2405695 Marcucci Landscape History as a Planning Tool

Landscape history as a planning tool

Daniel J. Marcucci*

103 Woodland Drive, York, PA 17403, USA

Received 5 February 1999; received in revised form 5 November 1999; accepted 14 January 2000

Abstract

Landscapes are constantly changing, both ecologically and culturally, and the vectors of change occur over many time

scales. In order to plan landscapes, they must be understood within their spatial and temporal contexts. This paper argues that

the inevitable dynamism in a landscape requires planning to explain and to deal with change. However, planning has been

slow to do this, in part because it is inadequately equipped to analyze both rapid change and gradual evolution. A landscape

history exposes the evolutionary patterns of a specific landscape by revealing its ecological stages, cultural periods, and

keystone processes. Such a history can be a valuable tool as it has the potential to improve description, prediction, and

prescription in landscape planning.

In proposing landscape history as a tool for planning, I specifically address four questions. Why is this tool needed in

landscape planning? What form should landscape history take? What are the obstacles to acquiring good landscape histories?

And, what are the potential benefits of using history in landscape planning? To illustrate this proposition, I draw from an

example of landscape history developed for Long Pond, Pennsylvania. # 2000 Elsevier Science B.V. All rights reserved.

Keywords: Landscape history; Landscape change; Planning tools; Historiography; Keystone processes

1. The need for history in landscape planning

There is a landscape in the Pocono Mountains of

northeastern Pennsylvania that is unique in many

ways. This flat tableland of 100 km2 is known com-

monly as Long Pond. For one, the surficial geology is

unusual, being glacial till that predates the Wisconinan

ice mass. During this most recent ice age, Long Pond

persisted as peri-glacial tundra. Climatically, Long

Pond has two distinguishing statistics. Being the first

significant elevation west of the Atlantic coast, this

landscape receives the highest annual precipitation in

Pennsylvania. At the same time, it has the coolest high

temperatures during the summer. Such factors help

explain its perennial popularity as a mountain resort.

Biologically, Long Pond is distinguished by having

the highest known concentration of rare and endan-

gered species in Pennsylvania, with both boreal and

temperate species existing in association (Latham

et al., 1996).

Starting in 1860 and lasting for over 100 years, the

human population at Long Pond hovered around 200

to 300. The landscape and the culture were remote and

independent, with the main marketable resource being

the huckleberries and blueberries that covered the

* Tel.: 1-717-854-6259.E-mail addresses: [email protected], [email protected]

(D.J. Marcucci)

Landscape and Urban Planning 49 (2000) 6781

0169-2046/00/$20.00 # 2000 Elsevier Science B.V. All rights reserved.PII: S 0 1 6 9 - 2 0 4 6 ( 0 0 ) 0 0 0 5 4 - 2

landscape. To foster this crop, local residents burned

the landscape in rotation every 23 years. This prac-

tice persisted long after state efforts at preventing it.

During this time, a plant association known as the

Pocono till barrens dominated the landscape.

The last 50 years, however, have wrought rapid

changes on Long Pond. First, the ascendance of

commercial blueberry growing elsewhere brought

the demise of the wild huckleberry business here,

and with it the motivation for intentional burning.

Then in 1965, Interstate 80 opened, paving the way

for even greater change. Now part of the New York

City metropolitan area, Long Pond is situated in the

fastest growing region in Pennsylvania. Current land-

scape planning issues at Long Pond center on biolo-

gical conservation, exurban development, and tourist

and recreational appeal. The end of fires and the

increase of houses and buildings have resulted in

the Pocono till barrens being reduced to a fraction

of their former size.

What Long Pond shares with other landscapes

across Pennsylvania and across the Earth is that it

is changing. The persistent dynamism in nature and

the interventions of industrial humans mean that land-

scape change is inevitable, and in many cases rapid.

Thirty years ago, Eugene Odum wrote in his seminal

article on ecosystem development:

Society needs, and must find as quickly as

possible, a way to deal with the landscape as

a whole, so that manipulative skills (i.e. tech-

nology) will not run too far ahead of our under-

standing of the impact of change (Odum, 1969).

To deal with the landscape as a whole and to

understand change is a tall challenge for landscape

planning, but I argue, is a primary contribution we can

make towards sustaining landscapes that have long-

term viability for humans and non-humans alike. If

nothing else, the debates around sustainability indicate

that successful plans must work for this generation as

well as those long into the future. A landscape is a

contextual phenomenon, embedded in a world that is

both spatial and temporal, or, if you prefer, geogra-

phical and historical. Yet, while methods to study the

geographical attributes of landscapes are increasingly

understood, methods to know their temporal contexts

are not.

This article is not centrally about Long Pond; it is

about how we as planners can and should use land-

scape history as a planning tool to understand change

on our way towards dealing with the landscape as a

whole. As I will argue, the history of each landscape is

unique it is also complicated. Trivial history will

have limited veracity and little utility in planning.

Although the full history of Long Pond cannot be

reported in this space, highlights from it will be used to

illustrate the arguments (Marcucci, 1998).

1.1. Landscape as legacy

In landscape architecture and historic preservation,

there is some currency in referring to landscapes as

palimpsests, where ghosts of earlier times linger on the

medium. With an actual palimpsest, however, the

ghosts on the parchment are not connected in form

or content to the new figures that are drawn there; they

are only related coincidentally by occurring on the

same surface. Erased parchments are fungible and

interchangeable. However, landscapes are not fungi-

ble because each is a unique combination of physical,

cultural, and locational features. Furthermore, a chan-

ging landscape is very much a function of historic

conditions. A more accurate metaphor is to think of

landscapes as legacies. A landscape existing today

results from previous conditions and events in that

locale, and it follows that landscapes of the future will

be legacies of the elements and processes occurring

today.

The perspective on landscape change offered by the

experienceofasinglehumangenerationis toomyopic to

describe that landscape accurately. Such a short-term

view gives the impression of an unchanging environ-

ment, or at best, a brief slice of landscape development.

Without an accurate long-term history of the land-

scape and without an understanding of the processes

which are guiding its evolutionary path, we are unable

to envision future landscape changes. The long-term

patterns of change in a particular landscape will be

revealed by describing the landscapes seral stages

and cultural sequences, and determining the keystone

processes of landscape change. Keystone processes, as

will be explained later, are those formative processes

which influence the trajectory of landscape change.

