, Volume 23, Issue 4, pp 921–940 | Cite as

Cultural perceptions of small urban wetlands: Cases from the Halifax Regional Municipality, Nova Scotia, Canada

  • Patricia M. Manuel


Urban wetlands, despite their imperfections, provide natural and aesthetic landscape diversity in the built environment. We are beginning to understand and document the ecological significance of this diversity and the management challenges presented by the urban context. The cultural significance of urban wetlands has not received similar attention. The reserch presented in this paper explores the relationship between people and wetlands in local neighborhood settings. We surveyed residents of three urban communities in the Halifax Regional Municipality, Nova Scotia, Canada for their knowledge about and perceptions of a small wetland in each of their respective neighborhoods. Results of the survey show that the study participants are aware of the wetlands in their midst but are not especially observant of or knowledgeable about ‘their’ sites, nor do they visit their wetlands regularly. Yet, despite this apparent disinterest, they readily identify the wetlands as part of their neighborhoods and as assets, especially as natural features and habitat for urban wildlife. The study participants do not consider these neighborhood wetlands nuisance environments or a waste of land. Instead, respondents revealed an appreciation of the aesthetic attributes and habitat value of wetlands in the eity and of urban natural spaces.

Key Words

urbain wetlands urban habitat wetland values cultural values 


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Literature Cited

  1. Azous, A. L. and R. R. Horner (eds.). 2001. Wetlands and Urbanization. Lewis Publishers, Boca Raton, FL, USA.Google Scholar
  2. Bardecki, M. J. 1984. Wetland Conservation Policies in Southern Ontario. A Delphi Analysis. Geographical Monographs 16. Department of Geography, Atkinson College, York University, Downsview, ON, Canada.Google Scholar
  3. Bardecki, M. J., E. W. Manning, and W. K. Bond. 1989. The reality of valuing wetlands: the case of Greenock Swamp, Ontario, Canada. p. 81–90.In D. W. Fisk (ed.) Proceedings of the Symposium on Wetlands: Concerns and Success. American Water Resources Association, Bethesda, MD, USA.Google Scholar
  4. Bond, W. K., K. W. Cox, T. Heberlein, E. W. Manning, D. R. Witty, and D. A. Young. 1992. Wetland Evaluation Guide. Final report of the wetlands are not wastelands project. North American Wetlands Conservation Council (Canada), Wildlife Habitat Canada, Environment Canada and Canadian Wildlife Service, Ottawa, ON, Canada. Issues Paper No. 1992-1.Google Scholar
  5. Campbell, C. S. and M. H. Ogden 1999. Construoted Wetlands in the Sustainable Landscape. Wiley and Sons, New York, NY, USA.Google Scholar
  6. Canadian Wildlife Service. 1998. Wetlands Environmental Assessment Guidelines. Biodiversity Protection Branch, Canadian Wildlife Service, Environment Canada, Ottawa, ON, Canada.Google Scholar
  7. Chovanec, A. 1994. Man-made wetlands in urban recreational areas: a habitat for endangered species. Landscape and Urban Planning 29:43–54.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Cox, J., C. Hendrikson, I. Skelton, and R. Suffling. 1996. Watershed planning for urbanization to avoid undesirable stream outcomes. Canadian Water Resources Journal 21:237–251.Google Scholar
  9. Dewitt, C. B. 1981. Waubesa wetlands: a case study of wetlands preservation. p. 491–501.In B. Riechardson (ed.) Selected proceedings of the midwest conference on wetland values and management. B. Richardson (ed.). Freshwater Society, St. Paul, MN, USA.Google Scholar
  10. Ehrenfeld, J. 2000. Evaluating wetlands within an urban context. Ecological Engineering 15:253–256.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Envirosphere Consultants Limited. 1996. Report on an evaluation of information quality in reports produced by ‘Frogwatch’ 95' participants. Nova Scotia Museum of Natural History, Halifax, NS, Canada.Google Scholar
  12. Fritzell, P. A. 1978. American wetlands as cultural symbol: places of wetlands in American culture. p. 523–534.In P. E. Greeson, J. R. Clark, and J. E. Clark (eds.) Wetland Functions and Values: the State of our Understanding. American Water Resources Association, Minneapolis, MN, USA.Google Scholar
