litton 1968, Burke et al 1968) that foreground extends from 0 to 1/k or 1/2 mile, middleground from 1/k to 1/2 up to 3-5 miles and background from 3-5 up to i n f i n i t y . A l l three zones may be present in the landscape visible from a given point. For the present purposes of the examination of scale i t is convenient to start with the background and by approaching i t observe the transition of components of i t to middle-ground and then foreground. (Photographs 10 to 13). Photograph 10 shows the frame of reference from 2 miles. It corresponds to the "vista"(Simonds 196l) examined by the eye. Individual trees, rocks, buildings are of such a small scale in the frame that they are invisible to the unaided eye or exist only a very weak texture. It is characteristic of the background to contain only simple outline shapes and l i t t l e surface texture or detail, only the gross patterns standing out, and the skylines or ridgelines being the strongest visual elements, other detail removed by small scale due to distance and atmospheric perspective. Photograph 11 shows the frame of reference from 1 mile, individual buildings, trees and rocks being now a large enough part of the whole to appear as strong texture. The detail is now the middle ground, the generally most c r i t i c a l zone as i t occupies a large proportion of many views (Colviti, 1970). Photograph 12,corresponding to the vista examined from 500 yards, shows individual trees, and buildings showing up as strong line and now a great part of the vista and foreground. Very much detail is visible in the fore-ground and indeed the observer is in i t . Individual trees and rocks may be - 51 -examined in detail and the other senses of sound, smell and touch may be added to the visual for perception of i t . Yet closer views as from 18 inches (Photograph 13) change the elements of line to texture once again. A further example of the effect of the movement of observer viewpoint serves also to show how dominance of feature (as opposed to dominance of factor) changes. In Photograph Ik taken from 100 yards from the tree, the tree feature is dominant against the mountain background. In Photograph 15 taken from 1/2 mile, co-dominance is present, the mountain range and tree being of equal visual dominance. Finally, in Photograph 16, taken from 1 mile, the mountain range dominates the tree which is now only one component of the vista. In practice, this should be borne in mind in the design of scenic t r a i l s and roads, where by careful location, a sequence of vistas might be presented showing,fOr.example, some man-made feature in detailed foreground position, e.g. forestry operations, where the vis i t o r might gain an insight into the work. Then, to reassure him that this essential function is moreover being conducted with concern for the landscape he can then be presented with a vista where the operation is seen within the wide landscape as a blending component (always assuming that i t is.'). b) Scale can also be changed within the same vista by changing the size of objects within i t , with respect to a scale of reference such as the human form. From a viewing distance of k to 6 feet as seen by the observer this is illustrated as follows. (Photographs i f to 2lf). In Photograph i f , the stones are small and appear to the observer as fine texture as in Photograph 13. In Photograph 19, the rocks are larger and - 52 -PHOTOGRAPH ik PHOTOGRAPH 15 PHOTOGRAPH l 6 Transition in dominance of landscape features with observer movement. - 53 -PHOTOGRAPHS 17-24 Change of r e l a t i v e s c a l e i n the landscape by changing the s i z e o f the objects w i t h i n i t w i t h respect to the observer. - 5k -appear as weak to moderate form as in Photograph 20. With larger rocks as in Photograph 21, they are strong form (Photograph 22;, returning as they become yet larger as in Photograph 23,to texture and colour (Photograph 2k). This awareness of whether form or line or texture is the dominant factor in analysis of the landscape is important where an observer viewpoint i s not fixed. For example, the corridor of a pow^rline through a forest, where the edge has been given some irregularity, might appear visually acceptable from a few hundred yards. Yet the same corridor viewed from several miles is a visually disturbing feature in the landscape, requiring a different treatment for i t s visual integration into the landscape. In an analagous fashion, the decision as to the variety and area of plant species to be planted to provide a pleasing landscape w i l l depend upon the scale of the patches at the distance from which they w i l l be viewed. And clearly the problem is complicated further i f differing management treatments w i l l be seen from a series of viewpoints each within memory span of the other. A further example of scale "manipulation" occurs when the landscape is photographed through camera lenses of various (or varying) focal lengths, and while i t i s not suggested that the landscape should be designed with this in mind, as the number of variables then becomes overwhelmingly large, familiarity with this phenomenon is valuable. The "standard" lens of any camera, that i s the one which is f i t t e d to non-interchangeable lens cameras and which is generally supplied with inter-changeable lens cameras, i s of a focal length approximately equal to the diagonal1, of the film plane or negative size. Thus for the 35 mm format, where the film plane is 2k mm x 36 mm ("35 mm" refers to the width of the film, perforations included) the diagonal is ^ qual to the square root of the sum of the squares of these dimensions, and therefore the standard lens i s - 5 5 -of a focal length approximately equal to this; That i s : f . l . (std. ) = Ji^2 ^ fe2 (where 1 =length of film plane, b =width of film plane) Thus for 35mm i t is 43mm. In practise this varies from 45 mm to 58 mm but 50mm is common, and corresponds approximately to the 60 degree scanning area of foveal vision (Walker 1971). The commonest use of additional lenses is to increase(telephotp)or decrease (wide angle) the scale of the image produced on the negative (or transparency) as compared to that produced by the standard lens. This is illustrated in Photographs 25 to "2f\. The effects produced are similar to that produced by changing the observer distance as described previously and illustrated in Photographs 10 to 13, but in this latter case perspective too is changed. Thus the photographer has the a b i l i t y to manipulate perspective at w i l l for a number of effects, and so the a b i l i t y to photographically manipulate scale, achieving on film results analagous to those illustrated in Photographs 17 to 24 , achieved by actually changing the size of the objects with respect to the observer. This phenomenon of perspective manipulation is illustrated in Photographs 28 to 3D.. 2.7 Observer Position In contrast to the previous section where change of observer position affects the scale of the landscape viewed, change of observer position is here taken to mean the location of the observer in terms of whether he is below, at the same level as or above the visual objective, these three possi-b i l i t i e s being referred to as (l) observer inferior, (2) observer normal, and (3) observer superior. (Litton 1968). In common with observer distance, - 5 6 -PHOTOGRAPHS 2 5 , 2 6 , 2 7 Change of photographic image scale i through increasing lens power. - 57 -I PHOTOGRAPHS 28, 29, 30 Perspective manipulation through increasing lens power. - 58 -i t has important results on the dominance and scale of features viewed, and upon the "depth' of view (Sargent 1971). Further, i t too is subject to manipulation and choice, observer positions being consciously selected as in the routing of roads and t r a i l s . For any visual objective, whether i t be a natural feature or a management activity, the proportion of i t seen is a direct function of the angle between the observer's line of vision and the horizontal and also the angle of slope on which the visual objective li e s (assuming there is no intervening fea-tures such as vegetation to obscure the view from some positions). This is illustrated in Figure 2. Clearly from position x the apparent size of the feature and consequently the amount of detail visible is maximum, and so in the case of visually favourable features this site ought to be con-sidered for viewpoint purposes (commensurate as always with other consider-ation), or where the feature is undesirable this position might be avoided or provided with appropriate screening. A similar effect occurs when the observer is viewing horizontally from a number of positions of similar height and here depends on the horizontal angle between the observer's line of sight and the plane of the surface on which the objective occurs, as in Figure 3. In general an observer inferior position, where the observer is below the feature being viewed, is the least c r i t i c a l in terms of d i f f i c u l t i e s of screening any undesirable views and consequently may require most mani-pulation of intervening vegetation and so on to provide views of desirable features. Also important to note i s that from this position the foreground is prominent and so receives much attention. From the observer superior position, where the observer's line of sight is down to the visual objective, as in the classical view from the high mountain peak, restrictions on his view are minimum as are the opportunities - 59 -OBSERVER INFERIOR FIGURE 2 The extent of a v i s u a l o b j e c t i v e i s a f u n c t i o n of the angle between the observer's l i n e of s i g h t and the h o r i z o n t a l , and a l s o the angle of slope on which the v i s u a l o b j e c t i v e l i e s . (from Bacon 1971) - 60 -OBSERVER POSITION LEAST CRITICAL OBSERVER POSITION MOST CRITICAL FIGURE 3 The extent of a v i s u a l o b j e c t i v e i s a f u n c t i o n of the h o r i z o n t a l angle between the observer's l i n e of s i g h t and the plane of the surface on which the o b j e c t i v e occurs. (from Bacon 1971) - 61 -f o r screening out undesirable features (Photograph 31). PHOTOGRAPH 31 Observer Superior P o s i t i o n As the widest view i s u s u a l l y obtained from t h i s p o s i t i o n , the o p p o r t u n i t i e s f o r showing management a c t i v i t i e s as i n t e g r a t e d i n t o the general landscape are maximum; i n gene r a l , the views of the landscape provide a maximum though g e n e r a l i s e d r e v e l a t i o n of contents. Depth o f view i s maximum, considered i n some landscape c l a s s i f i c a t i o n schemes to be a plus f a c t o r , but t h i s w i l l be discussed l a t e r . The observer normal view i s c l e a r l y intermediate between the two p o s i t i o n s j u s t d e scribed, and so s e l f - e x p l a n a t o r y . I t s view provides a compromise between the broad overview of the observer s u p e r i o r p o s i t i o n and the sense of s p a t i a l enclosure provided by the observer i n f e r i o r p o s i t i o n , so suggesting i t s e l f i f indeed a compromise must be found. - 62 3 2.8 Motion and Sequence Every object we perceive exists in time as well as in space and cannot be understood in i t s entirety u n t i l i t has been observed from a number of points of view. Thus i t i s perceived through a flow of impressions tied together through the memory of the observer. In terms of planning, the succession of perceptions or experiences are said to show sequence i f they have continuity, an important consideration as our perception at any moment is influenced by previous experiences and when recalled in memory, by those before and after i t . In nature successions of experiences are usually casual though some-times they are progressive: for instance through ascent, as in climbing from lowlands to mountain peak; or directional, as in crossing Canada west-wards, from the prairies, over the Rockies, through the valleys and to the ocean; or inwards from the sunlit edges of a forest to i t s dark interior; or progressions of enclosure, complexity, intensity, convenience or compre-hension. A planned sequence would be a conscious arrangement of organ-isation of elements and spaces and would generally have a beginning and an end that is usually, though not always, the climax. In fact there might be several climaxes, so long as each one is supported by, and satisfying to, the sequence in which i t occurs. There is thus a suggested impulse to move from the start to the end. Ideally a planned sequence would interpret, express or dramatize the elements, areas or spaces i t traversed and the total sequence would have a distinctive character and associated emotional response. Such an ideal, planned sequence is characteristic of the Japanese approach to the design of parks and gardens and is exemplified by the following - 6-3 -example (Twlss I 9 6 6 ) : "Rikyu, in his garden at Sakai, obstructed the open view of the sea, by planting a grove of trees in such a way that only when the guest stooped at the stone water basin to wash his hands and rinse his mouth preparatory to entering the tea-house he caught an unexpected glimpse of i n f i n i t y - thus suddenly re-vealing the relation of the dipperful of water l i f t e d from the basin to the vast expanse of the sea, and of himself to the uni-verse. " This provided a very appropriate and satisfying climax to a walk through the garden, whose prime feature, the view i t provided of the sea, i s tan-talisingly reserved u n t i l i t s visual impact can be maximised. Such idealism in design i s clearly, however, only possible in the ab-sence of powerful and valid practical requirements and constraints, and in most situations, as for road and t r a i l construction, ;.many deviations from the ideal must be anticipated. But, as has been emphasised throughout, form should generally be subordinate to function, yet always a consideration, and in the planning of any spaces through which people are to move, whether on foot or in vehicles, an understanding of spatial modulation is important. Among the general principles involved is that the greater the time that an observer can view a given visual objective, the greater the strengthening of the dominance factors. Thus when objectives are viewed from a car as a sequence of visual experiences, the observer experiences the dominance factors as an averaging of the different scenes, greatly strengthened by the scene viewed at any one time. When the observer is stationery, as at a view point, the dominant factors are greatly strengthened. Further, in these situations where the observer is able to concentrate on a scene for a period of time, they should be considered more c r i t i c a l and so more worthy of the designer's attention than those where the observer sees the scene as moving and one of a sequence of visual experiences. An exception would be where - 6h -the feature and the road are such that the v i s u a l objective can be seen from the road f o r a considerable period of time, e s p e c i a l l y i n the driver's forward cone of v i s i o n . Speed of t r a v e l by the observer i s a further important consideration as i t c l e a r l y a f f e c t s the time that a feature can be seen and also the amount of attention the observer ( i f d r i v e r of a car) can di v e r t from h i s main task of d r i v i n g s a f e l y . Yet, as Appleyard (1964) says, "...once he climbs i n t o a v e h i c l e , the whole v a r i e t y of personal movements, i n which our language i s r i c h - dawdling, s t r o l l i n g , walking, stepping, hopping, running or climbing - becomes r e -s t r i c t e d . He s i t s , perhaps operating the gears, with movements that bear only an i n d i r e c t r e l a t i o n s h i p to h i s t r a v e l . . . Movement has been steadied, changes i n d i r e c t i o n have been graded out, stops are eliminated... The automobile or any other vehicle screens out many t a c t i l e clues of self-motion." In f a c t , the very "improvements" that make the dr i v e r more comfortable i n his car simultaneously d u l l his k i n e s t h e t i c sense, the body sensation ex-perienced by a r i d e r i n a car as the car makes a h o r i z o n t a l or v e r t i c a l turn. Movement i s normally detected by two groups of sensors. The f i r s t are nerve endings d i s t r i b u t e d i n the ligamentous structures of j o i n t s and areas of deep t i s s u e s . The second group consists of inter-communicating membranous sacs and canals f i l l e d with f l u i d (the labyrinths) located i n the s k u l l . The f i r s t group of sensors send pulses to the br a i n and per-ceive any movements of the muscles and j o i n t s , the speed of the pulses depending on the speed of movement experienced. The l a b y r i n t h detects two types of movement, that of the body i n r e l a t i o n to i t s environment, and that of the head i n r e l a t i o n to the body. Movement up and down, side to side and backwards and forwards i s detected and these sensors maintain the equi-l i b r i u m or balance of the body. Even though a person may hot be experiencing - 6 5 ' -movement, he w i l l s t i l l possess an awareness of h i s b o d y ' S T p o s i t i o n i n r e l a t i o n to the surrounding environment and so, i n the "best" of c a r s , i t i s these l a t t e r sensors w i t h which we are concerned. The modern car f u r t h e r removes the s e n s i t i v i t y of the other senses t o the outside w o r l d , l e a v i n g only v i s u a l p erception as the operating sense. While the f a c t o r s b a s i c t o r e c o g n i t i o n o f the s c e n i c resource can conveniently be discussed i n d i v i d u a l l y , they are p e r c e i v e d together and are i n t e r r e l a t e d i n the landscape: whether or not they c o n s t i t u t e a uniform whole i s the subject of composition. 