As a legacy, each landscape has a unique story. The

goal of a properly formulated landscape history, or

68 D.J. Marcucci / Landscape and Urban Planning 49 (2000) 6781

what might also be called a landscape biography, is to

explain the temporal context of the current landscape.

The proper form for this landscape history will be

discussed the following section. Suffice it to say now

that history here is used in the ecologists sense to refer

to past events that contributed to ecosystem develop-

ment not necessarily just human actions or

recorded events (Christensen, 1989).

1.2. Planning in time

As an activity, planning is imbued with time.

Through description, prediction, and prescription,

planners of landscapes intend to perpetuate environ-

ments that provide the materials for comfort and

sustenance for a still increasing human population

and to provide the milieu for a meaningful and inter-

esting life. Yet, these landscapes must also protect

biological diversity, functioning natural communities,

and, in the longest timeframe, genetic evolution.

Three temporal aspects of planning necessitate

history as a tool. First, landscape planning has both

short-term and long-term motivations. Second, the

creation of the current landscape is dependent on

values that people had and continue to have with respect

to their environment. Finally, planning itself, once

implemented, becomes another historical process on

the land and must be understood within its context.

At its core, landscape planning has both short-term

and long-term motivations (Marcucci, 1998). In 1986,

Tonn argued that the nature of environmental pro-

blems should compel us to undertake 500 year plan-

ning. His advice is well heeded for landscape

planning. The special challenge this poses to land-

scape planning is that it cannot ignore landscape

change or the processes which cause it.

The genius of the debate about sustainability is that

it forces a long-term vision of goals and outcomes.

The irony is that much of the literature strives to create

a perpetual cycle of resource use through maximized

efficiency and thereby disregards the temporal factor

altogether. Literature that focuses on this idealized

system misses the inevitability of environmental

change, random events in nature, and ongoing human

population growth. By heeding the advice for a 500

year outlook, landscape planning can capture the

critical genius of sustainability that long-term goals

will best preserve options for future generations.

One major cause of change in many landscapes is

humans. However, cultural systems themselves are in

flux. Values and activities of people change. This is

important to landscape change because there is a

feedback loop between culture and the physical land-

scape which manifests itself through time. Nassauer

(1995) notes that culture structures landscapes while

landscapes inculcate culture. This holistic view of

landscape describes an environment that is a legacy

not only of ecological conditions but also successive

values. Todays landscape is in part the result of

historical cultural values. It follows that future land-

scapes will reflect on our collective values and beliefs

about the environment as well. Planning a landscape

for human communities and environmental integrity,

therefore, requires a historical understanding of chan-

ging human culture.

Landscape planning is itself a social activity. Once

implemented, it becomes part of the historical pro-

cesses in a landscape (Hackett, 1971). There is no

certainty in environmental predictions. Similarly,

there is no certainty in the outcomes of planning

prescriptions. In order for long-term landscape plan-

ning to be effective, it will have to be ongoing. Thus,

planning will become one of the processes in the

bundle of keystone processes that determine a land-

scapes future. Many others, including market-driven

economic activity, will have a great impact also. The

temporal context of landscape planning itself is then

another reason to place the outcomes of planning in

historical perspective.

1.3. History in planning

The point then is, understanding landscapes as

dynamic legacies and planning as a temporal activity

should convince planners and citizens that history is an

important element in the planning process. As early as

1928, Benton MacKaye was urging regional planners

to undertake 100 century histories. He argued that the

environment is the product of history (MacKaye,

1962, p. 52). In chronicling the genesis and devel-

opment of New England, MacKaye provided such a

100 century review. This he broke into three periods:

primeval, colonial, and metropolitan. Sadly, his advice

went largely unheeded as physical planning in the

ensuing decades was directed towards maximizing

resource development and constructing highways.

D.J. Marcucci / Landscape and Urban Planning 49 (2000) 6781 69

Planning during this period relied on short-term goals

and objectives that were largely socio-economic.

With the new environmentalism in planning that

began in the 1960s, awareness of landscapes as bio-

physical systems naturally led planners to the realiza-

tion that change and evolution was an ongoing issue.

Contemporary landscape planning theory contains a

group of literature that recognizes the inevitable

change of landscapes (McHarg, 1969; Hackett,

1971; Fabos, 1979; Laurie, 1986; Berger, 1987; Stokes

et al., 1989; Steiner, 1991). However, even when

history is called for, there is limited guidance on its

form or use in planning. The works generally call for

land-use history as a prelude to a planning process

which is largely one of suitability analysis and land-

use decision making, or for documentation of historic

resources.

The strongest call for planning with change comes

from the landscape planner, Brian Hackett (1971). He

argues that large-scale landscape change is precisely

the domain of the landscape planner who should be

engaged in sequential planning. Hackett identifies

studying landscape evolution as one of four operations

in his Landscape Planning Techniques: the major

task of this particular technique is to reconstruct the

various stages of the landscapes evolution and parti-

cularly those in the natural pre-humanized stages

(Hackett, 1971, p. 33).

Although there is precedence in theory for the use of

history, examples of planning that are attuned to

landscape evolution are rare in the United States.

Steiner (1991) cites two landscape plans from 1980.

One, the Pinelands in New Jersey, used a broad-view,

10,000 year history to understand the dynamics of the

current landscape. The other, the Makah Coastal Zone

in the Pacific Northwest, took a centuries-long look at

how the Makah people traditionally looked to the sea

for their livelihood.

Making the connection between 100 century his-

tories and 500 year plans requires a history that con-

forms to certain attributes of landscapes as evolving,

changing legacies. The seminal landscape scholar,

J.B. Jackson, feared that much of what was called

landscape history was little more than local history

with a spatial dimension thrown in for good measure.

He preferred instead the rare glimpses of the history

of the landscape itself, how it was formed, how it has

changed, and who it was who changed it (Jackson,

1984, p. xi). The question before us is: how do we

construct such a landscape history?

2. A form for landscape history

Landscape planners require a history that describes

and predicts the patterns and causes of evolution and

change. I argue that a such history has three essential

requirements. It covers a specific place or geography.

