Abstract
Shifting cultural values of land and resources affect conservation photography. Throughout history different understandings of the land lead to different conservation approaches. Specifically analyzing Canada and the U.S., it it clear that while these shifting values can serve to promote environmental conservation, they can also injure efforts as well. Looking through a primarily cultural lens this analysis will include important historical information and context, the application of visual theories, and examples that will be used to demonstrate the shifts in conservation photography. Problematizing the idea of what nature and the environment are and are not is one of the primary factors of this analysis as well as how outside influences and interests impact environmental conservation photography.
To understand conservation photography the origins of conservation must be understood. The environment and the “wilderness” have not always been seen as the revered body that it is today. It had previously been thought of as a scary, unknown and inhuman place; it was not somewhere people would go for a fun or cathartic experience. More than anything, the wilderness was a land of opportunity for (white) human expansion and exploitation. It wasn’t until after the Industrial Revolution that the wilderness was viewed with a different understanding. It manifested into a sacred entity in need of protection from the human influence that was sure to destroy it.
Of course nature has always been a subject for photographers but “the origins of more purposeful nature photography (in the US) came about with the conservation-oriented work… [these] classic images proclaimed the heritage values of wilderness and became outreach tool in establishing federal parks.” (Farnsworth, 770) From the mid to late 1800’s the value of the land was shifting and becoming symbolic of the American frontier and religious awakenings (Cronon, 4). This romanticism and grandeur associated with the land lead to the establishment of the national parks. People feared the diminishing frontier and wild unexplored land, as it was the foundation of national expansion. The frontier was representative of what it meant to be American and therefore parts of it must be preserved. (7)
The surge in agricultural in the late 1800’s and early 1900’s, the subsequent Dirty Thirties, and the Great Depression seem to be another turning point in environmentalism. Besides environmentalists, hunters were interested in conservation as well. The need for conservation surpassed nostalgic symbols of U.S culture, and Canadian and U.S. conservation efforts were also “driven by the twinned utilitarian concerns of sustainable settlement and resource management” (Mcmanus, 68). As resources that were seemingly abundant and endless dwindled people were faced with a dilemma, and the sustainability of hunting and agriculture seemed to become a priority. In reality, “conservation was not just about protecting the natural resources of a region: it was driven by the local interests of settler groups who saw the wealth of the natural world as their own.” (Mcmanus, 69).
Throughout the late 1920’s and 1930’s, Ducks Unlimited, an organization dedicated to wetland preservation, would use photos “juxtaposing ducks in flight with workers [and] hunters with guns,” to further their goals which showed “that the protection of nature and wildfowl [was] intimately tied to the culture of hunting” (Mcmanus, 70). Applying the Gestalt theory to a photo such as this, the proximity of the hunter to the wildfowl suggests an intimate relationship. Even if the wildfowl are far away from the actual hunter, they share an environment and have a close intimate relationship that differs from conservation photos that exclude people. Photo conservation efforts such as these attempted to balance environmental conservation efforts with the sustainable hunting. By positioning the wildfowl and hunters in the same photo, their proximity implied a reciprocal relationship between the two.
The glorification of hunting photos used in early conservation efforts to establish protected hunting land emphasizes the colonial aspects of conservation photography. The land must be preserved so that people can use and exploit it in ways that still benefit them. Organizations that glorify photos of “‘white men with dead animals … testify further to the significance of hunting as a ritualistic display of power by white colonial elites over land, subject, people, and nature.’” (Mcmanus, 71) While the relationship of people and the environment is important in conservation photography, being cognizant of the way that this is done is equally important.
The idea of coloniality is very prevalent, especially in early articulations of conservation photography. Much of early environmental preservation efforts were articulated as protecting untouched lands that were not yet destroyed by the human touch. Pictures of vast nature scenes without people were at the forefront of the movement. These photos which were used to show the greatness of untouched lands, ignored indigenous peoples who had been established there for centuries. Both hunting photos and the photos of the “untouched wilderness” have an implicit ownership and colonial gaze that can’t be ignored in the history of environmental conservation photography. The use of people in conservation photos is something photographers have to grapple with. The inclusion of humans can imply that humans should be the beneficiaries of environmental conservation, while photos without humans imply a separation, a “them/us” mentality.
While hunting photos have become less popular in conservation efforts, or even used to emphasize the need for conservation, such as elephant hunting photos, the power of the camera still mirrors the power of the gun. Cameras are “a predatory weapon — one that is as automated as possible, ready to spring,” (Sontag, 14). In a study on the educational potential of environmental photography, one of the participants, a biologist and conservationist photographer, says that his experience and skills he gained through hunting have helped him in his ability to approach and “shoot” wildlife (Farnsworth, 772).