2.9 Composition In essence, composition i s the arranging of the parts i n t o a v i s u a l l y harmonious whole. The b a s i c working p r i n c i p l e i s t h a t the whole i s greater than the sum of the p a r t s f o r , w h i l e i n any landscape features of beauty can be found, t h i s i s no guarantee that the whole w i l l be considered aesthe-t i c a l l y p l e a s i n g . For example, the photographer or p a i n t e r can f i n d much of beauty i n a c i t y slum or i n '. s o - c a l l e d over mature t r e e s , i n terms of t e x t u r e , l i n e and so on, which the b u i l d e r or f o r e s t e r may r e p l a c e w i t h s a n i t a r y but d u l l apartment b l o c k s or p l a n t a t i o n s . We are f a m i l i a r w i t h the concept i n the context of a p a i n t i n g or other work of a r t but i t can a l s o be extended t o the landscape we see, the i m p l i -c a t i o n being not t h a t the landscape i s a work of a r t i t s e l f , but t h a t i t can be seen to have c e r t a i n o f the c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s of one, and so can be d i s -cussed i n s i m i l a r terms. Of course, c e r t a i n landscapes have been designed l a r g e l y as works of a r t , f o r example, the t r a d i t i o n a l 18th century E n g l i s h landscape, but as has been emphasised p r e v i o u s l y , f u n c t i o n must be the dominant c r i t e r i a f o r the design of most landscapes. - 66 -Throughout the centuries considerable thought has been given to the establishment of f i x e d r u l e s and formulae t h a t might be a p p l i e d to determine good composition whether i n p a i n t i n g s , b u i l d i n g s , landscapes, or the r e l a -t i o n s h i p s between various features of the landscape. S e v e r a l schools of thought have regarded m a t h e m a t i c a l ^ r e l a t i o n s h i p s as the b a s i s o f a l l matter, growth and order. For example, the "golden r e c t a n g l e " , formed whenever a u n i t square i s subtracted from each ever-d i m i n i s h i n g r e c t a n g l e , and whose sides have the r a t i o ^ o f 1: 1 . 6 l 8 or roughly 3: 5 , has appeared repeatedly i n the s t r u c t u r e s and spaces of the Western world. B o r i s s a v l i e v i t c h (Simonds 1 9 6 l ) has proposed t h a t there are only two laws of a r c h i t e c t u r a l harmony, the law of the s i m i l a r and the law of the same.According t o the law of the same, harmony i s p e r c e i v e d or created i n a s t r u c t u r e or composition of s t r u c t u r e s through r e p e t i t i o n o f the same elements or spaces or forms. In the law of the s i m i l a r , harmony i s pe r c e i v e d or created through the r e p e t i t i o n of s i m i l a r elements, spaces or forms. The "organic" scheme i s a f u r t h e r e a r l y " r u l e " that has r e c e i v e d i n -c r e a s i n g a t t e n t i o n r e c e n t l y . The p r o g r e s s i o n was discovered by F i b o n a c c i , an I t a l i a n mathematician of the Renaissance times and was w i d e l y adapted to a l l phases of p l a n n i n g . S t a r t i n g w i t h u n i t s of 1 and 2 , i f each new d i g i t i s the sum of the previous two, a p r o g r e s s i o n o f 1 , 2 , 3 , 5 , 8 , 1 3 , 2 1 , 3 4 and so on r e s u l t s , which, when t r a n s l a t e d i n t o p lan forms and rhythms, i s v i s u a l l y p l e a s i n g . F u r t h e r , i t was l a t e r discovered that t h i s p r ogression approximated the growth sequence of p l a n t s and was taken by many planners as c o n f i r m a t i o n t h a t i t was " n a t u r a l " and "organic". V i t r u v i u s , who was a Roman a r c h i t e c t and s c h o l a r l i v i n g i n the 1s t century B.C. proposed h i s theory of a e s t h e t i c a l l y p l e a s i n g proportions based on a study of ancient Greek p l a n n i n g . He concluded t h a t the s i z e and p r o p o r t i o n s of - 67 -the human body were of fundamental importance i n planning and h i s "anthro-pomorphic module" had a profound e f f e c t on Renaissance planning. His ideas were summed up i n the f o l l o w i n g quota i o n : "Therefore i f nature has planned the human body so that the members correspond i n t h e i r p roportions to the complete c o n f i g u r a t i o n , the ancients seem t o have had reason i n determining t h a t i n the execution o f t h e i r works they should observe an exact adjustment of t h e i r s e v e r a l members to the general p a t t e r n of the p l a n . " (Simonds, 1 9 6 l ) Leonardo da V i n c i , i n the 15th century, s i m i l a r l y t a b u l a t e d a system based on the mean proportions of the component parts of the human f i g u r e i n r e l a t i o n t o i t s t o t a l h e i g ht. Figure h i l l u s t r a t e s h i s p r i n c i p l e t h a t "the span o f a man's outstanding arms i s equal to h i s h e i g h t . " (Simonds 1 9 6 l ) . FIGURE k (from Simonds 196 l ) - 68 -While these propositions are certainly of value to a f u l l under-standing of the concept of composition, they are clearly of more limited application to the "functional" landscape that is being emphasised here, or the "wilderness" landscape, than they are to one planned solely for aesthetics, such as the traditional English landscape or Japanese garden where the visual impact and psychological effect are of prime concern. In the former landscapes ecological, economic or sociological factors largely dictate the confines within which aesthetic judgements can be exercised. Even within these confines, however, there is considerable room for the arrangement of structures, siting of viewpoints, and so on to maximise the aesthetic qualities of the given environment. For example, rather than trying to crudely conceal a structure in the landscape such as a pulp m i l l , camp-site or other, with a f u l l e r explanation of their role in the functional landscape they can be seen as integral parts of i t and not disfiguring appendages to i t . Of great importance here is the relationship between any structure and i t s surrounding space. For instance i t has been pointed out by Hegeman and Peets (Simonds, 196l) that the human eye can best see the detail of an object when i t is separated from i t by a distance equal to the largest dimension of i t . Thus the object is seen within an angle of U5 degrees. To see the object at i t s best as a whole, apart from the detail, the observer should be separated from i t by a distance equal to about twice i t s height so that he sees i t over an angle of 27 degrees and so i t f i l l s his entire f i e l d of view without moving his head. Further, i f he wants to see the object as part of a group of objects he should see i t at an angle of 18 degrees and so must be separated from i t by a distance equal to about three times i t s height. At a greater distance the object begins to lose i t s - 69, -dominance in the f i e l d of view. Thus for the viewing of monumental objects within the landscape whether they be buildings or natural features, attention should be given to these guidelines in the choice of viewpoints. Buildings may be arranged freely within a landscape as individual units, in which case the relationship should be between building and landscape. Buildings of similar form can be spaced out so as to dominate a landscape and give i t unity. While a variety of uses can occur in the intervening spaces, each element within the visual f i e l d of view should at least be compatible by association. When structures are composed in relation to natural or man-made fea-tures such as roads, railways, lakes or rivers, their forms and spacings when possible as in the case of buildings, should be such as to achieve the most desirable relationship. Thus a resort fronting on a lake should be composed as a harmoniously related unit in which the lake adds to the resort and the resort to the lake. Similarly, i t is equally possible for a pulp m i l l to be harmoniously integrated into i t s surroundings, or a roadside building to be planned as one with the road in terms of landscape character, sight distances, approaches and technical considerations. The important point to bear in mind is that a building complex, just as much as a forest or moor, has i t s own distinctive landscape character that must be recognised and understood, so i t can be accentuated or consciously modified. The principles of composition can be demonstrated most clearly in the context of the viewpoint or scenic outlook or the l i k e . F i r s t l y , what is a view? In essence a view is the scene which is observed from a given vantage point (Simonds, 196l). Frequently an outstanding view is reason enough for the choice of a given s i t e , but frequently the view is poorly or only partially u t i l i s e d . "A view must be studied, analysed and developed - fo -with keenly perceptive artistry to u t i l i z e even a fraction of the f u l l dramatic potential. Like other landscape features, the view, hy i t s handling, may be preserved, neutralised, modified, or accentuated." (Simonds, 196l) The i n i t i a l decision must be concerned with the relation between the use of an area and the view seen of i t . Thus, i f the purpose of a scenic t r a i l or nature t r a i l is to show the beauties of "untouched nature," i t may not be desireable to then provide a view-point which clearly reveals logging practises. Yet in other circumstances i t would be entirely correct to reveal the "other" uses that are made of the landscape. The former situation would largely negate the goodwill generated by the forest company or whatever through construction of a scenic t r a i l , while the latter in the correct context would help to convey the idea of the compatability of many activities in the landscape. Ideally the view should be totally revealed only from that position where i t is seen to greatest advantage. Thus i t should not be wasted in one f i r s t blow but gradually revealed and suggested through a sequence of partial views as described previously under "sequence." As opposed to the view, the vista is a confined view, usually towards a terminal or dominant element or feature (Simonds, 196l). It may be formed by natural features such as tree branches or by man made structures as a window frame. The difference between the view and the vista is very clear in the context of photography. From a mountain top, for example, a wide view of the land may be visible. There is certainly a strong desire among a l l vacation photographers to capture the entire panorama, and in the attempt much film is expended as shown by even the most casual inspection of the prints that pass through any photo processing station. Many people attempt to take a series of photographs which they later hope to piece together and - 71 -so re-create the view, while those with more sophisticated cameras buy-wide angle lenses which permit wider angles of the view to be recorded* Yet only very rarely are successful results obtained, and i t is. widely held in photographic circles that the wide angle lens i s the most d i f f i c u l t to use successfully. The resolution of the disappointment with the comparison between the remembered visual view and the photographic image lie s in an understanding of the large differences between the eye and the camera, despite the well known cliche that the eye is l i k e a camera. As described later, the human eyes together, with the head held stationary, have an angle of vision of approximately 180 degrees horizontally, the angle of the total visual f i e l d to which the eyes are sensitive. Further, of the total visual f i e l d , a small angle of only one degree across is seen very sharply, while due to the scanning a b i l i t y of the eye a 60 degree f i e l d is seen sharply. In other words, i f we wish to retain a photographic analogy, the best comparison of the eye is with a camera f i t t e d with a "zoom" lens of very wide range of effective focal lengths, rather than with a camera f i t t e d with the so-called "standard lens" of approximately 50 mm focal length (for the 35mm format). While the l a t t e r , with i t s angle of view of approximately 50 degrees, corresponds to the sharply seen area of the visual f i e l d , the entire visual perception system of eye plus brain, on examining a view, is subconsciously able to perceive the 180 degree panorama and simultaneously subject portions of i t (vistas, in effect) to detailed scrutiny, as i s only possible to the photographer by exposing a number of frames with a variety of effective focal lengths supplied by the zoom lens or a range of interchangeable lenses of differing focal lengths. Thus, Photograph 32, which covers an angle of 180 degrees horizontally and was made by combining two 90 degree negatives, corresponds to the total visual f i e l d visible to an observer holding his head steady. In this case the PHOTOGRAPH 3 2 A 180 degree view corresponding to the total f i e l d visible to an observer holding his head steady. - 7-3 -r e s u l t i n g photograph i s v i s u a l l y p l e a s i n g but t h i s i s more the exception than the r u l e , (though the wide view may be of value f o r other than a e s t h e t i c purposes) and moreover, there are w i t h i n i t a number of v i s t a s of more v i s u a l appeal than the wide view as i n d i c a t e d . U n l i k e a view, a. v i s t a can be created i n i t s e n t i r e t y and i s subject to close c o n t r o l , and i t i s e s p e c i a l l y important t h a t the r e l a t i o n between the v i s t a and the use area should be compatable. Thus the v i s t a through the window of a nature centre should h a r d l y terminate at a car park or a sprawl of cabins. Compatability between the enframement of the v i s t a , i t s b e ginning, i t s middle ground and terminus should be the g o a l . Considering the enframement of the v i s t a , keeping i t simple and unob-t r u s i v e through appropriate choice o f form, t e x t u r e and colour i s a s u i t a b l e treatment. The overhead plane of enframement i s l e a s t c o n t r o l l a b l e being f r e q u e n t l y the sky i t s e l f . In c e r t a i n circumstances the canopies of trees can be u t i l i s e d and by means of t h i s great c o n t r o l over the q u a l i t y and s c a l e o f the v i s t a i s a v a i l a b l e . Where the t e r m i n a l f e a t u r e of the v i s t a i s the f o c a l p o i n t of the v i s t a the middle ground and foreground should be r e l a t e d to i t and l e a d the eye t o i t . I t need not be s p e c t a c u