It describes a holistic system. And, it reveals the

keystone processes that shape the landscape over

multiple time frames. Adhering to these three condi-

tions yields a landscape history that chronicles suc-

cessive cultures, ecological stages, and keystone

processes.

2.1. Place history

All landscapes are local. By definition, landscape

history must be about a specific place. The theme of

geographical significance runs through the literature

on landscape history (Jackson, 1984; Crumley, 1994;

Flores, 1994) and landscape planning (Hackett, 1971;

Riley, 1995). The historical geography of a landscape

is significant in two ways. First, it should place the

landscape in regional context. Second, it recreates, to

the extent the data allow, the ecological stages of the

land.

By placing a landscape in regional context, land-

scape history addresses exogenous variables that

affect landscape change. The flow of energy, material,

and organisms, including people, into and out of a

landscape has a profound impact on its evolutionary

path.

History of the internal geography of a landscape is a

study of the sequence of land mosaics and possibly of

ecotopes themselves. It is in the area of spatial analysis

that landscape ecology is best developed and provides

important tools for landscape planning (Forman,

1995). These are the basic building blocks in under-

standing ecological and physical stages in a land-

scapes history.

2.2. Holism

In current landscape theory, there is considerable

consensus about conceiving landscapes holistically.


That is to say, understanding the landscape as a whole

cannot be done merely by analyzing its elements. The

interaction of the elements must be considered, espe-

cially the interaction of natural and cultural ones. It

follows that landscape history must also take a holistic

view of a landscape, integrating natural and human

activity as parts of a single evolving system (Crumley,

1994; Flores, 1994; Patterson, 1994; Nassauer, 1995).

One implication of a holistic history is that cultural

systems themselves should be represented as sequen-

tial phenomena related to place. Each culture, or

cluster of cultures modifies a landscape that is the

legacy of previous cultures. Even within the historical

continuum of a single ethnic group, significant cultural

evolution occurs; but as argued earlier, over time,

landscapes inculcate culture (Nassauer, 1995). In this

way, landscapes embody the story of different but

sequential cultures occupying the same space, and

creating their own succession of places (Flores,

1994, p. 12). This essential interrelatedness can be

presumed throughout the history and prehistory of

humans in a landscape, which may easily represent

10,000 years (Hackett, 1971; Crumley, 1994).

At Long Pond, there have been several recognizable

cultural periods. Human presence at Long Pond dates

back at least 100 centuries to PaleoIndian culture.

This was followed by other Native American cultures

in succession: Archaic, Woodland, and Historic. Each

cultures impact on the landscape was different as they

possessed different technological skills with respect to

agricultural, hunting, and tool making. The last group

existed in the 17th and 18th centuries and was a

cultural system that was highly altered by contact

with European travellers and immigrants. Ultimately,

Indian cultural systems throughout the Pocono plateau

and ultimately Pennsylvania were overcome by Eur-

opean inroads. For a period of roughly 35 years,

between 1765 and 1800, Long Pond was largely

unpopulated as it was the setting for frontier strife

between warring groups.

Around 1800, permanent European settlement

began that initiated a distinct Long Ponder culture.

This group was organized around a subsistence econ-

omy based on mountain resources and income from

travellers and resorters. Long Ponder culture was

closely connected to the natural landscape. By

1965, a transition was begun for a Metropolitan

culture that is supplanting the Long Ponder culture.

No longer attached to the confines of the Long Pond

landscape, this group is connected to a regional iden-

tity and economy. The transition to the Metropolitan

culture is fueled by the tenfold increase in population

during this period.

The condition of holism for the landscape history of

Long Pond requires not only identification of succes-

sive cultures but also description of how each was

connected to its physical environment. This latter

requirement we will revisit in the discussion of key-

stone processes. One important ramification of this

condition to stress now is that natural resources and

the keystone processes that accompany their exploita-

tion must be identified as cultural phenomena. The

motivations for removal, conservation, or protection

of certain landscape elements cannot be understood

otherwise. A physical element may exist in a place for

centuries or eons without being a resource. It only

becomes one if the cultural system and the related

economy make it so.

In this way, the wild huckleberries at Long Pond,

that were an important landscape resource throughout

the Native American and Long Ponder periods, have

ceased to be a resource for the Metropolitan culture.

Many other resources have had similar cycles or have

been depleted completely so that they cease to be a

factor in the economy. Ice and lumber are two that had

major significance in the Poconos in the past. Fish and

game were, for many cultures, elements of subsistence

living. In modern times, they are part of the recrea-

tional resources of the mountain lands. The most

significant resource use impacting Long Pond today

and in the near future is water extraction. This is

because of the importance of this resource to the

regional metropolitan culture. The Bethlehem Water

Authority, the single largest landowner at Long Pond,

extracts water from the landscape for use in a distant

city.

2.3. Keystone processes

Landscape history needs to tell how and why the

landscape developed. This means it must explain the

genesis of a particular landscape, if appropriate, and

the long-term processes associated with change

through the sequence of landscape periods. Landscape

change occurs when over time, the flow of energy

and consequent movement of materials in a landscape


results in a new structure and new functional char-

acteristics (Thorne, 1993, p. 25). Landscape change

can be wholesale or incremental. Wholesale change

occurs through wide-acting phenomena such as fire or

rapid suburbanization. Incremental changes, that is

ecotope by ecotope, cause landscape change when

they are persistent and the ecotopes are not resilient.

These incremental changes over space and time aggre-

gate into an overall pattern of change and evolution.

Not all processes acting through a landscape are

equally significant in their effects, especially with

respect to change. A history of landscape evolution

should focus on what I shall call keystone processes:

the ones that are influential in the evolutionary tra-

jectory of the landscape. An alteration or cessation of a

keystone process will result in a new trajectory. Other

processes may cause localized, usually short-lived

change but do not contribute to the overall pattern

of change.

Each landscape has a specific set of keystone pro-

cesses, a set that changes over time. The set of key-

stone processes influencing a landscape today is not

the same set existing 1000 or even 100 years ago.

There is no a priori means of identifying the keystone

processes of a particular landscape. Recognition of

keystone processes in particular periods can only

occur once the landscape history has commenced.

