The Seattle Street-Smart Naturalist: Field Notes from the City

The Seattle Street-Smart Naturalist: Field Notes from the City (Seattle) by David B. Williams

I had initially thought this book would point out interesting "natural areas" in the city. It does a bit of that. However, the focus is on "themes" of nature within the cities. There are chapters on hills and fault lines that are very place-centric. However, others cover topics such as eagles, crows, geese, bugs, and invasive species. There are many interesting nuggets in the book. Crows are very territorial, and are thriving in the city in thanks to the open space in the suburbs. 

Many of the plants and animals in the city are non-native invasive species. They are able to thrive and push out many of the natives. Animals have had a love/hate relationship. At one time, significant effort was made to increase the geese population. Now, there is more often active culling. 

The area occupied by Seattle had a diverse landscape before the city was developed. There were areas dominated by large evergreen trees. There were also creeks, bogs and wetlands with diverse flora and fauna. Some areas such as Carkeek Park and Thornton Creek expose some of this diversity. Other areas have long been paved over.

Whatever Happened to Tanganyika?: The Place Names That History Left Behind

Whatever Happened to Tanganyika?: The Place Names That History Left Behind by Harry Campbell

This is a short book with a page or two for various place names that are no more. The descriptions provide a brief description, complete with history and some dry British humor, The audience is clearly British. Some of the modern British political discussion went right over my head. The place names are a smattering of different ones that are "gone" for different reasons. Many of the cases are of colonial place names being replaced by "local" ones. (Though in more than one case, the local one is the name of a dictator, and the name disappears shortly after their death.)  The local one may not be without other controversy. (Madras to Chennai sparked some debate, and even questions over which is more "native")

Other times the political entity may no longer exist. There are islands that were once inhabited that no longer have permanent residents. There are countries like Yugoslavia that splintered off to individual countries. The other even threw in an April Fools "San Serriffe" place name.

The book is an ideal "bathroom reader", with many short section that can be thumbed through and read on their own.

The Address Book: What Street Addresses Reveal About Identity, Race, Wealth, and Power

There is no international standard for addressing house locations. (Though Google plus codes and "three words" mechanisms have tried.) Common addressing is a relatively new innovation first created to facilitate taxation. 

The United States was one of the first places to implement standardize grids in places like Manhattan and Philadelphia. That quickly spread to development in other parts of the country. Chicago rationalized the disparate names from many annexed cities into a common grid. The sizes of grids differs from city to city. Salt Lake City has very wide blocks. Portland has small blocks. However, not all places in the US have grids or even addresses. There are many areas such as rural West Virginia that still do not have street addresses. You need to ask locals for specific directions to find a place.

Other countries have different scheme. In Japan, addresses tend to be block based. (One theory is that this came out of the "blocks" that students use to write Kanji. In some places house numbers are added in the order that houses are built, not necessarily where they are.

Naming of streets can be a huge source of conflict. The United States has many numbered streets, while other countries shun them. Naming streets after important historical figures is common, but often leads to conflict when those figures go out of favor. Streets after Civil War veterans are have come and gone. Martin Luther King streets have popped up after his death. (Though many are in fairly impoverished neighborhoods. Was the street placed in a poor neighborhood or was their disinvestment because of the street name?) The author even mentions that one year 40% of all business by New York City council involved street name changes. People do seem to care a lot.

Little Washington: A Nostalgic Look at the Evergreen State's Smallest Towns (Tiny Towns)

Little Washington looks at 100 different towns with populations of less than 3500. Some of these are smack dab in the middle of urban areas. However, many are well off the beaten bath. A common theme is fire. It seems most of the towns have been burned down at least once. I guess that is a risk when building with wood in the middle of forests. 

Many of the towns date from the late 1800s. For all that was known at the time, one of them could have become what Seattle is today. Alas, that did not happen. A number of towns did have boom periods that increased the population into the thousands before falling down to their present levels. Transportation played a key role. Some riverboat towns fell off as trains came. Rail interest then ceded to highways. Road travel has resulted in a loss of services in many small towns as residents can travel to other towns for schools or shopping. 

For each town there is an attempt at a narrative history. This often has a mixture of historical facts with interesting things presently in the town. (There are a few that come across as fairly negative.) Some of these towns look like they would be great to visit. I do wish there were better maps in the book.