l a r : i t i s simply the focus of a t t e n t i o n through being the r i g h t t h i n g seen from the r i g h t p l a c e , w i t h j u s t the r i g h t degree o f enframement. The strongest l i n k a g e between the beginning and t e r m i n a l feature i n a v i s t a occurs when there i s a l i n e a r element connecting them. This may be a s e r i e s of p a r a l l e l l i n e s which converge to the f o c a l p o i n t , or elements seen i n alignment. When the alignment i s strong the landscape as such has been c a l l e d a f o c a l landscape ( L i t t o n 1968). The l i n e a r element, whether i t be a river, a road, lines of trees or other, is the "axis" of the landscape, and as i t can be a strong landscape element i t can neutralize other features adjacent to i t and must be handled with care. Thus, monumental features in the landscape such as isolated trees, rock faces and so on, in !' the presence of a strong axis may be reduced to the status of points along the axis. In the natural landscape, however, the axis is rarely the very strong element i t is in the urban landscape, where i t can impose a symmetrical pattern on the landscape. In general, the natural landscape elements are rarely balanced on either side of a line of sight. Yet i t is generally agreed that visual balance is fundamental to a l l satisfactory composition, and so as we find many seemingly asymmetrical natural landscapes pleasant to look at then a visual balance must somehow be present. Since there can be no visual balance u n t i l there is a line of sight, and as i t is highly unlikely that there can be from any point of observation a visual balance along the line of sight, i t seems that the observer must seek out in any landscape those vistas or views or sight lines that produce a satisfactory visual balance. Thus the child or primitive sees only objects in space, but the sophisticated observer with a more selective eye perceives relation-ships. And depending on the degree of sophistication or training of the observer, the greater is the demand of the mind upon the eye to compose an image that i s complete in equilibrium in terms of form, mass, value colour and association, but also the greater is the number of visual compositions that he is able to find, producing a richer visual landscape. Simonds ( l 9 6 l ) has referred to this balance without bi l a t e r a l symmetry as "occult" balance, proposing that "Except in these exceptional cases where bi l a t e r a l symmetry has for some reason been contrived, i t is by occult balance that man com-poses and comprehends the world about him." - 7 5 " Once again a photographic example helps to reinforce this opinion. For example, the beginning photographer finds great d i f f i c u l t y in satis-factorily composing landscape photographs. The vacation photographer to whom photographs are solely a means of remembering his vacation, produces "snapshots" (photographs taken without regard to the aesthetic/artistic possibilities of the subject matter) which remain at a low standard of ar-t i s t i c quality as opposed to their high technical quality which modern equipment almost guarantees. The more demanding novice photographer seeks to improve his composition through application of such "rules" as that of the "rule of thirds "(based- on the "golden rectangle"') whereby the dominant or focal part of the image is placed on one of the four points formed by dividing both the horizontal and the vertical axes of the format into three equal parts. Of course, when there are more than one dominant objects which the photographer might legitimately wish to have in a single picture he has no solution and the picture he produces of them is condemned by "traditionalists" as being of "sp l i t interest". In fact this and other photographic rules were borrowed from painting, though painters themselves had abandoned them many years previously^ . uT-he early photographers 1 !goal was to be accepted as "artists too" and i t is only within recent years that freedom in composition has be-come the norm (except in some s t i l l influential bodies such as the various "salons" largely emulating the Royal Photographic Society of London) largely based on this "occult" composition. Thus Photograph 32£ contains a number of complete and balanced visual compositions which the practised eye isolates and which the photographer may single out as photographs. An understanding of the processes by which the observer isolates for observation the various vistas and components of the landscape is aided by an examination of visual perception, the subject of the next section. - 76 -CHAPTER III. VISUAL PERCEPTION AND THE LANDSCAPE 3.1 Psychological Background Perception is the process whereby man collects or receives information via his senses from his environment and so can be an active or passive process. Affecting perception is a set of basic human needs genetically transmitted which Maslow (1954) has used to explain motivation. They can conveniently be regarded as a heirarchy .of human needs (Figure 5). The basic needs are physical and begin at birth. They are expressed as the demands for food, water, and shelter. Until they are satisfied the individual is unmotivated to seek the higher needs, feeling a physical threat from his environment. With satiation of these requirements, his need for social contact emerges and motivates him to find human relationships. The desires for love and affection and group identity also emerge at this level. With satisfaction of the physical and social needs, the individual's psychological desires appear. He experiences a desire to a reputation or status through which he acquires a sense of self-worth. The highest level needs Maslow calls "self-actualisation" or "what a man can be, he must be." He suggests that this level is only possible among the older generation (in general) because of the characteristics of - 77 -4. SELF-ACTUALIZATION To become e v e r y t h i n g one c a p a b l e o f becoming. 3. PSYCHOLOGICAL S e l f - E s t e e m S e l f - E x p r e s s i o n R e p u t a t i o n and S t a t u s g. SOCIAL P l e a s a n t and P r o d u c t i v e Human R e l a t i o n s h i p s 1 . PHYSICAL Food, S h e l t e r , e t c . S a f e t y gure 5 - H e i r a r c h y o f Human Needs ( f r o m Maslow, 1 9 5 4 ) - 78 -our current society that inhibit such pos s i b i l i t i e s . It i s , however, precisely this level that "Consciousness III " individuals (referred to previously) demand be attainable by everyone,through proper harnessing of the powers of technology now available to us. Consciousness III individuals are, further, in f u l l agreement with Maslow, that the charac-t e r i s t i c s of the current society are due to the educational systems that demand a uniformity of performance and reduction of individuality so that their products may f i t readily into the various roles allocated to them. The self-actualising person or the "practising" Consciousness III individual i s freed from threats from his environment and from social pressures to conform and so can direct his energies in any direction he feels important. Clearly, an aesthetically pleasing environment is only assured, (and perhaps only then jus t i f i a b l e , i f i t s rehabilitation or preservation is costly) when a l l , or at least a majority, of society i s able to attain this level of self-actualisation. 3.2 Visual Perception Visually perceived information is conveyed through a number of different forms as exemplified by the following: 1. Image symbols (writing, photographs, films, etc.); 2. Objects and structures; 3. Animals; h. Models, maps, graphs, etc.; 5. Other people; and 6. The natural environment. - 79 -In most circumstances a l l senses are responding to the surroundings, hut in any given situation they are each u t i l i s e d to varying degrees. In humans the sense of sight is generally dominant, and for an observer in a modern car i t is the only one capable of giving a detailed des-cription of the surrounding environment. Certainly in reacting to other people the sense of sound is very important and an experiment in the city environment (Southworth, 1970) has shown that the subtraction of sound makes the city seem sad, ugly and depressing instead of interesting and l i v e l y , but the weight of the evidence reveals that to man the sense of sight is overwhelmingly important. Further, the Milnes (1962) have shown that the sense of sight is relatively more important in humans than in any other of the small number of mammals possessing binocular vision, and the concensus of opinion of writers and philosophers through the centuries has been that sight is the dominant sense (Malins, 1966). Thus attention in the present work is chiefly directed to this sense. 3.3 The Eye The retina of the eye is i t s photosensitive interior lining (Figure 6 ) . It consists of three different areas, the fovea, the macula and the periphery, though the areas function simultaneously and reinforce one another. The sensitive surface of the retina consists of two main types of sensors: a) the elongated, slender rods used for night time vision which is colourless, and b) the shorter and thicker cones for daytime vision including colour. Only cones occur in the fovea p,nfl only rods in the periphery. There are about l 8 o million sensors distributed over the human retina (Walker - 80 -Figure 6 RIGHT EYE OF A MAN: HORIZONTAL SECTION (from Walls, 1942) 1971). Data gathered hy these sensors i s transmitted to the brain v i a the o p t i c nerve. The other components of the eye i l l u s t r a t e d are the lens, i r i s and c i l i a r y muscles which function as follows: the i r i s controls the amount of l i g h t reaching the r e t i n a j u s t as changing the f - number of a camera, while the lens focusses t h i s l i g h t onto the r e t i n a , i t s curvature being a l t e r e d by the c i l i a r y muscle to accomodate l i g h t coming from objects at d i f f e r i n g distances. - 81 -U n l i k e the camera, however, an image i s not formed on the r e t i n a ; r a t h e r , the sensors of the r e t i n a are st i m u l a t e d i n a mosaic p a t t e r n and impulses are sent t o the "brain f o r use and i n t e r p r e t a t i o n . 3.4 F i e l d of V i s i o n When the head i s i n a h o r i z o n t a l s t a t i o n a r y p o s i t i o n the angle of v i s i o n i s approximately 180 degrees h o r i z o n t a l l y and v e r t i c a l l y i t i s 50 degrees above and 60 degrees below the l i n e of s i g h t . This i s the t o t a l v i s u a l f i e l d to which the human i s s e n s i t i v e , but the area of sharpest v i s i o n , t h a t perceived by the fovea, i s only one degree ac r o s s , or approximately twice the apparent diameter of the sun or moon. This i s not as l i m i t i n g as i t seems, however, as the eyes move very r a p i d l y and l a r g e areas of the v i s u a l f i e l d can be scanned i n a short time so that approximately 60 degrees of the v i s u a l f i e l d i s covered e f f e c t i v e l y . F u r t h e r , t h i s 60 degree f i e l d i s viewed s t e r e o s c o p i c a l l y due t o the d i f f e r e n c e i n the image provided i n the two eyes and so enables us t o recognise r e l a t i v e distances between objects and o u r s e l v e s , though not the absolute d i s t a n c e . Due t o the s m a l l separation of the eyes (base l i n e ) s t e r e o p s i s c o n t r i b u t e s l i t t l e beyond 200 m. and i s e n t i r e l y i n e f f -e c t i v e beyond 1000 m. At these d i s t a n c e s , the viewer depends f o r distance estimates upon shadows, the overlapping of one object or surface upon another, the knowledge of the s i z e of f a m i l i a r o b j e c t s , r e l a t i v e p o s i t i o n i n the f i e l d and a e r i a l p e r s p e c t i v e . (Anderson, 196l). 3.5 The Influence of Motion In view of the f a c t t h a t f o r many people, the p r i n c i p l e contact w i t h the landscape i s through the windows of a. f a s t moving c a r , the importance - 82 -of motion t o v i s u a l perception deserves f u r t h e r a t t e n t i o n . Dynamic v i s u a l a c u i t y (D.V.A.) i s the a b i l i t y of the observer, e i t h e r i n motion or s t a t i o n a r y , t o perceive d e t a i l of objects which may be e i t h e r i n motion or s t a t i o n a r y (Hornbeck, 1968). Motion by the observer along a given path causes the surrounding environment t o appear t o move i n a p r e d i c t a b l e manner as i n Figures 7 and 8. There are a number of g e n e r a l i s a t i o n s t h a t may be quoted i n connec-t i o n w i t h the r e l a t i o n between v i s u a l perception and motion: a) As speed i n c r e a s e s , the number of things t o be seen and attended t o increases p r o p o r t i o n a t e l y . I t al s o becomes more dangerous ( f o r a car d r i v e r ) t o observe d e t a i l s apart from those important t o keeping the car on the road and so a t t e n t i o n becomes f i x e d on the approaching ri b b o n of road. b) As speed i n c r e a s e s , the p o i n t of c o n c e n t r a t i o n recedes. As the eyes are e f f e c t i v e l y " f e e l i n g " t h e i r way ahead, seeking s u f f i c i e n t s a f e t y margin f o r emergencies, the grea t e r the speed the f u r t h e r ahead the eyes concentrate (Figure 9). c) As speed i n c r e a s e s , p e r i p h e r a l v i s i o n d i m i n i s h e s . As the eyes are l o o k i n g f u r t h e r ahead at higher v e l o c i t i e s , so the d e t a i l observed i s s m a l l e r ; a c c o r d i n g l y , the angle of v i s i o n diminishes (Figure 9). d) As speed i n c r e a s e s , foreground d e t a i l s begin to fade. As seen from the vec t o r s i n Figures 6 and 7, the nearest objects of the foreground are apparently moving f a s t e s t , and so are l e s s c l e a r l y seen, and disappear almost completely at 60 mph. As a general r u l e , a l l objects p l a c e d the same number of f e e t o f f the l i n e of t r a v e l (or c l o s e r ) as the mph t r a v e l l e d , w i l l be b l u r r e d . For example, at 30 mph, an object 30 f e e t of the l i n e of t r a v e l 83 -FIGURE 7 The flow of the optic array during locomotion in a ter r e s t r i a l environment. (from Gibson, 1966) o ° ' ' 1 1 i 1 u 2™°; 1 1 I I I I I j ' " ' ' H O 0 * \\\\ i n H N I j 30° J j 60° I I 1 n 1 * t 1 '90° v \ \ * H H / / , \ , \ *' " 180° FIGURE 8 The flow velocities in the optic array reflected from the surface of the earth. (from Gibson et a l , 1955) - 8U -1600 11+00 1200 1000 800 * 600 -1+00 . 