Furthermore, this recognition may depend upon view-

ing process at the proper scale. Pattern recognition

across time and space in ecology is dependent on scale

(Levin, 1992).

An initial enquiry into the history of a landscape

should take a multiple view of the temporal scale and

consider the full range of possible keystone processes.

In temperate and northern latitudes, a 10,000 year

perspective on the landscape will take us to a point

where global climatic conditions were significantly

different and humans were present in many land-

scapes. Besides this 100 century view, it is also

important to consider the millennial, centennial,

decennial, and annual scales, for in each, keystone

processes may occur that are not apparent from other

scales. Identifying processes at different scales will

also allow the planner to correlate them to the time

frames of planning interest. Fig. 1 shows the time

frames for select keystone processes to affect change.

There are five general categories of keystone pro-

cesses: geomorphological processes, climate change,

colonization patterns and growth of organisms, local

disturbances of individual ecosystems, and cultural

processes (Forman and Godron, 1986; Wilmanns-

Wells, personal communication; Nassauer, 1997).

Each category potentially contains a wide array of

actual keystone processes.

The first two are what Forman and Godron (1986)

call foundation variables. They tend to be long-term

natural processes occurring over thousands or millions

of years. Geomorphological processes refer to the

creation of landforms (Ritter, 1978). They involve

plate tectonics, erosion, deposition, and glaciation.

Climate is a crucial variable of landscape change

especially as it relates to cycles of glaciation and

the long-term migration of species. There is consider-

able scientific debate about the human role in climate

change through alteration of the atmosphere. Such a

phenomenon may require climate change to be con-

sidered as a short-term as well as a long-term process.

Processes in the third general category, colonization

patterns and growth of organisms, may occur over

long or short periods, and may be natural or anthro-

pogenic. Because the biology of a landscape is such an

important aspect of its ecology, the establishment of

life forms plays a critical role in landscape evolution.

The migration of plant species across a land area is a

complicated scenario studied by paleobotanists (Del-

court and Delcourt, 1987). Particularly, during major

climate change, vegetation populations undergo dra-

matic alterations in their ranges. Colonization patterns

of animal populations, especially in the case of large

herbivores, may have a significant impact on a land-

scapes sere. Humans have been responsible not only

for their own colonization of new landscapes, but also

for introducing many alien plant and animal species

(Crosby, 1986). Pathogens can virtually wipe out a

species across its range in less than a century.

The fourth category contains the keystone processes

that are the most difficult to predict. Again, they may

occur over long or short periods, and may be natural or

anthropogenic. Landscape disturbances is a broad

category that includes both random events and chronic

occurrences. Disturbances, which may be endogenous

or exogenous, can affect the direction and speed of

landscape change. On the other hand, many distur-

bances occur which do not affect landscape change

and, therefore, do not rise to the level of keystone

processes. The impacts of disturbance may be mini-


mal, limited only to an ecotope. Alternately, distur-

bance may be pervasive and chronic leading to an

entirely new landscape. Natural disturbance of entire

landscapes can be fire, volcanoes, and floods. Com-

plicating the role of disturbance in landscape change is

the class of human disturbances that are unprece-

dented, cause total landscape change in the space of

years, and remain unpredictable with respect to their

long-term outcomes or reversibility.

The fifth category of landscape-forming processes

is cultural. As landscapes are a holistic manifestation

of natural and human elements, it follows that cultural

processes can lead both to physical change or to

change in the cultural system itself. We can think

of cultural systems as composed of culture, society,

and economy. Culture refers to the beliefs and values

of the people in a region. Often, the overall culture is a

plurality of beliefs coming from differing groups that

are related solely by geographical proximity. Society

refers to the relationships and interactions of indivi-

duals to individuals, groups to groups, and individuals

to groups. Economy refers to the connection between

individuals or groups and resources. Conceiving a

cultural system this way is useful for analyzing its

relationship to the landscape. As this is a growing area

of landscape investigation, a definitive list of land-

scape-forming cultural processes is not possible. How-

ever, a working listing can be speculated. This list

includes perpetuation and change of values, political

and legal control of land, settlement patterns, technol-

ogy advances, and economic activity.

2.4. The resulting landscape history

Once the conditions for landscape history are satis-

fied, how do we organize the information? The pur-

pose is to describe the generation of landscape periods

based on the ecological stages, cultural periods, and

Fig. 1. Length of time for select keystone processes to affect landscape change.


keystone processes. Each landscape period represents

a changed landscape with respect to its structural and

functional characteristics.

A timeline is a useful graphic device that allows

historical information to be layered. Thus, landscape

periods, ecological stages, cultural periods, and key-

stone processes can be viewed contemporaneously.

Such a timeline should have a logarithmic time scale,

giving greater weight to the events of this century, but

going back to the period of glacial retreat over 10,000

years ago.

As an example, the timeline for Long Pond is given

in Fig. 2. There have been five distinct landscape

periods at Long Pond: Glacial Recovery, Woodland

Adaptation, Frontier, Mountain Livelihood, and

Metropolitanization. For each period, the history

describes, the ecological communities on the land,

the cultural groups occupying and using the land, and

the processes maintaining or changing the land. In this

landscape, where anthropogenic fire played a large

role, there was close correlation between cultural

periods and keystone processes. The historical record

of the last 200 years was significant enough to describe

causal relationships.

3. Difficulties in landscape history research

A history that attempts to explain a landscapes

evolution by describing its seral stages and cultural

sequences, and by determining the causes of landscape

change will not be easy to write. The two main

problems are: landscape history is unconventional

and not standardized; and the data requirements are

hard to satisfy.

3.1. Lack of conventions

Landscapes are complex systems for which deci-

sions must be made with imperfect knowledge. Land-

Fig. 2. Timeline of landscape periods, ecological stages, cultural periods, and keystone processes at Long Pond.


scape planning requires tools which synthesize con-

ventional methods and use both qualitative and quan-

titative data. Landscape history in the form described

in the previous section is one such tool.

However, this landscape history is unconventional.

Although some examples from environmental history

(Christensen, 1989; Flores, 1994; Whitney, 1994) and

historical ecology (Crumley, 1994) are consistent with

a landscape approach, it is not a purely conventional

ecological inquiry nor is it precisely public or envir-

onmental history. Ecological science and environmen-

tal history might both review an individual landscape

history as inadequately rigorous (Ingerson, 1994).