The Revenge of Geography: What the Map Tells Us About Coming Conflicts and the Battle Against Fate

Geography is not destiny, but it is a very strong influence. Location and natural borders have played a large role in the destiny of empires and the shape of the world today. Iran/Persia has had a very logical border on the Iranian plateau. It has been one of the longest lived civilizations. Egypt had an easily navigable river base and was protected on other sides. This facilitated a stable empire. Mesopotamia was not so well protected and was the site of regular churn. Europe is fairly dense with a huge amount of coastline and that has contributed to their maritime prowess. 

While some borders are natural, others are artificial. Most of the borders in Africa were arbitrarily drawn. The northern and southern borders of the United States are also fairly arbitrary. Northern Mexico is fairly well separated from southern Mexico, but very connected to the US. Some argue that the border region could choose to form its own country. The residents are different from other immigrants in that they can argue that they once occupied this area. 

India also has overlapping culture and borders. Pakistan and Bangladesh have both been part of India, but have been separated. Other countries, like Nepal and Afghanistan have also historically been part of the India sphere of influence. 

Geography has allowed growth and knowledge dissemination to take place in various regions. Eurasia is oriented east-west, with similar climate zones stretched over long ranges. This allows similar agricultural technologies to spread over fast ranges. South America and Africa are north-south oriented, and thus have much more limited climate bands. Africa also has areas such as the Sahara that further block connections.

The book has an interesting story of the influence of geography and politics. I was hoping for a broader argument, but the narrow approach did have some good points.

Land: How the Hunger for Ownership Shaped the Modern World

Land is an interesting concept. Most land already exists. Yet, people have laid claim to it and have exchange money to "purchase" the land from others. Often the initial claim involved taking land from those that previously were using the land. In some instances, land was gradually separated into different holdings. In other cases, people came in to "take it".

Ownership of land arouses strong feelings. Many wars have been fought over "control" of sections of land. People have strong animosity to others that control the desired land. But what does control of the land mean? Historically, it was primarily as a means of agriculture. People were investing significant effort in cultivating crops. They wanted to maintain control over this. Today, "exclusion" continues to play a role in land ownership. Ultra-wealthy may gather vast swaths of remote land to establish their compound. This may be used for only a short amount of time in a year. However, it ends up being cut off from others that desire to use it.

Land also evolves through many uses. Many peoples have been moved off their lands because others sought a better use for it. Sometimes this use involves more intensive cultivation or city development. Other times, it may be setting it apart as a national park. This can lead to some curious history. Yosemite was once inhabited by Native Americans. It is now set apart as an "undeveloped" national park. However, in doing so, there has been a much more intensive development of roads, trails and lodgings and a huge increase in the number of people passing through. 

The use and ownership of land has changed a great deal through history. It will continue to change. There will continue to be conflicts over ownership as well as attempts to resolve these conflicts. Even with the near "virtual" society, land remains important. 

Earning the Rockies: How Geography Shapes America's Role in the World

Earning the Rockies is part travelogue, part history of the importance of geography in the growth of geography. History came alive through the experience with his father and the history of Bernard Devoto. He wrote the type of grand "American Exceptionalism" history that is not very popular these days. America was able to adopt a very individualistic culture because it was settled from the east. An individual could fairly easily farm land with their own effort. Even the big southern plantations were somewhat independent. This was compared to Utah which required the communal effort of the Mormon population in order to irrigate a difficult land.
He also explores the homestead of presidents. Buchanan was a "bad" president in part because he was willing to "appease" rather than make the bold moves that Lincoln made.
In the seocnd half of the book, he explores the United States. He notes that a lot of the "unique" parts of the country have become very homogenous. Rest stops used to have (whites only) table service and gourmet food. Now anybody can get unhealthy fast food at rest stops. The same chains are all over the united states. The author explores many of the small towns that are "dying". Wheeling West Virginia was a poster child for the small town decline. There were other cities in the midwest that experience similar population decline. The retail left the city for the exurban malls. The people live a homogenous "lower class" life, different than the "brewpub" life of those in small college towns and big cities. This did have the advantage of giving the local hotel and restaurants a feel that was "different" from the sameness of the hotels and meals throughout the trip.