200 OBSERVER FIGURE 9 L a t e r a l f i e l d o f v i e w and f o c u s s i n g d i s t a n c e s . - 85 -i s moving (apparently) at 72 degrees/sec and i s beginning t o b l u r , w h i l e at 100 mph a l l o bjects 100 f e e t or c l o s e r are b l u r r e d due t o the i n a b i l i t y of the eyes t o f o l l o w them (Hornbeck, 1968). e) As speed i n c r e a s e s , space pe r c e p t i o n becomes impaired. As space and motion are perceived i n d i r e c t l y , w i t h the help of memory, by r e l a t i v e changes i n the apparent s i z e and p o s i t i o n of o b j e c t s , l o o k i n g ahead at great distances (as n e c e s s i t a t e d by speed) these changes are so sm a l l t h a t one can not t e l l whether a car i s coming or going except by i n d i r e c t clues such as the lane i t i s i n . The movement of objects t r a v e l l i n g p a r a l l e l t o and cl o s e t o the axi s of v i s i o n - cannot be discerned beyond some 800 f e e t . As speed i n c r e a s e s , the time i n t e r v a l between d i s c e r n i n g the motion o f an object and coming abreast of i t s h r i n k s . The apparent motion o f the environment past the observer i s f u r t h e r emphasised when an object moves across a va r e i g a t e d background than across a homogeneous one as movement i s more r e a d i l y contrasted w i t h the s t a t i o n a r y features of the former and i s t h e r e f o r e more n o t i c e a b l e and apparently f a s t e r . Yet w h i l e much of the landscape i s l o s t t o f a s t moving viewers, the apparent motion of the landscape i t s e l f can f o r some be a pleasant a l t e r n a t i v e , as described by Appleyard (196U). "When the observer moves, the environment i s set i n apparent motion. Mass, space, l i g h t , surface and d e t a i l pass by i n continuous t r a n s f o r m a t i o n . More evident and d e l i g h t f u l on the freeway or from the t r a c k e d v e h i c l e , where motion i s continuous and r e l a x e d , the environmental f i e l d appears t o be i n vast r o t a t i o n , d i m i n i s h i n g i n v e l o c i t y from foreground t o background. Motion c l a r i f i e s and a r t i c u l a t e s the f i e l d . Foreground b l u r moves across the background, o b j e c t s loom up, swing and t u r n , each f a c e t r e v e a l e d l i k e some g e s t u r i n g mannequin, and complex movements of the road can throw the e n t i r e scene i n t o a choreo-graphic wonder." The a p p l i c a t i o n o f these f a c t s t o p r a c t i c a l design s i t u a t i o n s w i l l - 86 -be returned t o l a t e r . Other Factors i n Perception' The a b i l i t y of man t o use h i s p e r c e p t u a l systems increases w i t h m a t u r i t y from i n f a n c y t o adulthood and w i t h conscious e f f o r t . Yet wh i l e t h i s i s t r u e , what i s perce i v e d at any moment i s dependent upon the time, p l a c e and set of circumstances, (a) Adaptation When a sensation i s experienced over a p e r i o d of time, adaptation or f a t i g u i n g occurs, and the sensation i s no longer r e g i s t e r e d i n the mental process. For example, a c l o c k t i c k i n g i n a room i s no longer "heard" a f t e r a time, or an odour i s no longer n o t i c e d a f t e r prolonged exposure t o i t . A s i m i l a r phenomenon occurs i n the v i s u a l sense and i s important i n such f i e l d s as road design. Thus i n handling h i s car a d r i v e r has two main t a s k s , v e h i c l e c o n t r o l and d e s t i n a t i o n i d e n t i f i c a t i o n and f i n d i n g . D i f f e r e n t amounts of a t t e n t i o n are r e q u i r e d by both and the i n t e n s i t y w i t h which each i s st u d i e d v a r i e s throughout a given journey ( a t t e n t i o n a l demand). This i s i l l u s t r a t e d i n F i g u r e 10. This F i g u r e i s not q u a n t i t a t i v e , but i t demonstrates the f o l l o w i n g d r i v e r s i t u a t i o n s which can occur during a t r i p . S i t u a t i o n 1: This i s the p r e t r i p planning phase where the d r i v e r ' s a t t e n t i o n a l demand i s devoted t o the d e s t i n a t i o n approach task. S i t u a t i o n 2: This i s the s t a r t of the t r i p where the d r i v e r i s aware of the route he w i l l t a k e , but must s t a r t the car and concentrate on d r i v i n g so a t t e n t i o n a l demand i s hi g h . S i t u a t i o n 3: This i s a s t r e t c h of road where low a t t e n t i o n a l demand i s r e q u i r e d , the d r i v e r having only t o continue speed and s t e e r i n g of the v e h i c l e . O F w . A??5A OF- BKl^EMe ^ jRDW'Se \JiWP®Ucfb P35TAWCe MOTE- TIMfc W r e A W r H S ) A R E -f f c e f o M S L E . BCTREME- V W A & L E 3 » <3£0>wce K, foe f m MMTTCP PCae&h W£*WAY FIGURE 10 A t t e n t i o n a l demand. ( f r o m H o r n b e c k C 1 9 6 8 ) - 88 -S i t u a t i o n k: This represents a sudden change p o s s i b l e i n the a t t e n t i o n a l demand of the road. I t may be due t o heavy t r a f f i c , an i n t e r s e c t i o n , sudden lane change, weather c o n d i t i o n s , obstacles and so on. S i t u a t i o n 5: Here the d r i v e r r e c e i v e s new in f o r m a t i o n concerning h i s l o c a t i o n w i t h respect t o h i s d e s t i n a t i o n and a t t e n t i o n a l demand i n -creases . S i t u a t i o n 6: The d r i v e r i s here approaching h i s d e s t i n a t i o n and must a l t e r the c o n t r o l s of h i s car. This r e q u i r e s high a t t e n t i o n a l demand and accomplishment of the d e s t i n a t i o n approach task. B o l t , Beranek and Newman (Hornbeck, 1968) have suggested the f o l l o w i n g : "A r a t h e r important n o t i o n which u n d e r l i e s the t h e o r e t i c a l work i s t h a t d r i v e r s tend t o d r i v e to a l i m i t . We suggest t h a t the l i m i t i s determined by t h a t p o i n t when the d r i v e r ' s i n f o r m a t i o n processing c a p a c i t y , e i t h e r r e a l or imagined, i s matched by the i n f o r m a t i o n generation r a t e o f the road, e i t h e r r e a l or estimated. The d r i v e r s may be wrong i n t h e i r estimates, but they w i l l tend t o achieve t h i s balance of input i n f o r m a t i o n r a t e and informa t i o n processing r a t e . A d r i v e r i n u n f a m i l i a r t e r r i t o r y sees a great deal more u n c e r t a i n t y i n the s i t u a t i o n than a d r i v e r f a m i l i a r w i t h the t e r r i t o r y . With f a m i l i a r i t y there comes re d u c t i o n of u n c e r t a i n t y , a r e d u c t i o n o f in f o r m a t i o n flow r a t e , and a higher permissable v e l o c i t y , granted the same t e r r i t o r y and circumstances." Thus by examining the l e v e l of a t t e n t i o n a l demand, i t i s p o s s i b l e t o p r e d i c t the speed which the d r i v e r w i l l be l i k e l y t o m a i n t a i n , and by i n c r e a s i n g and decreasing the l e v e l of a t t e n t i o n a l demand of the road, the designer could c o n t r o l the d r i v i n g speed. In a s t a t e o f very low a r o u s a l , f a t i g u e enters i n , as on a long s t r e t c h of f l a t road, and the d r i v e r i s almost l u l l e d to sleep by the monotony of i t . With very high a r o u s a l , too many messages get through t o the b r a i n and prevent the person from responding t o any one set of s t i m u l i . These r e l a t i o n s h i p s are i l l u s t r a t e d i n Fi g u r e 11. - 89 -SLEEP LOW AROUSAL HIGH AROUSAL F i g u r e 11: Cue - A r o u s a l ( f r o m H o r n b e c k e r , 1968) (b) P e r c e p t u a l F a i l u r e . F a i l u r e t o p e r c e i v e t h e immediate environment i s a phenomenon c l o s e l y r e l a t e d t o a d a p t a t i o n as d e s c r i b e d p r e v i o u s l y . I t can due t o o v e r s t i m u -l a t i o n o f t h e s e n s e s , and a l s o t h r o u g h d u l l i n g o f t h e s e n s e s , as t h r o u g h t h e use o f c e r t a i n d r u g s , o r be c a u s e o f p r e - o c c u p a t i o n w i t h a p r o b l e m o r o t h e r t h o u g h t s . ( c ) A t t e n t i o n . The amount o f a t t e n t i o n a s u b j e c t p a y s t o h i s s u r r o u n d i n g s i s a l s o i n f l u e n c e d by w h e t h e r he has a d e s t i n a t i o n i n mind o r n o t . I f he h a s , t h e immediate s u r r o u n d i n g s a r e more o f an o b j e c t t o be t r a v e r s e d r a t h e r t h a n a .source o f i n t e r e s t i n t h e m s e l v e s . S i m i l a r l y , i f he i s a l o n e i n - 90 -the immediate landscape he w i l l be more aware of i t , and more affected by i t , and consequently perceive more detail in i t than i f he were holding a conversation with a second person while traversing i t . Further, the f i r s t time a subject v i s i t s a particular area he finds greater general interest in i t than he w i l l in subsequent v i s i t s , though the latter w i l l involve greater attention to finer detail and short term changes. Interpretation of the Visual Information While as previously described perception is the physical process by which man gathers or receives information, just what the human observer "concludes" from this information is individually unique and dependent on a number of factors some entirely divorced from the physical environ-ment surrounding him at the time of observation. Certainly, the primary structural elements of the landscape which are perceived by the senses, are the prime formers of the "image" (Lynch i960) of the landscape. For example, in a l l cultures and throughout human history, there have been locations regarded as sacred or holy places, and characterised by landforms, rocks, water bodies and other features of perceptual significance. Likewise, in the modern cit y , some neighbourhoods have reputations of being ugly or boring or exciting and Lynch (i960) suggested that such images were formed from the urban equivalents which produced simplicity of form, dominance, unusualness, consistency, clear edges, and also names and associations. Therefore, while the image of the landscape is formed from the perception of objective phenomenon, the interpretation formed by the observer is personal, and influenced by a number of factors as follows: - 91 -a. Factors dependent on the immediate s i t u a t i o n : i . : F a m i l i a r i t y w i t h the landscape. An observer viewing a landscape w i t h which he i s f a m i l i a r i s more l i k e l y t o n o t i c e change i n i t t h a t would be missed by an observer viewing i t f o r the f i r s t time. Conversely, the l a t t e r i s more l i k e l y t o n o t i c e the s t r i k i n g f e a t u r e s of i t which are taken f o r granted by the former. i i . Manner of viewing the landscape. An observer viewing the landscape from a footp a t h perceives i t s i g n i f i c a n t l y d i f f e r e n t l y than he would i f viewing i t from a car on a freeway. The car i t s e l f " f i l t e r s " out some of the perc e p t u a l i n f o r m a t i o n , and the speed of t r a v e l a f f e c t s what i s seen. i i i . Information h e l d by the observer about the landscape. Whether gained w h i l e viewing the landscape or p r e v i o u s l y through photographs and w r i t t e n accounts, i n f o r m a t i o n about the landscape causes the observer's a t t e n t i o n t o be d i r e c t e d towards s p e c i f i c elements, i v ; Role o f the landscape. R e c r e a t i o n i s t s g e n e r a l l y seek out landscapes t h a t appeal t o t h e i r own i n t e r e s t s . Thus mountaineers seek out peaks w h i l e fishermen seek r i v e r s and l a k e s . The r e c r e a t i o n i s t w i t h l e s s p a r t i c u l a r t a s t e s seeks out landscapes that contrast i n some way w i t h h i s home environment. Lucas and P r i d d l e (1964) found that canoeists had more rig o r o u s c r i t e r i a f o r wilderness p e r c e p t i o n than had motor boat users. V ; A t t e n t i o n p a i d t o the landscape. The immediate s t a t e of mind of the observer, h i s l e v e l of i n t e r e s t , t i r e d n e s s and degree of pre-occupation a l l a f f e c t h i s p e r c e p t i o n . b. Factors dependent on the background of the observer: '4. Home environment. - 92 -People tend to feel more "comfortable" with a landscape they know, though they may seek a contrast when on holiday, i i . Cultural environment. Different cultures and different stages of the same society at different times respond in varying ways to landscapes. Thus for much of i t s history western society regarded the "wilderness" as something to be feared or destroyed while now i t i s actively sought out be recrea-tionists. i i i ' . Knowledge of other landscapes. An observer who has experienced other landscapes has a source of comparison for the present landscape and so has his attention directed, i v Educational background. A striking example of this is provided by the differing reactions of observers to the Scottish Highlands. For example, the "average" recreationist holds them in high regard, while to an ecologist they are "an inherently i n f e r t i l e region devastated by deforestation and repeated burning, largely depopulated and opened to heavy and uncontrolled sheep grazing, (which) is a distressing sight to anyone with some appreciation of ecological principles." (McVean and Lockie 1969). - 93 -Chapter IV DESCRIPTION AND ASSESSMENT OF LANDSCAPE AND SCENERY Landscape and Scenery At t h i s stage, the j u s t i f i c a t i o n s f o r c o n s i d e r i n g the a e s t h e t i c p r o p e r t i e s of the environment i n p l a n n i n g , how we perceive t h i s e n v i r o n -ment, and some of the b a s i c v i s u a l l y s i g n i f i c a n t components of i t have been o u t l i n e d . While "landscape" and "scenery" are everyday words i n common useage, before preceding i n t o the a c t u a l assessment of them i t i s e s s e n t i a l t o define e x a c t l y what the terms mean. Their being i n common useage makes them s u s c e p t i b l e t o loose i n t e r p r e t a t i o n . There i s a well-known saying a t t r i b u t e d t o a Yorkshire man on seeing the E n g l i s h Lake D i s t r i c t , "There's nowt -'ere but scenery." While p o s s i b l y unaware o f the p r o f u n d i t y t h a t would be l a t e r read i n t o h i s remark, he d i d s t r i k e on an important p o i n t upon which F a i r b r o t h e r and others have expanded. The landscape has been p r e v i o u s l y described as a comprehensive expression o f the t o t a l environment, t r a n s l a t i n g a wide range of a b s t r a c t s such as land-use, p o p u l a t i o n d e n s i t y , settlement p a t t e r n , t r a f f i c f l o w , l o c a l s i t e c o n d i t i o n s and others i n t o p h y s i c a l r e a l i t i e s . To F a i r b r o t h e r (1970) the landscape i s " h a b i t a t plus man" and i s synonymous w i t h the wide l y used term " t o t a l environment". In t h i s sense she echoes the sen-timents of our Yorkshireman who could see only an imcomplete landscape i n the p a r t i c u l a r , p a r t of the Lake D i s t r i c t t h a t d i d not obviously show - 9h -the mark of man's hand. (One wonders how he would react to a truly-untouched area of l a n d such as an American Wilderness Area.) L i t t o n (1966) a l s o emphasised the landscape as a v i s u a l , p h y s i c a l e n t i t y , and not a s t a t e o f mind or a b s t r a c t emotional q u a l i t y . "Landscape" i s , i n f a c t , a very o l d word found i n a l l languages of Germanic o r i g i n . In some c o u n t r i e s , Germany f o r example, the d i r e c t t r a n s l a t i o n i s "Landschaft" and t h i s c a r r i e s w i t h i t i m p l i c a t i o n s , of t e r r i t o r i a l d i v i s i o n , which are absent i n general E n g l i s h useage of the word. Recently, however, "landscape" i s used i n an increased number of s i t u a t i o n s , Dr. Jacquetta Hawkes w r i t i n g , " A l l landscape i s , a f t e r a l l , h i s t o r i c a l : the c r e a t i o n f i r s t of the slow i n t e r p l a y of t i t a n i c n a t u r a l f o r c e s , l a t e r m o d i f i e d , f o r b e t t e r or f o r worse, by the hand of man." "View" has been r e f e r r e d t o p r e v i o u s l y as the scene which i s ob-served from a given v i e w p o i n t , and thus dependant on the observer. F a i r b r o t h e r (1970) has given a u s e f u l d i f f e r e n t i a t i o n between "view" and "landscape" r e f e r r i n g to the view as "the scene which e x i s t s when we are t h e r e , and inc l u d e s the people on the h i l l t o p s , cars on the roads, p i c k n i c k e r s and walkers, and a l l the rest',' c o n t r a s t i n g w i t h the landscape which i s "the scenery which e x i s t s . . . whether we are there or not." Therefore the view i s temporary and so, according t o F a i r b r o t h e r , (1970), "expendable f o r a season... The landscape i s long term and must be pro-t e c t e d f o r good." This p o i n t i s discussed more l a t e r , i n the context of the r e l a t i v e seriousness of uses which d i s t u r b the view only and those which d i s t u r b the landscape a l s o . "Scenery" i s l i k e w i s e a word i n common useage and subject to a v a r i e t y of i n t e r p r e t a t i o n s . The simplest d e f i n i t i o n i s t h a t of the Concise Oxford D i c t i o n a r y where i t i s defined as "the prospect of b e a u t i f u l or - 95 -impressive country"(by analogy with stage furnishings). Sargent (1967) refers to i t as "a locality and a l l that can be seen from i t - a landscape." However, he makes the important point that natural scenery is sometimes confused with natural beauty, whereas there are significant differences. By contrast, whereas scenery, li k e landscape is an objective phenomenon, beauty is a more subjective thing, "that quality of objects that gratifies the aesthetic nature - the perfection of form resulting from the har-monious combination of diverse elements in unity."