Nonetheless, planners are compelled to facilitate deci-

sions even in the face of imperfect knowledge. There-

fore, landscape history will have to synthesize its own

conventions, keeping in mind the ultimate utility for

landscape planning.

Flores (1994) challenges his fellow environmental

historians to recognize the persistent dynamism in

landscapes. This, he says, is required if they make

any claim to apprehending reality. He argues that in its

efforts to cover vast regions, like the arid west, what is

missed in much environmental history is the historical

reality of place. Because of his appreciation of eco-

logical and cultural processes of change and their

connection to place, Flores advocates for what he

calls a bioregional history, which is virtually synon-

ymous with landscape history as defined here. Accord-

ing to Flores, a good bioregional history is place

specific, temporally deep, and examines environmen-

tal change across sequential cultures.

Whitney (1994, p. 4) notes the difficulty of meeting

the rigorous ecologists demand for quantification or

statistically verifiable change. The story of environ-

mental change and causal agents has several charac-

teristics which render a strictly scientific analysis

impossible. One, environmental issues generally have

quantitative components that are hard to determine.

Two, environmental changes are rather complex,

resulting from an interaction of a variety of forces.

Positive and negative feedbacks may be hard to dis-

cern. Three, simultaneous occurrence of two events

does not establish cause and effect.

Landscape history that is developed within the

framework of landscape ecological theory is likely

to overcome some of these objections since landscape

ecology is that form of ecology which is credited with

bringing ecology and history together (Cronon, 1990).

Haber (1990) notes that landscape ecologists are

beginning to expand their paradigm: Natural history,

so long neglected or even despised as being unscien-

tific, is gaining a new scientific importance. The form

for landscape history proposed in the previous section

is devised to articulate a convention that will be

adequately rigorous for planning.

3.2. Obscure data

The other significant problem confronting the

researcher of landscape history is that the necessary

data may not exist, be unavailable, or be difficult to

locate (Hackett, 1971; Stirling, 1990; Whitney, 1994;

Marcucci, 1998). All historical research is part detec-

tive work, but the writer of landscape histories is

especially burdened to search a myriad of sources

to glean pertinent information. This results largely

because landscape is an unconventional and relatively

new research topic there are no standard or cen-

tralized repositories of the necessary information.

Further complicating the task, many landscapes that

are valued for their biology and other natural features

have been historically remote. As was true at Long

Pond, this remoteness is often the single most impor-

tant factor perpetuating both rare natural ecosystems

and distinctive local culture. This remoteness also

leads to a paucity of historic data (Stirling, 1990;

Marcucci, 1998). In dealing with incomplete or incon-

sistent data, landscape historians are advised to build

redundancy into their research with multiple lines of

inquiry (Whitney, 1994). Evidence for landscape his-

tory can be found in two broad categories: documen-

tary evidence and field evidence (Whitney, 1994;

Marcucci, 1998).

Documentary evidence includes both primary and

secondary data. This data may come in the form of

written documents, such as journals, notebooks, cor-

respondence, guidebooks, deeds and contracts, his-

tories, and periodicals. Alternately, documentary

evidence can be found in drawings and paintings,

photographs, maps, census statistics, insurance and

tax records, and historical scientific data. Documen-

tary evidence is particularly useful to the landscape

historian for the more recent historic periods.

The documentary evidence for Long Ponds history

came in many forms at a variety of locations. Both the


county and the state historical society contained cor-

respondence and maps that related to the condition of

the land during the 19th century. The archives of the

Pocono Forestry Association contained photographs,

correspondence, and records concerning 20th century

fire prevention. These were supplemented by fire

records of the Bureau of Forestry. Long Pond has

had a long tradition of inspiring natural history. The

results of these early scientific investigations were

located in local and research libraries. Also in libraries

were drawings, maps, books, and articles documenting

past landscapes and especially the huckleberry busi-

ness. Private family records added to this line of

inquiry. The county planning commission provided

census data for the study area.

Once found, historical documents must be scruti-

nized for accuracy. In many sources, references to

landscape elements and descriptions are incidental

and careless. Travellers descriptions are often unspe-

cific or inaccurate with respect to vegetation. Colonial

land surveys, often the earliest comprehensive record

of a landscape, may be poor indicators of species

distribution and other natural features because of

fraud, timing of survey, misidentification of trees,

sampling bias in the types of land, and bias in tree

selection (Wilkinson, 1958; Whitney, 1994; Price,

1995; Dando, 1996). Another common source, 19th

century county histories, concentrated on biography,

towns, catastrophes, and manufacturing. Often inclu-

sion of ones family in such a history was guaranteed

by an advance purchase.

Field evidence is valuable for understanding both

historic and prehistoric periods, as well as the

contemporary landscape. Field evidence includes eco-

logical data, archeological data, and anthropological

data, especially oral histories. There is a strong histor-

ical element to much standard ecological research, and

ecological reports can yield good historical data.

Fortunately, the Pocono history covered an area which

has long attracted scientific interest. Recent ecological

studies have been prompted by a compelling need for

biological conservation (Thompson, 1995; Latham

et al., 1996). In establishing long-term vegetational

history, paleobotanical studies are crucial. Similarly,

archeological investigation is historical in nature.

Where they have occurred, archeologists findings

are important sources for landscape historians. How-

ever, not all landscapes under investigation will have

been the subject of direct scientific research. If they

have not occurred within a given study area, then spec-

ulation based on analogous landscapes may be the best

that can be offered until such studies are undertaken.

One form of field evidence that was especially

important to the 20th century history of Long Pond

was oral history. Since Long Ponder culture was closely

connected to the land and persisted through several

generations of a small cluster of families, residents

of Long Pond had a deep understanding of their land-

scape. Furthermore, they provided me as a researcher

with a rich understanding of the people and the place.

First person memories went back to the 1920s, with

local stories going back decades before that.

Even as the techniques of landscape historical

research become more sophisticated, individual land-

scapes will have distinct data requirements and unique

sources. In this respect, each is a puzzle not only to

its specific history but also to its research protocol.

Nonetheless, it is a puzzle whose pieces do exist in

libraries and archives, in scientific labs, and on the

land itself.