Why Cities Lose: The Deep Roots of the Urban-Rural Political Divide

In Why Cities Lose, Jonathan Rodden takes a very academic look at the urban/rural political divide across English speaking countries. While most European countries have proportional representation, Canada, the US, the UK and Australia have winner-take-all district elections. The winner-take-all system encourages a few parties to assemble a basket of policies to appeal to sufficient voters. The arrangement today is typically that one party represents the rural and exurban areas, while another represents the urban areas. The book is full of charts and graphs showing how far one must go from the central city to flip from the "urban" to "rural" party. With traditional industrial cities, it happens not too far out. With "knowledge economy" cities like San Francisco or Seattle, one has to travel much further out. The "left" party is typically strongest in the dense urban manufacturing core. This often rose out of the socialist parties uniting labor unions. The democratic party was able to co-opt the socialists and become the urban party in the US. Today, however, most manufacturing is done in sprawling exurban plants, with most of the workers voting Republican. (Though in the past the parties did not have the strong rural/urban association.)
Democrats tend to have a concentration disadvantage. Pennsylvania is presented as a case study. Despite Democrats often taking statewide offices, Republicans have dominated the legislature. This is due to the concentration of democratic voters in cities. In the suburban and rural areas, the Republicans have an advantage, but not so pronounced. The constitution requires districts to follow communities as much as possible. This results in some urban districts that are overwhelmingly democratic, while rural districts have a smaller Republican advantage. The result is that a large number of democratic votes are "thrown away". Even with unbiased computer-generated maps, Republicans still get an advantage. (However, the Republican legislature has taken it a step further and added gerrymandering to the picture.) In the south, the Republicans have used voting-rights legislation as justification for creating black "super-majority" districts in rural areas. This has allowed Republicans to dominate in a more balanced state.
The Democratic party also struggles on one side to appeal to urban progressives that want to push the party to the left, and more pragmatic centrists who want to win. When the party is doing well, the left-flank tends to push the party to the left, alienating the centrists, and causing the party to lose. Then the party must become more disciplined and move to the center to gain greater wide-spread acceptance.
There is a great deal more data in book. It does start to get overwhelming. The thesis is simple. Parties of cities are disadvantaged by their concentration in winner-take-all districts. The existing parties are served well by the current system and have little incentive for change that would allow upstarts.

Maphead

I love maps. I have a large collection of paper maps sitting around the house. Bike maps, transit maps, National Geographic maps and more. My dream job was to work at Google Maps. (When my interviewers there turned out to be in the internal tools department, rather than maps, I decided to look elsewhere.) I would often go on long bike rides just so I could come home and spend hours staring at the map, trying to figure out where I went.

Maphead seemed like the book for me and it didn't disappoint. Ken "Jeopardy champion" Jennings starts with a pretty straightforward story of maps and the people that love them. Paper maps have that allure that you still can't get from online mapping programs. We also get a history of maps with many anecdotes and bits of trivia thrown in.

Then the book starts to venture out towards other types of "geography geeks". We get the academic geographers (who often disparage "mere maps"). We also get the (mostly male Indian) kids in the geography bee. There are people who spend hours following a "trail" on a map, geocachers, fantasy mappers and other "geography obsessed". (We have people that visit the highest point in every state, integer latitude/longitudes, 100s of countries and so forth.) Some people are even obsessed with taking pictures of all highway signs. He even uses the book as an excuse to visit Rand McNalley headquarters in Skokie. (That was another place I would have liked to work. I'm surprised he didn't head out to Delorme in Maine.)

The writing is entertaining, and the subject matter is both nostalgic and informative. Am I an oddball who loves maps, but does not have great spacial skills? What will things be like when the GPS generation grows up? (Could we control the world just by hacking GPS navigation devices.) To most people, a "GPS" tells you how to get some place, but for me it is always something that can tell you where you've been. A glance at the map it how you know where to go. Am I a maphead too?

Don't Know Much About Geography: Everything You Need to Know About the World but Never Learned

[August 2009] The basis of this book is an outline of general geographic terms. Each discussion is usually introduced with a some playful question that is then properly explained. After providing a brief answer, the author then tends to go off in some direction, adding facts and opinion related to that subject. Sometimes this discussion is merely an encyclopaedia-like enumeration of geographic features. At other times, he goes rambling off in tangentially related discussion (such as a long war discussion.) Nearly all discussions are filled with wit and opinion. Some of these discussion were quite enjoyable, while others are a mere waste of paper. The book is more than a decade old, so some discussion (especially is diversions into current events and politics) seem quite dated.

While there is a very lose narrative, each section is fairly independent, making it easy to read any given section. However, some of these independent sections seem to be a little too rambling to be used as a 'bathroom' book.

The book is certainly more enjoyable than a geography textbook, however it will take a lot longer to get through than a simple encyclopaedia article.