(Sargent 1967). Thus, defining natural beauty requires a value judgement on the part of the observer to the effect that i t gratifies his aesthetic senses. Landscape and Aesthetics. Most work in the landscape inventory f i e l d (e.g. Burke, Lewis and Orr, 1968; Sargent, 1967; Litton, 1968) has attempted to minimize the element of subjectivity. The other approach, based largely on a belief that "the simple;' and universal c r i t e r i a of beauty i t s e l f " (Murray 1962) i s the only possible approach to the diversity of the natural landscape, does, however, have i t s advocates. Certainly, landscape appreciation is essentially an aesthetic experience at whatever level i t is undertaken, and as such the experience must be subjective and personal, depending not only on the intrinsic characteristics of the scene and i t s observer, but on many other extraneous factors which w i l l influence the nature of the experience. Thus the"image" of the environment may be formed from the perception of objective pheno-menon, but the interpretation given to i t by the observer must be essen-t i a l l y personal, subjective, and therefore variable. Different people w i l l notice different things and give them different meanings and importance. - 96 -F u r t h e r , these impressions w i l l vary at d i f f e r e n t times according t o the d i f f e r e n t s t a t e s of mind of the observer, as described p r e v i o u s l y . I t would thus seem u n l i k e l y t h a t p r i n c i p l e s of any general v a l i d i t y could be formulated, the a e s t h e t i c r e l a t i o n s h i p s between objects and ob-servers having been discussed by philosophers f o r c e n t u r i e s . Today, however, now that a e s t h e t i c s draws upon p e r c e p t i o n , psychology, s o c i o l o g y , ethnology, h i s t o r y and archeology, new p o s s i b i l i t i e s are open. As Lord L i s t o w e l has pointed out ( L i s t o w e l , 1967), "This r e v o l u t i o n i n method has given a e s t h e t i c s an o b j e c t i v e and s c i e n t i f i c value i t c o u l d never have obtained as a branch of s p e c u l a t i v e philosophy." In t h i s context, the " i n s t r u m e n t a l i s t " h y p o t h e s i s (Beardsley, 1958) i s of value. Here the a e s t h e t i c q u a l i t y of an object l i e s i n i t s c a p a c i t y f o r producing a e s t h e t i c experience and the greater the cap a c i t y the greater the magnitude of the p o t e n t i a l a e s t h e t i c value. Thus the cap a c i t y l i e s i n the o b j e c t , not the observer, provided t h a t the object f a l l s w i t h i n a f u n c t i o n - c l a s s , r i g o r o u s l y d e f i n e d i n terms of i t s own i n t e r n a l c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s . (For example apples must be d i s t i n g u i s h e d from pears or oranges). Within the c l a s s , the objects must d i f f e r i n t h e i r degree of f u n c t i o n a l performance. Under these c o n d i t i o n s , the c a p a c i t y / f o r experience possessed by the object w i l l then d i f f e r i n magnitude depending on such p r o p e r t i e s as compositional u n i t y , the i n t e n s i t y of i t s q u a l i t i e s , and the range of v a r i e t y of these q u a l i t i e s . This c a p a c i t y w i l l e x i s t independently of whether or not the object i s observed; i t w i l l a l s o e x i s t independently of the observer's c a p a c i t y f o r i t s a p p r e c i a t i o n . Thus i t disposes of the o l d analagous p h i l o s o p h i c a l question as t o whether a t r e e t h a t f a l l s out of human ear range r e a l l y does make a sound. The a e s t h e t i c q u a l i t y of a landscape may t h e r e f o r e be defined as i t s - 97 -c a p a c i t y t o produce an a e s t h e t i c experience d e r i v i n g from i t s own i n -herent p r o p e r t i e s . C e r t a i n l y the magnitude of t h a t experience w i l l depend on who the observer i s and under what circumstances, but i t i s e s s e n t i a l l y d e r i v e d from the i n t r i n s i c p r o p e r t i e s of the landscape. F u r t h e r , the experience does not have t o happen, but be capable of happening, t o d i f f e r e n t people, w i t h d i f f e r e n t c a p a c i t i e s f o r a p p r e c i a t i o n and at d i f f e r e n t times. In other words, the a e s t h e t i c q u a l i t y of the landscape i s t o be judged by i t being an instrument f o r the production of a e s t h e t i c experience (Hospers, 1969). Use of the Landscape Before proceeding f u r t h e r and attempting t o apply t h i s p r i n c i p l e i n the c l a s s i f i c a t i o n of landscapes we must f i r s t be aware of the range of landscape categories and the r e l a t e d management a l t e r n a t i v e s , a. The n a t u r a l landscape. This landscape i s present only i n the remaining areas of "true w i l d e r n e s s , " where n a t u r a l f o r c e s , i n the absence of work by man (or at l e a s t c i v i l i s e d man) have created the landscape. However, i t i s taken here t o a l s o i n c l u d e these areas which are predominantly n a t u r a l l o o k i n g and f r e e from any obvious recent m o d i f i c a t i o n by man. Thus many N a t i o n a l and P r o v i n c i a l Park areas would be i n c l u d e d . Due to the s u p e r l a t i v e nature of the landscape, or the d e l i c a t e e c o l o g i c a l balance, or p o l i c i e s ( f o r example the U.S. Wilderness A c t , 1964) which p r o h i b i t management by man, the management a p p l i e d i s only that which i s necessary t o a l l e v i a t e any changes i n the e x i s t i n g landscape due t o the a c t i o n of v i s i t o r s . In those pseudo-wilderness areas where the d e s i r e d landscape (based on h i s t o r i c a l or t r a d i t i o n a l a s s o c i a t i o n s ) i s not composed of climax - 98 -communities (e.g. the Scottish Highlands) management is sufficient only to maintain the existing serai stage. Trails and other minor features necessary to allow the areas to he enjoyed are permitted, hut in a l l cases, the associated management ac-t i v i t y borrows i t s form, l i n e , colour, and texture from the landscape within which i t occurs. b. The near-natural landscape. Here management practises are permitted on an increased scale, but the character of the existing landscape remains dominant, and once again management practises leave no features which do not borrow their form, lin e , colour and texture from the existing landscape. For example, no slash, or skid roads are allowed to remain at conclusion of the management operations. Or, where complete removal of visually non-compatible modifications i s not feasible, they must be so weak as to permit the characteristic landscape to remain dominant. The result of such management is a landscape which, though extractively used, appears to be natural and blends with nearby or adjoining land-scapes. c. Subordinated natural landscape. Examples of this type are industrial, agricultural or production forestry landscapes; the aesthetics or recreational potential of the land is subordinated to functional requirements. Yet aesthetics arid variety are s t i l l inputs into the planning process and while the visual patterns created by the management activity are not necessarily natural, they do borrow their essential characteristics from the natural l i n e , colour, form and texture. The resulting segment of the landscape does not imitate i t s essential surroundings, but is purposefully designed to be functional and visually pleasing. - 99 -W h i l e t h i s t y p e o f l a n d s c a p e w i l l , o f n e c e s s i t y , be common i n a r e a s o f i n t e n s i v e p r o d u c t i o n , , i t may a l s o p r o v i d e a welcome a d d i t i o n t o l a n d s c a p e s t h a t have l i t t l e e x i s t i n g v a r i e t y . Thus r o l l i n g c o u n t r y o v e r -l a i n w i t h a u n i f o r m b l a n k e t o f f o r e s t might be impro v e d v i s u a l l y by c a r e f u l l y l o c a t e d c l e a r i n g s o r by t h e a d d i t i o n o f s t r u c t u r e s w h i c h b l e n d w i t h o r a c c e n t u a t e t h e n a t u r a l c h a r a c t e r , t h r o u g h t h e a d d i t i o n o f elements o f s t r o n g f o r m o r l i n e t o l a n d s c a p e p r e d o m i n a t e l y o f t e x t u r e o r c o l o u r . Any p l a n s made f o r t h e d e l i b e r a t e a c c e n t u a t i o n o f t h e l a n d s c a p e must be u n d e r t a k e n w i t h s p e c i a l c a r e , however, and i n t h e " w o r k i n g " l a n d s c a p e where t h e y a r e most l i k e l y t o be u n d e r t a k e n , t h e y must be f e a s i b l e under p r e s e n t day eco n o m i c s , l o g g i n g systems and so on, f o r con-s t r u c t i o n , h a r v e s t i n g and r e a f f o r e s t a t i o n , ( s t r e e b y , 1 9 7 1 ) . d. D i s r u p t e d l a n d s c a p e . Examples o f t h i s t y p e o f l a n d s c a p e o c c u r i n f o r e s t r y , a g r i c u l t u r a l , i n d u s t r i a l , r u r a l and u r b a n a r e a s : i n s h o r t , i n any a r e a where t h e p h y s i c a l a b i l i t y t o m a n i p u l a t e t h e l a n d s c a p e d e v e l o p e d t o a h i g h l e v e l b e f o r e i t was matched w i t h a s e n s i t i v i t y towards t h e l a n d as a community o f w h i c h man i s a p a r t . W h i l e t h i s t y p e o f l a n d s c a p e i s g e n e r a l l y t h o u g h t o f as a r e c e n t phenomenon, p r i m a r i l y o f r e c e n t w e s t e r n c i v i l i s a t i o n s , i t has i n f a c t been c r e a t e d t h r o u g h o u t h i s t o r y : t h e S c o t t i s h H i g h l a n d s , much o f t h e M e d i t e r r a n e a n b o r d e r i n g a r e a s and much o f C h i n a were com-p l e t e l y changed i n c h a r a c t e r ( p r i m a r i l y t h r o u g h r e m o v a l o f f o r e s t s ) by b u r n i n g , g r a z i n g , b y d o m e s t i c a n i m a l s and o t h e r f a c t o r s and t h e p r o d u c t i v i t y l e v e l was l o w e r e d . The r e s u l t s o f t h e l a b o u r o f " h a n d i c r a f t " s o c i e t i e s may i n d i c a t e an i n t i m a c y and sympathy w i t h n a t u r e i n c l o s e up, b u t t h e l a r g e s c a l e p i c t u r e f r e q u e n t l y r e v e a l s a d i s r e g a r d f o r n a t u r a l f o r c e s . Thus t h e " p o s t - e n c l o s u r e " l a n d s c a p e o f p a r t s o f E n g l a n d i s t r u l y a "humanised" - 100 -landscape i n terms of s c a l e and balance w i t h a r u r a l o r i e n t a t e d s o c i e t y (now d i s a p p e a r i n g ) . On a l a r g e s c a l e , however, i t r e v e a l s an u n r e l e n t i n g geometrical g r i d covering the landscape and modified only by the most formidable of n a t u r a l features such as marshes or rock outcrops and which i n l e s s moderate climates might not have s u r v i v e d . While many of these landscapes are changing through the changing needs of s o c i e t y , the character of many of them w i l l be l a r g e l y r e t a i n e d i n t h e i r present and f a m i l i a r form. Landscape r e h a b i l i t a t i o n i n most areas w i l l be confined t o s e c t i o n s of the'.landscape, r e v e r s i n g or minim-i s i n g these management a c t i v i t i e s which do not borrow t h e i r form, l i n e , colour and t e x t u r e from the c h a r a c t e r i s t i c ; : landscape or nature i n general. Examples are the m o d i f i c a t i o n of clearcut-; areas to forms more a k i n t o the n a t u r a l l y occuring open areas, r e p l a n t i n g of d i s t u r b e d land (as through f o r e s t r y or mining o p e r a t i o n s ) , and remodeling of e a r l y p l a n t i n g patterns w i t h t h e i r harsh geometrical shapes. The above categories of landscapes thus range from the n a t u r a l , f r e e from any s i g n i f i c a n t m o d i f i c a t i o n by man, t o the completely man dominated. But w h i l e the various categories arouse i n people d i f f e r i n g r e a c t i o n s t o them, the landscapes themselves are p h y s i c a l e n t i t i e s and can be c a t e g o r i s e d w i t h some degree of o b j e c t i v i t y . Within them, however, occur a number of elements which s i m i l a r l y arouse d i f f e r i n g r e a c t i o n s but are r a t h e r more s u s c e p t i b l e to s u b j e c t i v i t y i n t h e i r c l a s s i f i c a t i o n . M i s f i t s i n the Landscape Photograph 33 . of an abandoned c r o f t evokes a v a r i e t y of responses from observers. . Some consider i t an "eyesore" w h i l e others value i t - 102 -for i t s historical significance and story-telling value, as part of the price of misguided land policies. To yet others i t holds appeal as an aesthetically pleasing addition of elements of form and line to a land-scape of predominantly texture. Further examples of this type suggest themselves. Thus grain ele-vators are characteristic of the prairies and can be seen from a great distance indicating the presence of prairie towns long before other signs of the towns are v i s i b l e , and also adding variety to the f l a t landscape. Even the car dump, the classic eyesore to the "man in the street," evokes a variety of responses: to the architect or ecologist i t may be a symbol of waste, while an economist might see i t as a symbol of efficient a l l o -cation of capital to i t s most productive use. (Twiss, 1969). More locally, just 20 miles beyond the ski development at Whistler Mountain is Mount Currie Indian Reserve, hailed as one of the largest in Canada. To some i t is "a tranquil scene of old barns and machinery, moss-covered roofs, old people s i t t i n g on door-steps and children playing on the boardwalk." (Carter, 1972). To others a scene of discontent, frustration, decay and squalor amid plenty presents i t s e l f . (Photograph 34). Clearly, both interpretations are valid up to a point, insofar as they both show only a part of the true situation: depending on one's preconceptions a particular "image" of the true scene is perceived, and reinforced by photography, isolating and taking out of context these elements of the scene which back up a particularIpoint of view. The dilemma can only be resolved by looking deeper into the scene or spending some time and care in observation. Thus, as Twiss (1969) has pointed out, "Good scenic management of resources not only characterises the resource in distant view, but preserves or enhances detail in specificity, variety, and serendipity - the hidden but value surprises for those who can recognise and appreciate them." - 103 -PHOTOGRAPH 3b a tranquil scene of old barns and machinery..." - 10U -Then s u r e l y some features of the landscape can unanimously he c l a s s e d as eyesores? Power pylons and t h e i r a s s o c i a t e d "sagging wire landscapes" (McHarg 1969) immediately come t o mind. (Photograph 31). F a i r b r o t h e r (1970) makes a case f o r pylons "not p a i n t e d a p o l o g e t i c gray, but flambuoyant r e d , r e i n f o r c i n g t h e i r proud f l a m i n g o - l i k e shapes',' though only i n p a r t i c u l a r landscapes which can stand b o l d elements o f l i n e , and c e r t a i n l y not i n s m a l l s c a l e organic landscapes. She does make a f u r t h e r v a l i d p o i n t t h a t i n many areas where under-grounding i s advocated f o r power l i n e s the great a d d i t i o n a l cost necessary could be put t o b e t t e r use removing some more obvious eyesores p a r t i c u l a r l y i n many "subordinated n a t u r a l landscapes'.1 Her other p o i n t , namely that a l i n e o f pylons d i s t u r b s only the view and not the permanent landscape, i s not however v a l i d i n f o r e s t e d landscapes such as those o f B r i t i s h Columbia, where the necessary swaith o f t r e e s cut beneath the power l i n e s i s the more v i s u a l l y d i s t u r b i n g element through the conspicuous a d d i t i o n of elements of l i n e t o a landscape predominantly of texture.