4. Realizing the potential benefits of landscapehistory as a planning tool

In its motivations, landscape planning seeks to

improve human conditions and environmental com-

munities. In its methods, landscape planning involves

description, prediction, and prescription of conditions

in the landscape (Tomlin, 1990). Landscape planning,

which implicitly includes management, is best under-

taken as an ongoing and iterative process.

Four phases in the landscape planning process can

be generalized from various landscape planning tech-

niques (McHarg, 1969; Hackett, 1971; Laurie, 1986;

Steiner, 1991). They are: inventory of the ecological

and cultural systems; identification of issues, pro-

blems, and desired outcomes; plan making, including

analysis, forecasting, scenario writing, and decision

making; and implementation, including physical inter-

vention, institutional design, monitoring, and evalua-

tion. These four are not discrete, sequential activities,

but rather clusters of iterative, interactive activities

which may be going on simultaneously.

I argue that landscape history has the potential to

improve planning in the inventory, issue identification,


and plan making phases. The example of Long Pond

indicates some of the ways in which the history is

useful. In proposing landscape history as a planning

tool, I also hypothesize additional beneficial out-

comes. Very possibly, there will be other benefits of

this tool that I do not anticipate. Only when a body of

applied landscape histories has been accumulated and

analyzed will we have a full picture of their utility.

4.1. Enhancing the inventory

The purpose of the inventory phase is to describe the

landscape accurately. History is valuable to this phase

of planning because it expands landscape description

by revealing ecological stages, cultural periods, and

keystone processes. The history explains how new

landscapes are legacies of earlier ones. If we accept

that landscapes are dynamic phenomena, then his-

tories are useful and essential in describing them.

The history is especially valuable because it expli-

citly describes the nature/culture interaction through

time. Although holism is espoused in landscape the-

ory, we do not always realize it well in planning where

an initiative often focusses on either conservation or

development. By its very design, the form of history

proposed here chronicles these important interactions

for a particular landscape. Therefore, citizens and

planners have a means of conceptualizing the land-

scape as a whole.

Better description by itself is of little value if it is not

disseminated to citizens and incorporated throughout

the planning process. Involving citizens yields an

indirect benefit of landscape history. Most landscape

planning stresses the importance of citizen, or stake-

holder, involvement throughout the process. Initiating

historical inquiry at the very beginning provides a

means of engaging citizens in landscape planning. It

also allows citizens to be experts. Long-time residents

will be key informants to the history, especially with

respect to the recent past. Citizens of Long Pond were

eager to participate with histories of their communities

and local landscapes. Furthermore, they are a vested

audience for the completed history. In general, histor-

ical research can be a nonconfrontational way of

initiating citizen interest in planning. Of course, it

must be noted that once attached to policy decisions

the history may be scrutinized differently (Mandel-

baum, 1985).

4.2. Improving issue identification

One of the important ways that improved descrip-

tion is valuable to planning is that it provides a valid

context in which to identify issues, problems, and

desired outcomes. This would not occur without spe-

cific historical enquiry because the knowledge pre-

sented through landscape history is not intuitive or

automatic. The expert planner from out of town would

not know the dynamics of change or recognize land-

scape legacies merely from a survey of current con-

ditions. Even citizens, who are intimately familiar

with a landscape and its workings, will not necessarily

understand the consequences of common events.

There are three distinct benefits to this phase of

planning resulting from a better substantiated plan-

ning context.

First, by describing the cultural system, history

provides a context for contemporary issues and pro-

blems. History explains the beliefs and values of the

local culture, especially with respect to land. Under-

standing the source of conflicting beliefs and values is

necessary to identify areas of common interest. Thus,

a planner confronted with the need for conflict resolu-

tion will find this useful.

The process of framing and reframing issues is an

important activity in planning (Schon and Rein, 1994;

Hamin, in press). Through landscape history, the

issues, problems, and outcomes for a specific land-

scape can be reframed in a valid historical context.

Enriching the popular perception of a changing land-

scape has the potential to alter the political willingness

of a society for collective action directed at planning

and managing the common landscape. Ultimately, this

change of perception may result in a change of

attitudes towards the land. Perhaps most importantly,

the landscape history will change attitudes by educat-

ing people about the impact of human actions on the

land and about the significance of place to the local

culture. At Long Pond, as in other similar landscapes,

the issue of controlled burning had been set only in the

context of the last 30 years, thereby missing entirely

the historical authenticity of frequent fires.

Second, the goal of landscape history is to present a

long view. Continuing this long view into the future

forces consideration of potential issues and problems

that are essential to long-term landscape sustainability.

A 100 century history of a landscape makes the


conceptual leap to a 500 year plan easier. Plans made

today will not contain detailed prescriptions for 500

years hence, but they can sustain environmental

options (Tonn, 1986). Moreover, a landscape history

that chronicles previous landscape periods provides

ideas for future and alternative landscapes.

Third, by revealing keystone processes, history

allows connections to be made to agents of change

that come from outside of the landscape. Examples of

imported issues that might not be immediately appar-

ent are acid rain, global warming, intercity highway

construction, water authority projects in distant cities,

or state or federal policy decisions.

4.3. Influencing plan making

Plan making is a wide array of activities that lead to

decisions. It includes analysis, scenario writing, and

forecasting. This phase builds on the two previous

phases in the planning process, inventory and issue

identification. Plan making involves descriptive, pre-

dictive, and prescriptive techniques in envisioning and

deciding upon future landscapes. Landscape history

improves plan making merely because it improves

description in the earlier planning phases. Landscape

history can directly improve predictive and prescrip-

tive techniques as well.

History is valuable because it has the potential to

improve the predictive scenarios of landscape plan-

ning. This derives from more accurate descriptions.

By improving prediction, I do not mean to suggest that

history is deterministic. Prediction does not imply

certainty, but rather it presents a probability of poten-

tial outcomes. History shows that the actual course of a

landscape is determined by thousands of events,

actions, and decisions.

One form of predictive scenarios is to build geo-

graphic models to extrapolate the current trajectory of

a landscape. These models are built on algorithms

where the future outcome is a function of keystone

processes, time-series of ecotope conditions, assump-

tions about landscape function, and hypothetical inter-

ventions. Such models are a valuable use of historical

information that is spatial and quantitative.