Modern day articulations of conservation photography are more conscious of these issues. Before and after photography is now more available as well, whereas earlier efforts may not have had the foresight or technological means to take photographs and compare them later. One of the improvements needed in environmental education is “the need to better quantify impacts,” according to Blumstein and Saylan (Farnsworth, 769). Before and after photos are a good way to address this problem. In a study done on the declining number of South African cycads, researchers examined over a hundred repeat photographs at 53 locations at three different points in time (Okubamichael, 2153). They concluded that “almost all cycads are declining at an alarming rate” (Okubamichael, 2165). The ability to take multiple pictures of the same spot over a prolonged period of time is a revolutionary idea that has helped many conservation photographers relay their messages. Similarly, in the documentary Chasing Ice, we can see how time lapse technology and camera timers are used to take very uniform pictures over long periods of time and how these pictures reveal changes in the landscape and environment.
The evolution of conservation photographer’s methods and reasoning show a
“move beyond ‘charismatic mega fauna’ and the ‘fantasy of the non-present photographer in the portrayal of pristine nature’ to address the complexity and totality of ecosystems. Conservation photographers diverge from the idealized anthropocentric perspective found in such popular environmental education…” (Farnsworth, 771).
The changing landscape of conservation photography proves to emphasize the difference in nature photography and conservation photography once again. While nature photos have always been very beautiful, conservation photos had previously mirrored this beauty. But now “conservation photographs, a lot of times are not pretty. The are very ugly and they show wrecked ecosystems or species being sold in a market where they shouldn’t be consumed.” (Farnsworth, 773) Because “photographed images do not seem to be statements about the world so much as pieces of it,” (Sontag, 4) conservation photographers must be careful of subjects and methods they use in order to problematize this. By rejecting the image of the “mega fauna” photographers help distinguish their photos as more than just pieces of the world.
An evolution has taken place in regards to who is able to participate in conservation photography as well. Today it is not just environmentalists or even photographers that make up the conservation photography movement. Regular people are getting involved as well. In response to the 2010 Deepwater Horizon oil spill, a Louisiana resident created a mock cemetery with white wooden crosses labeled “fishing”, “beach sunsets”, “seafood gumbo,” among other things (Farnsworth, 774). The “photograph of the mock cemetery … also shows how conservation photographers utilize non-nature images and metaphor to convey story themes” (Farnsworth, 775). This example shows an understanding and utilization of symbolic signs in conservation photography. Crosses, while typically seen as religious symbols, symbolize death and mark a grave when placed in the ground. The similarity and proximity of the crosses are representative of a cemetery. Together the viewer understands the frustration and mourning of the loss of these aspects of coastal life.
As discussed before the involvement of people in photography can come off as anthropocentric, but it is also important to not separate humans from the environment. Photographers are becoming more conscious of this bind and working to balance it in their photography. In one study, a photographer photographs an up close shot of a logperch being held by a biologist. The fish is being held gently underwater so that the photographer is able to photograph it. The bottom half of the photograph is underwater and the top half is above water where you can see other biologists working in the background. Utilizing the Gestalt theory of proximity the photographer closely relates the perch and the biologists and provides “equal visual weight [to the] fish and the survey team, supporting the notion of a shared ecosystem” (Farnsworth, 776).
There are other problems that conservation photographers encounter as well. “Photographs of birds trapped in oil… have become emblematic of environmental catastrophe, and risk cliche” (Farnsworth, 783). Cliche photographs can lose their impact and shock value. Being over exposed to photos of melting ice caps, birds in oil, and other environmentalist cliches can desensitize people to their actual value and cause. In addition, tourist advertising photography only reinforces societal beliefs and desires to visit the “great unknown.” Photographs in these advertisements push the narrative of escape to untouched parts of world and emphasize the wilderness as a separate entity. Photos taken by tourists also reduce this space “by limiting experience to a search for the photogenic, by converting experience into an image, a souvenir” (Sontag, 9). These influences that simultaneously treat the environment as a vast unknown as well as reduce it to a mere vehicle for aesthetic photos work against narratives that conservation photographers are trying to share in their work.
In conclusion, the societal and cultural changes in the how we value the land influence environmental conservation photography. These shifting values create new understandings that allow for photographers to address previous problems in conservation photography but also pose new complications. Historical understandings of the land created a colonial romanticism that was reflected by the idea of the untouched wilderness, while modern photography acknowledges the value of human and other life forms as equal and inseparable. Although conservationists and civilians alike work to further these kinds of narratives, tourism advertising and tourist photos continue the colonial ideology today. The applications of visual theories and understandings of their effects on the viewer help conservation photographers to share their work in the most meaningful and effective way possible. These photographers methods and understandings are always changing and at a time where environmental protections are at risk in the U.S. it will be interesting to see what they come up with next.