(Photograph 31). B r i t i s h Columbia Hydro and Power A u t h o r i t y ' s Task Force (1970) st a t e s c a t e g o r i c a l l y t h a t "Undergrounding of high voltage t r a n s m i s s i o n l i n e s i s not economically f e a s i b l e at present, except i n the c e n t r a l cores of l a r g e r centres when i t ' s necessary f o r t e c h n i c a l reasons" though a d m i t t i n g t h a t "High voltage l i n e s and the towers necessary t o support them are a v i s u a l o b s t r u c t i o n , and e l m i n a t i o n o f them, i f i t were p o s s i b l e , would c o n t r i b u t e to the environment." Sargent (1967) describes an "eyesore"as, simply, "anything t h a t i n t e r f e r e s w i t h viewing the n a t u r a l scene", w i t h the only q u a l i f i c a t i o n t h a t some f e a t u r e s , such as r u r a l homes, may be eyesores but should, perhaps, be d e a l t w i t h through other channels r a t h e r than scenery c l a s s i f i c a t i o n . - 105 -Burke et a l (1968) drop the term in their scenery classification in favour of a system of ratings for any feature accordingly as i t detracts from, is characteristic of, adds favourably to, or is neutral to the landscape being viewed. In view of the subjectivity associated with the term this seems the better approach. Further, i t allows a more objective assess-ment of the various artifacts and other man-made changes to the landscape. To the "Reversers" (Fairbrother, 1970).or the simon-pure conser-vationists (Whyte 1970) "unimproved, undefiled, inviolate" nature is the highest class of land and any man-made changes are undesirable, in an increasing number of areas. While their standpoint is certainly valid and by being "splendidly unreasonable,' they have saved many fine areas which should have been saved and which would not have been saved without good old fashioned zeolotry,"(Whyte, 1970), an aversion to a l l artifacts is unhelpful. Landscape Description and Classification In view of the foregoing, where the complexities of deciding just what we perceive in the landscape have been discussed, and the maxim that form must follow function in a l l but a few isolated segments of the landscape has been stated, is i t valid to attempt to classify landscapes by visual criteria? In Europe the answer has been in the negative u n t i l recently, as the centre for landscape research has been Germany where as previously noted, the Anglo-Saxon concept of landscape as a source of aesthetic enjoyment was not present and the idea of "visual" landscape as a general resource was not appreciated (Countryside Commission for Scotland, 1971). Rather, the thinking in Germany has been predominantly development or problem orientated, with functional factors strongly em-- io6 -phasised. Only r e c e n t l y has work such as t h a t by Lynch (i960) i n f l u e n c e d t h i s t r a d i t i o n a l approach to take account of environmental p e r c e p t i o n and " i m a g e a b i l i t y " . The b a s i c design elements t o which we respond i n the landscape have p r e v i o u s l y been d i s c u s s e d , but what are the " a c t u a l " components of the landscape which might l e g i t i m a t e l y be used t o i d e n t i f y and grade l a n d -scapes? The landscape might be gitaded according t o such c r i t e r i a as a e s t h e t i c q u a l i t y , d i v e r s i t y , r a r i t y , h i s t o r i c a l or l i t e r a r y a s s o c i a t i o n s , or i n t e r n a t i o n a l importance and.lso on. On the other hand, the landscape might be evaluated i n terms of p o t e n t i a l l a n d uses, a matter which l i e s w i t h i n the f i e l d of r e g i o n a l and r u r a l p lanning which i s not the focus of the present work. Landscape "c h a r a c t e r " has been proposed as an e s s e n t i a l component of the c l a s s i f i c a t i o n process. Assuming that the " f u n c t i o n c l a s s e s " (Beardsley 1958) are a v a l i d concept, i t i s a l s o c l e a r t h a t l i k e must be compared w i t h l i k e : j u s t as i t i s not p o s s i b l e t o s t a t e c a t e g o r i c a l l y t h a t apples are " b e t t e r " than pears, so i t i s e q u a l l y u n r e a l i s t i c to say th a t one k i n d of landscape i s b e t t e r than another. For example, i f we make the statement t h a t mountain v a l l e y s are b e t t e r than lowland a g r i -c u l t u r a l landscapes, then a v a l l e y w i t h a d i r t y i n d u s t r i a l p l a n t would be ranked higher than a farming landscape of neat hedged f i e l d s and t r a -d i t i o n a l farm b u i l d i n g s . Most workers have based t h e i r c r i t e r i a on i d e n t i f i c a t i o n of the " c h a r a c t e r i s t i c " landscape (Burke et a l 1968). L i t t o n (1968) has sug-gested t h a t f o r a given geomorphic province or region there i s a l a n d -scape m a t r i x or general c o n t i n u i t y . Given t h a t t h i s i s i d e n t i f i a b l e , each landscape i n tu r n which we wish t o describe or grade might be com-pared w i t h t h i s , without judgement of m e r i t . The landscape character - 107 -might "be a) a s u b j e c t i v e , l i t e r a r y d e s c r i p t i o n of what are the most important elements of the scene (e.g. Murray 1962); b) a s u b j e c t i v e d e l i n e a t i o n of the boundaries between areas which appear t o d i f f e r i n landscape character, and subsequent a n a l y s i s of the elements c o n t r i b u t i n g t o the character of the d i f f e r e n t areas ( f o r example, B r e d s d o r f f i n Countryside Commission f o r Scotland 1971); c) ,a survey i n which elements are s u b j e c t i v e l y p l a c e d i n a pre-determined range of categories such as a more/some/much f o r e s t cover, or dissected/undissected r e l i e f ; d) a survey i n which elements are measured and p l a c e d i n a range of n u m e r i c a l l y d e f i n e d c a t e g o r i e s , such as percentage of f o r e s t cover. ( L i n t o n 1968). Method(d) i s r e l a t i v e l y o b j e c t i v e , but the i n i t i a l d e c i s i o n as t o what elements t o i n c l u d e i s s u b j e c t i v e and i n f a c t based on i n i t i a l l y a p p l y i n g method ( a ) . Methods (c) and (d) have been combined i n some stud i e s such as t h a t of Leopold (1969) where elements such as stream width were q u a n t i f i e d , w h i l e others such as degree of u r b a n i s a t i o n or p o l l u t i o n evidence were s u b j e c t i v e l y r a t e d on a range from "much" t o "none." While methods (c) and (d) are a t t r a c t i v e through t h e i r s t a n d a r d i s a t i o n , i n order t o keep the a n a l y s i s manageable, the number of landscape elements and t h e i r a t t r i b u t e s are u s u a l l y l i m i t e d . Thus the s u b t l e nuances of landscape character which c o n t r i b u t e so much t o the v i s u a l q u a l i t i e s of a landscape are missed, and the v a r i e t y o f elements i n the v i s i b l e landscape i s considered t o be of great value by other workers - 108 -s u c h as S a r g e n t (1?9^ >7). Thus i n h i s scheme t h e number o f d i f f e r e n t e l e m e n t s i n t h e v i e w i s t h e second most i m p o r t a n t f a c t o r measured and a v i e w c o n t a i n i n g o n l y a s m a l l number o f d i f f e r e n t e l ements from t h e range f i e l d s , h i l l s , f o r e s t s , w a t e r , f a r m s t e a d s , v i l l a g e s o r l e d g e s r e c e i v e s a c o r r e s p o n d i n g l y low s c o r e . Y e t w h i l e t h e c o n s t i t u e n t e lements o f t h e l a n d s c a p e a r e i m p o r t a n t , t h e q u a l i t y o f them and t h e o v e r a l l q u a l i t y o f t h e t o t a l l a n d s c a p e t h e y c o m p r i s e i s a l s o i m p o r t a n t . And what o f t h e r e l a t i v e w e i g h t t o be g i v e n each element? T h i s l a t t e r q u e s t i o n i s f u r t h e r c o m p l i c a t e d by t h e f a c t t h a t d i f f e r e n t e l ements have d i f f e r e n t v a l u e s i n d i f f e r e n t l a n d s c a p e s . Thus a r i v e r might be an u n i m p o r t a n t element i n t h e q u a l i t y o f a f o r e s t l a n d s c a p e b u t can c o n t r i b u t e g r e a t l y t o t h e b e a u t y o f an open l a n d s c a p e . A r e f i n e m e n t might be t o b a s e t h e s c o r e f o r a l a n d s c a p e on s p e c i f i c l a n d s c a p e elements w h i c h a r e a s s i g n e d a v a r i a b l e s c o r e . The v a r i a b l e s c o r e may be b a s e d on ' . a) n u m e r i c a l c a t e g o r i e s , b a s e d on measured d i f f e r e n c e s i n c h a r a c t e r ; f o r example, f o r a n e g a t i v e f e a t u r e , t h e l e n g t h o f power l i n e p e r u n i t a r e a ; b) r e l a t i v e c a t e g o r i e s , b a s e d on a p p r o x i m a t e d d i f f e r e n c e s i n c h a r a c t e r ; f o r example, many, some, no power l i n e s ; c) r e l a t i v e c a t e g o r i e s , b a s e d on j u d g e d d i f f e r e n c e s i n q u a l i t y ; f o r example, w e l l p l a c e d / b a d l y p l a c e d power l i n e s ; d) r e l a t i v e c a t e g o r i e s , b a s e d on j u d g e d i m p a c t o f l a n d s c a p e ; f o r ex-ample, power l i n e s c o n s p i c u o u s o r i n c o n s p i c u o u s . Y e t t h e s e more a n a l y t i c a l approaches t o l a n d s c a p e a n a l y s i s may m i s s t h e i m p o r t a n t p o i n t o f t h e r e l a t i o n s h i p between t h e elements p r e s e n t , and o t h e r a b s t r a c t e l e m e n t s o f l a n d s c a p e q u a l i t y . W h i l e s u c h a f a c t o r as t h e q u a l i t y o f t h e r e l a t i o n s h i p between t h e elements i s d i f f i c u l t t o - 109 -measure i t i s , for many purposes, the total effect of the landscape that is important. Thus, forests, mountains and water may be "good" elements in a landscape but their relative arrangement and the composition they present determines their true impact. When the d i f f i c u l t i e s inherent in a landscape analysis and inventory based on landscape "quality" are considered, i t seems well to pursue analyses based on "character" and this has been the usual approach. Thus Olmsted (1922) wrote: "There is always a strong temptation upon the traveller to en-deavour to so describe fine scenery, and the feelings which i t has occasioned to him, that they may be reproduced to the imagination of .his friends. Judging from my own experience, this purpose always f a i l s . I have never yet seen anything o celebrated in scenery, of which I had previously obtained a correct conception. Certain striking, prominent points that the power of language has been most directed to the painting of, almost invariably disappoint, and seem l i t t l e and common-place, after the exaggerated forms which have been brought before the mind's eye. Beauty, grandeur, impressiveness,'. in any way from scenery, is not often to be found in a few prominent, distinguishable features, but in the manner and the unobserved materials with which these are connected and combined. Clouds, lights, states of the atmosphere, and circumstances that we cannot always detect, affect a l l landscapes,... So i t is that the impatient f i r s t glance of the young traveller, or the imper-tinent c r i t i c a l stare of the old tourist, is almost never satis-fied, i f the honest truth be admitted, in what i t has been led to previously imagine. I have heard 'Niagara is a m i l l dam,1 'Rome is a humbug'... The deep sentiments of nature that we sometimes seem to have been made the confident of, ... are beyond words; they never could be transcribed into note books and diaries, and so descriptions of them become caricatures, and when we see them, we at f i r s t say we are disappointed that we find not the monsters we-were told of." Yet while saying that character is the basis for landscape analysis, an assessment of quality is also important as a measure of the landscape resources that are available for the purposes of giving people pleasure, and i t should be possible for trained observers to reach f a i r l y consistent assessments of landscape quality, just as on the quality of other aesthetic objects. It i s , however, unrealistic to isolate quality from character. - 110 -Thus t o compare the q u a l i t y of a woodland w i t h t h a t o f a mountain top i s p o i n t l e s s f o r a e s t h e t i c purposes, the r e l a t i v e assessments depending on p u r e l y p e r s o n a l preferences which are a f f e c t e d by many other f a c t o r s . In view of the many inherent d i f f i c u l t i e s i n v o l v e d i n scenery c l a s s i f i c a t i o n , the c l a s s i c a l c l a s s i f i c a t i o n by d i v i s i o n as i n b i o l o g i c a l c l a s s i f i c a t i o n appears t o be a u s e f u l approach t o the problem, producing an ordered h e i r a r c h y of cl a s s e s of elements i n the c l a s s i f i c a t i o n process. A. The Primary Elements of Character L i n t o n (1968) has proposed that the two t r u l y b a s i c elements of the sce n i c resource of any area are: I ) the form of the ground "not as de-f i n e d by the contours of the t o p o g r a p h i c a l surveyor, but r a t h e r by the landform cat e g o r i e s of the geomorphologist," and I I ) the "mantle of f o r e s t s and moorlands, farms and f a c t o r i e s , n a t u r a l vegetation and human a r t i f a c t s , by which the hard rock body o f the landscape i s c l o t h e d . " What i s a l s o important f o r the present purposes i s R e l a t i v e R e l i e f , i . Landform and R e l a t i v e R e l i e f A i r photographs and contour maps provide an i n t r o d u c t i o n t o the c l a s s i f i c a t i o n process, but w i t h r e s e r v a t i o n s : i t must be remembered th a t high or low e l e v a t i o n does not of i t s e l f make dramatic or d u l l scenery. Thus the B r i t i s h mountains, despite t h e i r comparatively low heights of three t o four thousand feet can be f a r more i n t e r e s t i n g geomorphologically than might be expected by a North American accustomed t o the peaks of the Rocky Mountains o f f a r greater h e i g h t . Thus Figure 12 shows absolute a l t i t u d e above sea l e v e l and r e l a t i v e a l t i t u d e of the h i l l t o p s above the nearby v a l l e y f l o o d s . With reference to absolute a l t i t u d e , Munich stands on a p l a t e a u whose spurs reach out towards S t u t t g a r t , Nuremberg - I l l -ABSOLUTE ALTiTUDE L aSo do1f'°W ****** 1 5 0 0 ^ ° « 3000^00,, J 5 " 6000ft 0 50 10Q 15Q K m , RELATIVE RELIEF "' ' FIGURE 12 Absolute and Relative Relief. (from Linton, 1968) - 112 -and Passau. Examination of r e l a t i v e a l t i t u d e , however, r e v e a l s t h a t both Munich and Augsburg stand i n an almost f l a t p l a i n about 100 km i n l e n g t h , surrounded by t r a c t s of low h i l l country t h a t i n t u r n are s t r o n g l y enclosed on almost a l l sides by uplands o f b o l d r e l i e f . P r e p a r a t i o n of maps of r e l a t i v e a l t i t u d e would be extremely u s e f u l i n s c e n i c c l a s s i f i c a t i o n but the labour i n v o l v e d i n producing them has so f a r l i m i t e d t h e i r production. In Linton's (1968) c l a s s i f i c a t i o n of the s c e n i c resources of Scotland he used o r d i n a r y topographic maps (of the Ordnance Survey) but i n t e r p r e t e d them i n the l i g h t of considerable p e r s o n a l experience of the areas. Where-as a topographic map gives c o n s i d e r a t i o n to the d i s t r i b u t i o n of major r e l i e f elements such as mountains, p l a i n s and p l a t e a u s , he p o i n t s out that greater or equal emphasis i s l i k e l y to be put on the d i f f e r e n t i a t i o n of forms generated by d i f f e r e n t processes of e r o s i o n and d e p o s i t i o n - f l u v i a l , g l a c i a l or marine. While these d i f f e r e n c e s are of t e n very important determinants of landscape, the e r o s i v e processes themselves are not alone s u f f i c i e n t index of landscape character. Thus g l a c i a t e d v a l l e y s might g e n e r a l l y be more dramatic than r i v e r - c u t v a l l e y s , but