Another way of building predictive scenarios which

is cruder, but quicker, and therefore, more easily

employed, uses qualitative historical information. It

involves comparing a landscape with other similar

landscapes. When planning draws on analogous case

studies to help predict the future of a landscape, the

object is to search for cases which share key features.

Typically, size, rates of growth, economy, or proximity

to urban centers are the studied characteristics. In

searching for analogies, it is best to not only compare

the structure and function of the landscapes, but also

the history of change, especially with respect to the

keystone processes. The most useful comparisons will

be made when similar processes and similar patterns

of evolution are found. This is especially critical when

it comes to cultural processes. As a growing body of

landscape histories develops, predictive analogies will

become more possible.

Many general patterns of landscape change have

been identified, and no doubt many more remain to be

found. Forman (1995) notes six widespread causes of

land transformation which have a variety of recogniz-

able mosaic sequence patterns: deforestation, subur-

banization, corridor construction, desertification,

agricultural intensification, and reforestation.

Patterns of change can be dominated by natural

processes. The shifting mosaic in forested ecosystems

is one such theorized pattern. Climate change and

species migration cause other patterns of change.

Many of the most important patterns for landscape

planning will have human-caused keystone processes.

For example, commercial forestry has been a domi-

nant keystone process in the mountain districts of

Pennsylvania for over 100 years. Coal mining has

had an even longer history in defining and creating

landscapes. In this century, industrial agriculture has

dominated the limestone valleys in the state leading to

a particular way of organizing the landscape. Prior to

this, low technology agriculture was a keystone pro-

cesses dating back a thousand years on some Penn-

sylvania landscapes.

A pattern of urbanization is identified by Forman

and Godron (1986) as the Landscape Modification

Gradient and by Rodiek (1988) as the Landscape

Development Continuum. It describes a linear pro-

cess of human induced land-use change. Five distinct

phases along the continuum are: natural, managed,

cultivated, suburban, and urban. This model describes

many landscapes histories, but urbanization comes in

many patterns and is not necessarily so sequential. On

the southern Pocono plateau, for example, suburba-

nization is occurring directly in pine barrens where


anthropogenic fire practices were only recently aban-

doned (Latham et al., 1996; Marcucci, 1998). The

landscape history of Long Pond shows rapid change

from natural and semi-managed ecotopes into subur-

ban ones. Knowing the historical patterns of change in

many landscapes and the underlying keystone pro-

cesses will greatly facilitate comparative studies of

landscapes. As the body of landscape histories grows,

its value to planning will increase.

Prescriptive scenarios are directed towards problem

solving (Tomlin, 1990). History complements the total

planning process. As such, history alone does not yield

prescription, but is part of a process that leads to

prescriptions. By improving the landscape inventory

and the context for discussing issues, problems, and

outcomes, history indirectly improves prescription.

A history is closely connected to prescription when

the keystone processes themselves become the object

of planning and management decisions. Through a

planning process which includes history, potential

landscape change can be determined to be desirable

or undesirable. Landscape intervention is then direc-

ted at creating, suppressing, or altering potential

change by manipulating keystone processes. The con-

nected processes of fire suppression and afforestation

is one clear example of how knowing keystone pro-

cesses is connected to planning prescriptions. Mana-

ging this keystone process is crucial for biological

conservation efforts at Long Pond. Without it the

Pocono till barrens are doomed. The history also

shows how fire suppression is connected to other

keystone processes in the current landscape period.

Many different keystone processes are potentially the

direct object of planning prescriptions. These key-

stone processes will be revealed to planners through

landscape history.

5. The outlook for landscape planning

I agree with the prospect and potential for landscape

history that J.B. Jackson expressed 15 years ago.

I admit that I hold the peculiar belief that the

value of history is what it teaches us about the

future. But I think that I am on firm ground when

I say that most of this landscape history deals

with an infinitely small fraction of the landscape

whether of the 18th or 19th century. The

reason is simple: the origin and history of only a

very few spaces, very few structures are on

record. . . I believe that with the use of modernarcheological techniques, with the use of aerial

photography, above all with the use of more

imagination, more speculation we could immen-

sely expand our knowledge of the landscape of

the past (Jackson, 1984, p. xi).

I am optimistic about the outlook for landscape

history. Landscape-scale planning is, I believe, of vital

importance given the current conditions of the envir-

onment and humanity. We need to move quickly from

scattered examples of planning landscapes as a whole

to widespread application across many contiguous

ones.

Landscape history will be essential in this effort

because of the inherent dynamism in nature, the flux of

cultural systems, and the resulting patterns of change

in landscapes. As a relatively new tool in our planning

methods, writing and using history will continue to be

refined. I have discussed some concerns about devel-

oping landscape history. Others have not been dis-

cussed but can be anticipated. For example, how much

will it cost to prepare landscape histories and who will

do it? Should there be professional historians working

closely with planners?

Planning without landscape history has little pro-

spect of engendering realistic long-term planning. We

cannot sustain our environmental options without

knowledge of keystone processes and patterns of

change over multiple temporal scales. Planning would

even suffer in the short term as our ability to under-

stand the current landscape as a legacy of previous

ones is compromised.

By using landscape history as a planning tool, we as

planners can describe a landscape more accurately and

engage in meaningful exchanges with citizens. In turn,

this will lead to more effective and complete prescrip-

tions. Ultimately, our intentions are to plan landscapes

that will be valued legacies to future generations.

Acknowledgements

The author gratefully acknowledges the comments

on early versions of this research by C. Dana Tomlin


and Christa Wilmanns-Wells of the University of

Pennsylvania and James F. Thorne of The Nature

Conservancy. The article benefitted from detailed

comments from Elisabeth M. Hamin of Iowa State

University and two anonymous reviewers from Land-

scape and Urban Planning.

References

Berger, J., 1987. Guidelines for landscape synthesis: some

directions old and new. Landscape Urban Planning 14,

295311.

Christensen, N.L., 1989. Landscape history and ecological change.

J. For. History 76 (4), 116125.

Cronon, W., 1990. Modes of prophecy and production: placing

nature in history. J. Am. History 76 (4), 11221131.