they are c e r t a i n l y not always so. Nevertheless, landform and r e l a t i v e r e l i e f are primary f a c t o r s i n landscape c l a s s i f i c a t i o n . A f u r t h e r primary f a c t o r i s i i . . V egetation Cover. While the types could be elaborated g r e a t l y , b a s i c d i v i s i o n s of the l a n d would be f o r e s t l a n d , moor or scrub l a n d , a g r i c u l t u r a l l a n d , and un-vegetated. These three primary f a c t o r s can be determined from a i r photographs, recent ones being e s p e c i a l l y u s e f u l , so that when the f i e l d .surveys are begun f o r the secondary features of landscape, the types of landscape t o be d e a l t w i t h are already known. - 113 -Photographs 35 and 36 show dr u m l i n i s e d landscapes of l o n g , p a r a l l e l h i l l s . Photograph 37 i s a stereo air-photograph o f the same type of landscape and re v e a l s the c h a r a c t e r i s t i c p a t t e r n s from which the landscape character can be determined r a p i d l y . B. The Secondary Elements of Character. Surface water elements, c o r r i d o r s and nodes of a c t i v i t y , i l l u s t r a t e what i s meant by secondary elements. Once again a i r photographs would r e v e a l these and w i t h recent a i r photograph coverage even very recent a l t e r a t i o n s t o the landscape can be detected. One way of re c o r d i n g the impact o f an element such as a road might be to r e l a t e i t t o g r i d squares covering the study area, so that the a c t u a l area d i s t u r b e d by the road and i t s a d j o i n i n g margins might be recorded. Yet t h i s i s not s a t i s f a c t o r y : a major freeway c r o s s i n g a t r a c t of land might very w e l l d i r e c t l y d i s t u r b l e s s area of l a n d than a web of minor roads, yet i t s t o t a l impact on the landscape i s c l e a r l y g r e a t e r . We must adopt a technique that allows f o r t h i s d i s p a r i t y . At t h i s p o i n t , the q u a l i t y of the landscape i s what we wish t o evaluate, acknowledging the p r e v i o u s l y mentioned problems of s u b j e c t i v i t y . When t h i s f o l l o w s on from a character determination, however, the problem i s lessened. B a s i c a l l y what i s t o be done here i s to examine a l l the elements which are "superimposed" upon the primary elements, and assess whether t h e i r presence i s a negative or p o s i t i v e a d d i t i o n to the landscape. Al s o taken i n t o account must be the l o c a t i o n of such t e r t i a r y and secondary elements and t h e i r r e l a t i o n t o one another. In Sargent's (1967) scheme a number of items of i n t e r e s t are l i s t e d i n i t i a l l y , and a scene i s r a t e d according t o the presence or absence of - 115 -these elements, of which h e ' l i s t s f i e l d s . , h i l l s , f o r e s t s , water, farm-steads, v i l l a g e s or ledges. Thus a scene which contains only f i e l d s i s given a r a t i n g of 1, wh i l e 5 i s given to a scene i n which one can see p i c t o r i a l l y s i g n i f i c a n t amounts of f i v e of the l i s t e d elements. This score i s modifi e d by the second component, namely the extension of the surface or the area over which i t can be seen, which i s i t s e l f determined by the p r e v i o u s l y described f a c t o r s of observer d i s t a n c e , p o s i t i o n , and the width of the view. The scheme might be c r i t i c i s e d on s e v e r a l p o i n t s : f o r example, i n c e r t a i n landscapes s e v e r a l of the l i s t e d elements might never occur, such as f i e l d s and farmsteads i n wilderness areas, yet t h e i r absence would c e r t a i n l y not be a negative f e a t u r e ; a l s o , there i s no allowance f o r the q u a l i t y of the element being recorded; t h i r d l y , i t i s u n l i k e l y t h a t a standard a l l o c a t i o n of an i n v a r i a b l e one p o i n t f o r the presence of any one element i n a l l landscape types w i l l be s a t i s f a c t o r y ; he a l s o a l l o -cates a higher score d i r e c t l y as the distance the observer can see i n -creases. While t h i s i s g e n e r a l l y s a t i s f a c t o r y , as C o l v i n (1970) po i n t s out, i t i s f r e q u e n t l y the middleground which gives the most i n t e r e s t and enduring pleasure t o the observer. Nevertheless, Sargent's scheme i s a u s e f u l one f o r an i n i t i a l f i e l d a n a l y s i s of a given area. Being based on a simple presence or absence plus an estimate of distance observable i t has the a d d i t i o n a l advantage th a t i t may be c a r r i e d out by unt r a i n e d observers. L i t t o n ' s (1968) scheme i s e s s e n t i a l l y s i m i l a r t o Sargent's, but t h i s scheme and others would be u s e f u l l y improved, p a r t i c u l a r l y where a map i s being prepared, by s t a n d a r d i s a t i o n of the symbols f o r the ( f r e q u e n t l y ) new values being charted and i n t h i s connection Lewis's (1964) (Figure 13) graphics provide i n t e r e s t i n g g u i d e l i n e s . - n6 -I I ) t } I ) I J IB 11 II IJ » 11 fes a. JJ B R a h g 6* a LSFi B HH 11 31 ft t& 3 ^ ^ @ I # ^ ^ £ si s: u „ u Ok L71 .TIT) si c I T 11 « 2^ ft ft ft ID Ml 11) 'A1 ft tti! Ill IM ft ft ft H] IM 141 IM 111 '11 • I)) <? © ful E3 H M ii n ii n tf i; ii n * fr ii it ) i ii « ISD ioi ru? m 3 D ® 3 ^ 3 ^ 12 P 3* •or mi w no in in m M nj tn ft ft ft ft ft ft ft ft ft ft no m 123 m m m m in in ffi! ^ K' fi!! fi^ fi! fi! ® fi! fi! 1) 134 m 131 1]1 131 119 ICO 141 HI WW7m}fMW ft £ J f t 3 <5 l« MI 141 HI tlO HI IM 111 IM 'SS /?J5V C ? 5 \ \ <9°^. / ^ N X <?P^ <>S' ^ \ ((•)) * ) ® • 0 « ) ) o # o ( ® ) Q»:D I*I * ) '-<^y s<^y z ^ c / <^~^o \my <^£> < 111 >M IE) Ifl IE] IM IE! 166 IE) HI q ° < | > 9 <f) £ ) * or) ( J ) • DI 173 D4 171 lit 17) IH IT) in K1 Df ID 111 IBS 190 III 111 193 11 ^ ^ 7H ^ „^5 f[o $ & 6£ 0 '" '" W m «' m m IDS m „ "D T * f j El @ [DJ | 101 101 111 IK 71) ;n III noFIGURE 13. Landscape resources for recreation - symbols (see over). (from Lewis, 1961+) - 117 -Landscape Resources For Recreation Water Resources \- itunil Resources '[Intrinsic Resources) Waterfalls _ Rapids, white-water Bathing beaches Agate beaches Natural springs, artesian flows Canoe routes Wild-rice areas - -Exceptional islands Fish habitat Chasms Trout Muskelhmge Walleye Bass Northern pike Sturgeon Catfish Pan fish Swimming facilities 9. 10. 11. 12. 13. 14. 15. 16. 17. 18. 19. Man-made Facilities (Extrinsic Resources) 20. Boating facilities, ramps 21. Fuel, repair & supplies 22. Marinas 23. Boating areas 24. Outfitting posts 25. Harbors of refuge 26. Camp sites 27. Canals 28. Dams, fishways, drainage ways 29. Locks 30. Lighthouses 31. Fish hatcheries 32. Mill ponds 33. Reservoirs 34. Shelters for ice-skating areas li istorical and Cultural Resources Man-Made Resources 50. Blacksmith shops 51. 13ridi;es (covered, etc.) • 82. Tiadinu posts S3. Old mills S-t. Taverns, saloons j So. Old mines ' 86. Opera houses 87. Historical homes t 88. Old forts | 89. Barracks j 90. Lumber camps 91. Battlefields 92. Historical markers i 93. Museums 94. Restaurants (native dishes) 95. Native handicrafts j 90. Local festivals, celebrations < 97. Outstanding farmers markets 98. Modern mines 99. Power plants 100. - Modern mills 101. Interesting industries (open) 102. Commercial fishing 103. Berry picking i 104. Ghost towns I 105. Rifle shooting ranges ! 106. Archery ranges 107. Sugar bush , 108. Songbirds 109. Aesthetic areas 110. Art museums 111. Outstanding buildings 1 112. Theaters 113. Existing public lands 114. Existing private lands 115. Proposed public lands 116. Proposed private lands Wetland Resources Natural Resources Intrinsic Resources 35. Exceptional wetlands 36. Wildlife observation 37. Wildlife hunting 38. Observation platforms 39. Wetland, projects, levees, -10. Wildlife preserves 41. Hunting preserves Topographic Resources Natural Values (Unique geological formations) 42. 43. 44. 45. 46. Man 50. 51. Caves Balanced rocks Castle rocks Exceptional glacial remains Natural bridges Stones & fossil-collection areas Mineral-ore outcroppings Outstanding soil conservation also farm conservation -Made Values Ski lifts Ski-rope tows Ski-slope structures Snow play areas, sledding, etc. Ski trails Skiing (cross country) Riding Hiking Nature trails Trail shelters Picnic areas Golf courses \outh camps Nature camps Day camps Vegetation Resources N*«ural Resour ces Sj>- Virgin stands (timber) Rare remnants el- Outstanding reforestation Wildflowers f0- Prairies i , - Specimens (trees, etc.) Unusual crops ' - Orchards made Resources Fire towers Rre trails & breaks pale forests (existing potential) p 0 u m y forests (existing potential) Ulunty parks (existing potential) j!<ate parks (existing potential) Jtate recreation areas (existing Potential) Archeological Resources 117. Effigy mound 118. Sugar bush 119. Petroglvph 120. Quartzile 121. Pipestone 122. Steatite 123. Quarry flint 124. Copper 125. Lead 12Q. Quartz 127. Chlorite 128. Camp site 129. Village site 130. Circular enclosure 131. Square enclosure 132. Rectangular enclosure 133. Wild rice 134. Cornfield 135. Garden bed 130. Trail 137. Ford 13S. Fort 139. Battlefield 140. Cache pits 141. Workshop 142. Historic village sites 143. Provision cache 144. Shell heap 145. Ceramic artifacts 146. Conical mound 147. Mound group 14S. Mmi'i i-round-oval 149. Historic cemetery 150. Prehistoric cemetery 151. Stone grave 152. Burial ground 153. Grave Wildlife Natural Resources Big Game FIGURE 13 continued. Kgy to Symbols 154. 155. 156. 157. 158. Bear Bobcat Wolf Deer Red & grey fox 185-186 Small Game 197-199 Water Fowl 200-211 Birds Tourist Service Facilities 212. Accommodations 213. Hospital 214. Telephone 215. Water 216. Pharmacies 217. Gas stations 218. Toilet facilities 219. Restaurant 220. Washer-dryer - 118 -Among these new values might he " a l l t h a t might command repeated a t t e n t i o n . " Thus Appleyard et a l (1964), using tape r e c o r d i n g s , f i l m s and photographs made a r e c o r d i n g of everything they found themselves l o o k i n g at w h i l e t r a v e l l i n g repeatedly along s e v e r a l routes. A l s o , (Burke et a l , 1968) Lewis and O e r t e l / made a "Landscape P e r c e p t u a l Study" which contained a f u l l i nventory of " a l l p e r c e p t u a l values such as r a i l r o a d s , highways, b u i l d i n g s , e x i s t i n g v e g e t a t i o n , steep s l o p e s , i n t e r e s t i n g views, e t c . . . " From t h i s they made a s e r i e s of maps on which r e c r e a t i o n a l uses were p l o t t e d and from which the f i e l d of view from any p o i n t on the road could be p l o t t e d . I d e n t i f i c a t i o n o f the c h a r a c t e r i s t i c landscape or the "background ma t r i x " has already been r e f e r r e d t o , and forms the b a s i s o f the scheme of Burke, Lewis and Orr (1968). In t h i s , each e v a l u a t i o n of the view seen from a p a r t i c u l a r p o i n t i s compared w i t h the c h a r a c t e r i s t i c landscape. Thus, i n e v a l u a t i n g a p o s s i b l e road route which extends through a g r i -c u l t u r a l l a n d , high mountain country and f o r e s t l a n d , comparisons are made based on the average character of each landscape zone i n t u r n as i t i s t r a v e r s e d . Given that the c h a r a c t e r i s t i c landscape can be agreed upon, (and s i n c e as p r e v i o u s l y described i t i s based on d e f i n i t e elements f r e e from s u b j e c t i v i t y , t h i s should be p o s s i b l e ) a view need only be r a t e d as being s u p e r i o r t o , equal t o , or i n f e r i o r to t h i s . In p r a c t i s e , each landscape zone, "Roadside Zone," f'Outer Zone" and "Far Zone", ( c o r r e s -ponding approximately to foreground, middleground and background) i s cl a s s e d as f o l l o w s : +1 =View has elements of n a t u r a l or ma'n-made beauty or i n t e r e s t t h a t are s u p e r i o r t o the c h a r a c t e r i s t i c landscape. C =View represents the c h a r a c t e r i s t i c landscape. -1 =Some work of man i n the view d e t r a c t s from the c h a r a c t e r i s t i c - 119 -landscape, but i s n e u t r a l or a t t r a c t i v e i n beauty or i n t e r e s t . Z = Zone i s not v i s i b l e . When a zone i s not v i s i b l e because of screening v e g e t a t i o n i n the roadside zone, the rank i s p l a c e d i n parentheses, (•fl); ( c ) ; (-!);• (N) and represents the view that would be obtained i f the ve g e t a t i o n were removed. The main d i f f i c u l t y w i t h t h i s scheme i s t h e r e f o r e only i n i d e n t i f y i n g the c h a r a c t e r i s t i c landscape but t h i s i s surmountable. Table 3 (Lacate 1970) i l l u s t r a t e s the comparative usefulness of a i r photographs and maps i n o b t a i n i n g t h i s i n f o r m a t i o n . Once again the scheme i s s u b j e c t i v e , but t h i s i s p r a c t i c a l l y un-avoidable when " q u a l i t y " i s being determined. Some might argue the opinion that only man-made features are capable of demoting a view t o a -1 r a t i n g , but "the scheme does provide summaries of routes when c a r r i e d out by t r a i n e d observers. Whereas landscape character presents l i t t l e problems then, to c l a s s -i f i c a t i o n , landscape q u a l i t y remains a source of controversy. Looking more c l o s e l y at q u a l i t y o f secondary and t e r t i a r y elements i n the l a n d -scape, a s o l u t i o n might be t o determine both t h e i r impact on character and c o n t r i b u t i o n t o q u a l i t y of the landscape. Thus the impact on char-a c t e r might be assessed on a s c a l e ranging from inconspicuous, through conspicuous, t o very conspicuous and iihe r e s p o n s i b l e element r a t e d 0; 1; 2; r e s p e c t i v e l y (Countryside Commission f o r S c o t l a n d , 1971). Con-t r i b u t i o n t o q u a l i t y might be r a t e d on a f i v e p o i n t s c a l e ranging from bad (-2) through n e u t r a l (0) t o e x c e l l e n t ( 2). The two scores might be combined f o r each f e a t u r e , the t o t a l t a k i n g i t s s i g n from the second. And any sum which contained zero would t o t a l zero as i t would not be s i g n i f i c a n t l y a f f e c t i n g q u a l i t y . E l a b o r a t i o n of the s c a l e s would be TABLE' 3: Identifieationbarid;- Inventory qfi;. NatKif aI!''Landsjqape;'a^ d'''l^ n-iiiade' Features '• E I. F. X Z t. T (A; KATES 1 Surface va'.er elementa (lrjke£, etreana, major ewamps, etc.) • Water q u a l i t y evaluation - Potential floo't lonvs - Groundwater values (S) LANDFORMS KHO TOPCGRAFirY - Slope evaluation and elevation ranges Distance measurements CBTAl:iABI.E P.W. T0I0-6SAPHIC PAPS ©Yea R.v7l::iJ c~ i : / r ^ i r 3TA1:-ABLE T:A-IC:--©let- 0 . S.X Portly (e.£ f , B - ©y,a tur^o nucn aa s l i t load. aquatic vr,3e-t n t i o n , depths) ©Yea ©Fartly ©Yea Yen (but topo-graphic capo better) t a r t l y (well recordn, etc.) ' ObTAI.itbLi CivAINABl.c ri-.r::-: ;':.o:i A " ; ; Kiiso:;-;: :;o tea 0 . S. ©Y»» Portly no Partly © V e » Landform and te r r a i n cnalyalc i . regional ar-d l o c a l interrelationohipa of features, uniqueness c f ftja turns lr. r e l a t i o n to " c h a r a c t e r i s t i c " lanSacnr-e i i . interpretation o f corcpcalticn ?.nd structure of landforr.s, depthc o f materials (composition of knolls - bedrock or unconsolidated matorials) i i i . erosion and landslide BIJ icep* i b l 11 ty of l?.nd-tonri patterns i v . R o i l ca*er.ary pattern!!, s o i l depths, drainage classes ( C ) V E G E T A T I O N - Extent of vec^tatlon cover - I d e n t i f i c a t i o n of vegetation species, height of /agetation, density* unique vccctatlon patterna, etc. NO NO NO No No © Y e s ® Y * s ©Yrn Far t l y Partly Partly F a r t l y (for pre-liminary EGll teats •nd analyses) © Y e O © Y R S (aceorr.-puniM by f i e l d work to check eco-IcG-lcal pat torn a of the area) Yrs (but not for lnrfia areas) No No No .NO Partly Partly P a r t l y ©lartly 0 . s. Partly (D) CLIKATIC INF0R".ATI0;J - Snow records! storm tracks, number of days of cunshina, etc. P a r t l y ( i f ecolocy of area can aervo as c l u i o ) Partly ( E ) W I L D L I F E - W i l d l i f e valuta (p> L A N D U S E A N D M A N - M A D E F E A T U R E S - Established recreation lands, state parts, t r a i l s , e x i s t i n g tourist f a c i l i t i e s , marinas* etc. - Other recreational land usei ( c o i f courses, undeveloped scenic arcao, viewpoints, oki slopes, etc.) Rural bulldin&Q and general zone of urbanization Commercial and Industrial land uoeo Residential areas anl q u a l i t y of housing, new subdivisions, t r a i l e r porks* etc. Exiutinc roods, present acceoa for realdento Other transportation f a c i l i t i e s Bnd u t l l i t i r o ( railroads, a i r p o r t o , transmitter! l i n e s , pipe l i n e s , etc.) Far t l y © Partly Partly (but l e -gal boundaries not blwayo i d e n t i f i a b l e ) Partly (sone ©Yes (except golf courses & for low i n -f a l l e are noted) tensity uses) Mo No No JYee Partly P a r t l y © r c o Partly (but can be out of date) © / « ©Yey {with eup-plcnentary f i e l d checks) ©Yes 0 . S. ©Yes (but types of Partly pipe]inc rcay not be i c t n t i f i a b l e ) Yee (especially for recent chances) YAB (as above) Yes (especially for recent development) 0. 3. C. S. 0 . S. 0 . S. ©Partly ©Yea © Y 5 S 0 . 5. C. S. ® - Cemetariea I n s t i t u t i o n a l lands, private and public educational f a c i l i t l c o , county forests, feacral f l a n hatchery, water supply reservoirs, etc. Extent and quality of agricultural'development, condition No of f i e l d s , size of flol<l3, t>arns, 6lloc, etc. His t o r i c resources and values (bulldincs, a r c h i t e c t u r a l s t y l e s ) No • Education ond recearch values i . researcS plots, experimental f i e l d crop areas, No forect plantations, w i l d l i f e habitat improvements I i , unique botnnlcal a R a n o r h n t i t n t a , unique w i l d l i f e and HQ waterfowl areas, unique fccoloei^al fornntlons H i . ftreos un.?'J f c r elaco tourn an'! fl<*l't Inlicr'itory purpoaeo (r.eolory, p^o.^.orpholo^y, p^-'olorj, hlntorlc e i t c c , n0 ecolorjr, forrntry, «cr leu lture , «te. ) 'fteat'ily avail.^blf, atr.ntnr! panchromatic Dlnck an>J whit.^ alrphoto-f.raphy usually at n r j l r a rancinG from 1 t l 5,003 - IIZ'J.OOO j t i i ^ r r iIo».:rr*o llntf.-.l i n ' cf more v.ilue /or f« ii'.uro l i n t * ' ! , tMn J r« bout n v n l l O3Mr0<t* to oliJ.'iln In I'orrx* l i on Tor thi* \ Yeo (but can b-j out of dote) Yea ( i f not aban-doned or very ar-iall) P a rtly @*ec Partly Partly © Y es ©Fartly (veceta- Partly t i o n patterns an^i c u l t u r a l r.anipul^tiont; are iden'-iifiable) Partly (areas should Partly g^ ow up cs unique pat-tern i n r e l a t i o n to "backcrouni landscape") No No 0 . S. Partly Partly © Y e © V e © Y e ©Yes ©Yen ©Yep Partly Partly Partly - 121 -possible but seems undesirable considering the present state of knowledge of the f i e l d . Thus we have a landscape classification scheme which takes as i t starting point the geomorphological base of the landscape i t s e l f and pro-ceeds from there to the more ethereal realms of landscape quality and the very nature of beauty i t s e l f . The scheme is successful in that i t attempts to quantify aesthetics but f a i l s in that i t s t i l l requires a considerable amount of expertise on the part of those conducting i t . And once again, the familiar question arises of who is entitled to make judgements of beauty on behalf of the populace as a whole? Even more significant,are we taking entirely the wrong approach in even attempting to quantify aes-thetics which should more rightly be kept apart from the world of measure-ments and so reveal i t s true value as an alternative to this? Eric Newton (Kates, 1970) advised that "except within the vaguest l i m i t s , beauty cannot be described: therefore i t cannot be defined. It cannot be measured either in quantity or quality: therefore i t cannot be made into the basis of a science. It has always proved impregnable to the frontal attacks of the aestheticians." And despite the "instrumentalist theory" described previously, where an object's capacity for producing aesthetic experience is said to be an intri n s i c property of the object, i t might be an experiment in f u t i l i t y to attempt to further elaborate schemes which attempt to analyse and describe natural landscape in written terms. Apart from the fact that except in relatively few areas w i l l i t ever be possible to put aesthetics before function, for purely descriptive purposes visual recording methods provide a satisfactory approximation to the "real" landscape, particularly with the increasing availability of video tape apparatus which enables scenes to be recorded and played back immediately in motion and colour; though i t must always be remembered - 122, -t h a t our perc e p t i o n of the landscape u t i l i s e s a l l the senses. While when a v e r b a l account of a landscape i s r e q u i r e d , emphasis should be pl a c e d on landscape character and the departures from i t , as e x e m p l i f i e d i n the above scheme. Going beyond d e s c r i p t i o n and inventory of scenery, to i t s p r o v i s i o n , and p u b l i c p o l i c i e s f o r i t , we are brought even more sharply against the f a c t t h a t p o l i t i c a l and economic bounds t o the p u r s u i t of beauty e x i s t , and lon g w i l l continue t o i n our s o c i e t y . F u r t h e r , the range of t a s t e s i n a e s t h e t i c beauty i n the landscape includes the production f o r e s t e r , the e c o l o g i s t , the "simon pure" wilderness e n t h u s i a s t , the engineer and the p r o v e r b i a l general p u b l i c . Bearing these i n mind, Kates (1970) has proposed that r a t h e r than seek t o measure beauty, we should measure u g l i n e s s , and i d e n t i f y the m i s f i t s i n the landscape, features t h a t can be agreed upon by a f a r wider cross s e c t i o n of s o c i e t y , and c e r t a i n l y t h i s could be r e a d i l y acted upon. As f o r the p r o v i s i o n o f beauty, i t i s c l e a r t h a t i t can n e i t h e r be l e g i s l a t e d f o r nor provided by committee. "We can appropriate government funds and choose a r t i s t s by committee, but t h a t i s a l l . " But by l ) the i d e n t i f i c a t i o n and p r e s e r v a t i o n o f the agreed upon good landscape t h a t e x i s t s ; and 2) the p r o v i s i o n of access to e x i s t i n g but unseen beauty; as w e l l as 3) the design of the landscape where no beauty already e x i s t s , a more a e s t h e t i c a l l y p l e a s i n g environment f o r a l l can be provided. - 123 -BIBLIOGRAPHY An d e r s o n , D o n a l d M. ( 1 9 6 1 ) . Elements o f D e s i g n . H o l t , R i n e h a r t & W i n s t o n , New Y o r k . A p p l e y a r d , D., L y n c h , K. and Myer, J.R. ( 1 9 6 4 ) . The V i e w from t h e Road. M.I.T. P r e s s , Cambridge, Mass. Bacon, Warren R. ( 1 9 7 1 ) V i s u a l R e s o u r c e Management G u i d e s , R e g i o n S i x . P r e l i m i n a r y D r a f t . F o r e s t S e r v i c e , U.S. Department o f A g r i c u l t u r e . B e a r d s l e y , Monroe C. ( 1 9 5 8 ) . A e s t h e t i c s . H a r c o u r t , B r u c e and W o r l d . B o l t , Beranek & Newman. ( 1 9 6 7 ) . A t t e n t i o n a l Demand o f A u t o m o b i l e D r i v i n g . S e n d e r s , J.W. e t a l . R e p o r t # 1 4 8 2 . Cambridge, Mass. B.C. Hydro and Power A u t h o r i t y . ( 1 9 7 0 ) The E l e c t r i c U t i l i t y and t h e E n v i r o n m e n t . P r o g r e s s , F a l l , 1 9 7 0 . B u r k e , H.D., L e w i s , G.H. and O r r , H.R. ( 1 9 6 8 ) . A Method f o r C l a s s i f y i n g S c e n e r y f r o m a Roadway. P a r k P r a c t i c e Development G u i d e l i n e , 3 / 6 8 , 2 2 - 1 . C a r t e r , Anthony. ( 1 9 7 2 ) . V i s i t t o Mount C u r r i e . B e a u t i f u l B r i t i s h C o l u m b i a . Department o f T r a v e l I n d u s t r y , V i c t o r i a . C a t l i n , George. ( 1 9 2 6 ) . N o r t h A m e r i c a n I n d i a n s . G r a n t . E d i n b u r g h . C l a r k , S i r Kenneth. ( 1 9 6 6 ) Landscape i n t o A r t . P e n g u i n . London. C l a r k e s o n , J o h n , and A.G. B r u c e . ( 1 9 5 0 ) . Highway D e s i g n and C o n s t r u c t i o n . New Y o r k . M c G r a w - H i l l . C l e V e l de T o q u e v i l l e , A l e x i s ( 1 9 4 6 ) . Democracy i n A m e r i c a . O x f o r d U n i v e r s i t y P r e s s . London. C o l v i n , B r e n d a . ( 1 9 7 0 ) Land and Landscape - E v o l u t i o n , D e s i g n & C o n t r o l . John M u r r a y , London. C o u n t r y s i d e Commission f o r S c o t l a n d . ( 1 9 7 1 ) • A P l a n n i n g C l a s s i f i c a t i o n o f S c o t t i s h Landscape R e s o u r c e s . P e r t h . Cowan, I a n McTaggart ( 1 9 6 8 ) . W i l d e r n e s s - C o n c e p t , F u n c t i o n , & Management. Horace M. A l b r i g h t C o n s e r v a t i o n L e c t u r e s h i p . U n i v e r s i t y o f C a l i f o r n i a . Crow, S. ( 1 9 6 6 ) . F o r e s t r y i n t h e Landscape. F o r e s t r y Commission, U.K. Dober, R i c h a r d P. ( 1 9 6 9 ) E n v i r o n m e n t a l D e s i g n . Van N o s t r a n d R e i n h o l d Co. New York. Eckbo, G a r r e t t . ( 1 9 ^ 9 ) . The Landscape We See. M c G r a w - H i l l Book Co. New Y o r k . - 12k -Emerson, R a l p h Waldo. (1950) Complete E s s a y s and Other W r i t i n g s . Modern L i b r a r y . New Y o r k . F a i r b r o t h e r , Nan. (1970) New L i v e s , New Landscapes - P l a n n i n g f o r t h e 21st C e n t u r y . A l f r e d A. Knopf. New Y o r k . G a l b r a i t h , John Kenneth. (1958) The A f f l u e n t S o c i e t y . London, H a m i l t o n . G e r n s h e i m , Helmut. (1965). A C o n c i s e H i s t o r y o f P h o t o g r a p h y . Thames & Hudson, London. G i b s o n , James J . (1966) The Senses C o n s i d e r e d as P e r c e p t u a l Systems. Houghton M i f f l i n Company. B o s t o n . G i b s o n , J . J . , P. Olum & F. R o s e n b l a t t (1955). P a r a l l a x and P e r s p e c t i v e D u r i n g A i r c r a f t L a n d i n g . "American J o u r n a l o f P s y c h o l o g y " 1955» 1968. Hardy, A. C. (1970) C o l o u r i n t h e Landscape. Landscape R e s e a r c h Group. London. f l o r n b e c k , P e t e r L. (1968) Highway E s t h e t i c s : F u n c t i o n a l C r i t e r i a f o r P l a n n i n g & D e s i g n . H a r v a r d U n i v e r s i t y , Cambridge, Mass. H o s p e r s , John (ed.) (1969) I n t r o d u c t o r y R e a d i n g i n A e s t h e t i c s . The F r e e P r e s s . J a c k s o n , J.B. (1970) S e l e c t e d w r i t i n g s o f J.B. J a c k s o n , e d i t e d by E.H. Zube: "Landscapes." U n i v e r s i t y o f M a s s a c h u s e t t s P r e s s . K a t e s , R o b e r t (1970). N a t u r a l H a z a r d i n Human E c o l o g i c a l P e r s p e c t i v e . U n i v e r s i t y o f T o r o n t o , Department o f Geography. T o r o n t o . L a c a t e , Douglas S. (1970). The R o l e o f R e s o u r c e I n v e n t o r i e s and Land-scape E c o l o g y i n t h e Highway Route S e l e c t i o n P r o c e s s . Department o f C o n s e r v a t i o n . C o l l e g e o f A g r i c u l t u r e , C o r n e l l U n i v e r s i t y . L e o p o l d , Luna B. (1969). Landscape E s t h e t i c s . N a t u r a l H i s t o r y M a g a z i n e , September 1969. L e w i s , P h i l i p H., J r . (196k) Q u a l i t y C o r r i d o r s f o r W i s c o n s i n . Land-scape A r c h i t e c t u r e , J a n u a r y 1964. L i n t o n , D a v i d L. (1968). The Assessment o f S c e n e r y as a N a t u r a l R e s o u r c e . S c o t t i s h G e o g r a p h i c a l M a g a z i n e , Volume 84, Number 3. L i s t o w e l l , L o r d . (1967). Modern A e s t h e t i c s . A l l e n and Unwin. London. L i t t o n , R. B u r t o n , J r . (1968). F o r e s t Landscape D e s c r i p t i o n and I n v e n -t o r i e s . , a b a s i s f o r l a n d p l a n n i n g and d e s i g n . P a c i f i c S.W. F o r e s t 8c Range E x p e r i m e n t S t a t i o n . - 125 -Lowenthal, David. (1967). Environmental Perception and Behaviour. U n i v e r s i t y of Chicago, Department of Geography. Chicago. Lucas, R.C. and P r i d d l e , G.B. (1964). Environmental Perception - A Comparison of Two Wilderness Areas, Annals A s s o c i a t i o n . American Geographer. 54. Luscher, Max. (1971) The Luscher Colour Test. Pocket Books. New York. Lynch, Kevin, (i960). The Image of the C i t y . The M.I.T. P r e s s , Cambridge, Mass. McHarg, Ian L. (1969). Design w i t h Nature. N a t u r a l H i s t o r y P r e s s , Garden C i t y , New York. McVean, D.N. and L o c k i e , J.D. (1969) Ecology and Land Use i n Upland Sco-t l a n d . Edinburgh U n i v e r s i t y Press. M a l i n s , Edward. (1966). E n g l i s h Landscaping and L i t e r a t u r e , 1660-1840. Oxford U n i v e r s i t y Press. Mann, Robert L. (1969). A V i s u a l Approach to Regional Planning. Regional Resources and Development. C o r n e l l U n i v e r s i t y , I t h a c a New York. Maslow, A.H. (1954) M o t i v a t i o n and P e r s o n a l i t y . Harper and Brothers. New York. M i l n e , Lorus & Margery. (1962) The Sense of Animals & Man. Penguin Books. Murray, W.H. (1962) Highland Landscape. Aberdeen U n i v e r s i t y P r e s s , f o r Na t i o n a l Trust f o r Scotland. Nash, Roderick (1967). Wilderness and the American Mind. ..New Haven, Yale U n i v e r s i t y Press. Neuhaus, Ri c h a r d . (1971) In Defence of People. Macmillan, New York. Olmsted, F r e d e r i c k Law, J r . and Theodore K i m b a l l (1922). F o r t y Years of Landscape A r c h i t e c t u r e . Being the P r o f e s s i o n a l Papers of F r e d e r i c k Law Olmsted, Senior. G.P. Putnam's Sons. Knickerbocker P r e s s , New York. Pinchot, G i f f o r d . (1947). Breaking New Ground. Harcourt Brace. New York. R e i c h , Charles A. (1971) The Greening of America. Bantam Books. New York. Repton, Humphry. (1907). The A r t of Landscape Gardening. A r c h i b a l d Constable & Company. London. Sargent, F r e d e r i c 0. (1967) Scenery C l a s s i f i c a t i o n . Vermont Resources Research Center, Vermont A g r i c u l t u r a l Research S t a t i o n (Rept. 18). Shafer, Elwood L. (1969) Perception of Nat u r a l Environments. Environ-ment and Behaviour. June 1969. Shepard, P a u l . (1972) Man i n the Landscape. B a l l a n t i n e Books, New York. - 126 -Simonds, John Ormsbee (1961). Landscape A r c h i t e c t u r e : the Shaping of Man's N a t u r a l Environment. ,'McGraw-Hill Book Company, Inc. New York. Sonnenfeld, J . (1967). Environmental P e r c e p t i o n and Adaptation L e v e l i n the A r c t i c . U n i v e r s i t y o f Chicago, Geography Dept. (Res. Paper 109). Southworth, M. (1970) The Sonic Environment o f C i t i e s . E k i s t i c s . V o l . 30, Number 178. Streeby, Larry L. (1970). Scenic Management Impact on other Forest A c t i v i t i e s . J o u r n a l F o r e s t r y , J u l y 1970. Tuan, Y i - F u (1968) The Hydrologic c y c l e and the Wisdom of God: a theme i n geoteleology. U n i v e r s i t y of Toronto. Research P u b l i c a t i o n s , Number 1. Toronto. Tuan, Yi-Fu (1971^ ) Man and Nature. A s s o c i a t i o n of American Geographers. Commission on College Geography. Resource Paper, Number 10. Twiss, Robert H. (1966) Science and the Regional Landscape. P a c i f i c S.W. Forest & Range Exp. S t a . , Berkeley, C a l i f o r n i a . U d a l l , Stewart L. (1963) The Quiet C r i s i s . Avon Books. New York. U.S. Senate and House of Representatives (1964). Wilderness Act. Walker, Theodore D. (1971). Perception & Environmental Design. P.D.A. P u b l i s h e r s . West L a f a y e t t e . W a l l s , G.L. (1942). The Vertebrate Eye. Cranbrook. I n s t i t u t e of Science. B u l l e t i n 19-Wei l e r , C C . (1970) Colour f o r A g r i c u l t u r a l B u i l d i n g s . Country Land-owner, August 1970. London. Whyte, W i l l i a m H. (1970) The Last Landscape. Doubleday and Company, Inc..; Garden C i t y , New York. 

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}]}"
                            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:
http://iiif.library.ubc.ca/presentation/dsp.831.1-0101634/manifest

Comment

Related Items