Crosby, A.W., 1986. Ecological Imperialism: The Biological

Expansion of Europe, 9001900. Cambridge University Press,

New York.

Crumley, C.L., 1994. Historical ecology: a multidimensional

ecological orientation. In: Crumley, C.L. (Ed.), Historical

Ecology: Cultural Knowledge and Changing Landscapes.

School of American Research Press, Santa Fe, NM, pp. 1

16.

Dando, W., 1996. Reconstruction of Presettlement Forests of

Northeastern Pennsylvania Using Original Land Survey

Records. M.Sc. thesis. The Pennsylvania State University.

Delcourt, P.A., Delcourt, H.R., 1987. Long-Term Forest Dynamics

of the Temperate Zone. Springer, New York.

Fabos, J.G., 1979. Planning the Total Landscape: A Guide to

Intelligent Land Use. Westview Press, Boulder, CO.

Flores, D., 1994. Place: an argument for bioregional history.

Environ. History Rev. 18 (4), 118.

Forman, R.T.T., Godron, M., 1986. Landscape Ecology. Wiley,

New York.

Forman, R.T.T., 1995. Land Mosaics: The Ecology of Landscapes

and Regions. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.

Haber, W., 1990. Using landscape ecology in planning and

management. In: Zonneveld, I.S., Forman, R.T.T. (Eds.),

Changing Landscapes: An Ecological Perspective. Springer,

New York, pp. 217232.

Hackett, B., 1971. Landscape Planning: An Introduction to Theory

and Practice. Oriel Press, Newcastle upon Tyne, England.

Hamin, E.M. Stories of the Land: Interpretive Planning and the

Mojave National Preserve. Johns Hopkins University Press,

Baltimore, in press.

Ingerson, A.E., 1994. Tracking and testing the nature-culture

dichotomy. In: Carole, L.C. (Ed.), Historical Ecology: Cultural

Knowledge and Changing Landscapes. School of American

Research Press, Santa Fe, NM, pp. 4366.

Jackson, J.B., 1984. Discovering the Vernacular Landscape. Yale

University Press, New Haven, CT.

Latham, R.E., Thompson, J.E., Riley, S.A., Wibiralske, A.W.,

1996. The Pocono till barrens, Pennsylvania: shrub savanna

persisting on soils favoring forest. Bull. Torrey Bot. Club 123

(4), 330349.

Laurie, M., 1986. Introduction to Landscape Architecture, 2nd

Edition. Elsevier, New York.

Levin, S.A., 1992. The problem of pattern and scale in ecology.

Ecology 73 (6), 19431967.

MacKaye, B., 1962. The New Exploration: A Philosophy of

Regional Planning. University of Illinois Press, Urbana.

Mandelbaum, S.J., 1985. Historians and planners: the construction

of pasts and futures. J. Am. Planning Assoc. 51 (2), 185188.

Marcucci, D.J., 1998. Planning a Changing Landscape: Ecology,

History, and Planning at Long Pond, Pennsylvania. Ph.D.

thesis. University of Pennsylvania.

McHarg, I., 1969. Design with Nature. Natural History Press,

Garden City, NJ.

Nassauer, J.I., (Ed.) 1997. Placing Nature: Culture and Landscape

Ecology. Island Press, Washington, DC.

Nassauer, J.I., 1995. Culture and changing landscape structure.

Landscape Ecol. 10 (4), 229237.

Odum, E.P., 1969. The strategy of ecosystem development. Science

164, 262270.

Patterson, T.C., 1994. Toward a properly historical ecology. In:

Crumley, C.L. (Ed.), Historical Ecology: Cultural Knowledge

and Changing Landscapes. School of American Research Press,

Santa Fe, NM, pp. 223237.

Price, E.T., 1995. Dividing the Land: Early American Beginnings

of Our Private Property Mosaic. University of Chicago Press,

Chicago.

Riley, R.B., 1995. What history should we teach and why?

Landscape J. 14 (2), 220225.

Ritter, D.F., 1978. Process Geomorphology. Wm. C. Brown Co.,

Dubuque, IA.

Rodiek, J., 1988. The evolving landscape. Landscape Urban

Planning 16, 3544.

Schon, D., Rein, M., 1994. Frame Reflection: Toward the

Resolution of Intractable Policy Controversies. Basic Books,

New York.

Steiner, F., 1991. The Living Landscape: An Ecological Approach

to Landscape Planning. McGraw-Hill, New York.

Stirling, D.A., 1990. Site histories in environmental site assess-

ments: a new opportunity for public historians. Public Historian

12 (2), 4552.

Stokes, S.N., Watson, A.E., Keller, G.P., Keller, J.T., 1989. Saving

Americas Countryside: A Guide to Rural Conservation. Johns

Hopkins University Press, Baltimore.

Thompson, J.E., 1995. Interrelationships among vegetation dy-

namics, fire, surficial geology, and topography of the southern

Pocono Plateau, Monroe County, Pennsylvania. M.Sc. thesis.

University of Pennsylvania.

Thorne, J.F., 1993. Landscape ecology: a foundation for greenway

design. In: Smith, D.S., Forman, R.T.T. (Eds.), Ecology of

Greenways: Design and Function of Linear Conservation

Areas. University of Minnesota Press, Minneapolis, pp. 2342.

Tomlin, C.D., 1990. Geographic Information Systems and Carto-

graphic Modeling. Prentice Hall, Englewood Cliffs, NJ.

Tonn, B.E., 1986. 500-year planning. J. Am. Planning Assoc. 52

(2), 185193.


Whitney, G.G., 1994. From Coastal Wilderness to Fruited Plain:

A History of Environmental Change in Temperate North

America, 1500 to the Present. Cambridge University Press,

Cambridge.

Wilkinson, N.B., 1958. Land Policy and Speculation in Pennsylva-

nia, 17791800. Ph.D. thesis. University of Pennsylvania.

Daniel J. Marcucci is a landscape planner teaching environmental

studies at Gettysburg College in Pennsylvania. He holds a Master

of Landscape Architecture and a Ph.D. in City and Regional

Planning, both from the University of Pennsylvania. His research

centers on the importance of dynamic landscapes and the human

and natural factors that change them.


Documents

2405695 Marcucci Landscape History as a Planning Tool