  13. Galuzzi, M. and J. Pflaum. 1996. Integrating drainage, water quality, wetlands and habitat in a planned community development. Journal of Urban Planning and Development September, 1996: 101–108.Google Scholar
  14. Girling, C. L. and K. I. Helphand. 1997. Retrofitting suburbia: open space in Bellevue, Washington, USA. Landscape and Urban Planning 26:301–313.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Gosselin, H. and B. Johnson. 1995. The Urban Outback—Wetlands for Wildlife: a Guide to Wetland Restoration and Frog-friendly Backyards. Metro Toronto's Adopt-a-Pond Wetland Conservation Programme. Metro Toronto Zoo, Toronto, ON, Canada.Google Scholar
  16. Hammer, D. A. (ed.). 1989. Constructed Wetlands for Wastewater Treatment: Municipal, Industrial, Agricultural, Lewis Publishers, Chelsea, MI, USA.Google Scholar
  17. Hammer, D. A. 1997. Creating Freshwater Wetlands, second edition. Lewis Publishers, Boca Raton, FL, USA.Google Scholar
  18. Hammitt, W. E. 1980. Managing bog environments for recreational experiences. Environmental Management 4:425–431.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Hopkinson, C., T. Crane, S. Gaborit, K. Horrigan, P. Jasinski, S. McLernon, M. McTavish, S. Pennington, S. Quon, L. Woo, and G. Mulamootil. 1997. An integrated approach to the planning and management of urban wetlands. The case of Betchel Park Wetland, Waterloo, Ontario. Canadian Water Resources Journal 22:45–56.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Johnson, C. W. and I. A. Worley. 1985. Bogs of the Northeast. University Press of New England, Hanover, NH, USA.Google Scholar
  21. Kennedy, G. and T. Mayer. 2002. Natural and constructed wetlands in Canada: an overview. Water Quality Research Journal of Canada 73:295–325.Google Scholar
  22. Kentula, M. E. 1995. Wetlands restoration and loss in a rapidly urbanizing area of Portland, Oregon. Wetlands 15:336–345.Google Scholar
  23. Kentula, M. E. and T. K. Magee. 1999. Forward. Wetlands 19:475–476.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Kreutzwiser, R. D. and L. J. Pietraszko. 1986. Wetland values and protection strategies: a study of landowner attitudes in Southern Ontario. Journal of Environmental Management 22:13–23.Google Scholar
  25. Kusler, J. A. 1988. Urban wetlands and urban riparian habitat: battleground or creative challenge for the 1990s. p. 2–7.In J. A. Kusler, S. Daly and G. Brooks (eds.) Proceedings of the National Wetland Symposium, Urban Wetlands. Association of Wetland Managers, Berne, NY, USA.Google Scholar
  26. Kusler, J. A. and M. E. Kentula (eds.). 1990. Wetland Creation and Restoration: the Status of the Science. Island Press, Washington, DC, USA.Google Scholar
  27. Mahan, B., S. Polasky, and R. M. Adams. 2000. Valuing urban wetlands: a property price approach. Land Economics 76:100–113.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. McGuekin, C.P. and R. D. Brown. 1995. A landscape ecological model for wildlife enhancement and stormwater, management practices in urban greenways. Landscape and Urban Planning 33:228–246.Google Scholar
  29. Niering, W. A. 1978. Our wetland heritage: historic, artistic, and future perspectives. p. 505–522.In P. E. Greeson, J. R. Clark, and J. E. Clark (eds.) Wetland Functions and Values: the State of our Understanding. American Water Resources Association, Minneapolis, MN, USA.Google Scholar
  30. Nova Scotia Department of Environment. 1995. Nova Scotia Department of Environment wetlands directive. The Environment Act, S. N. S. 1994–95, Government of Nova Scotia, Halifax, NS, Canada.Google Scholar
  31. Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources. 1992. Manual of Implementation Guidelines for Wetland Policy. Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources, Toronto, ON, Canada.Google Scholar
  32. Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources. 1993. Ontario Wetland Evaluation System, Southern Manual. NEST Technical Manual TM-002, third edition. Toronto, ON, Canada.Google Scholar
  33. Owen, C. R. 1999. Hydrology and history: land use changes and ecological responses in an urban wetland. Wetlands Ecology and Management 6:209–219.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Palmer, J. F. and R. C. Smardon. 1988. Human use value of wetlands. An assessment in Juneau, Alaska. p. 108–114.In J. A. Kusler, S. Daly, and G. Brooks (eds.) Proceedings of the National Wetland Sysmposium Urban Wetlands. Association of Wetland Managers. Berne, NY, USA.Google Scholar
  35. Reimold, J. R., M. A. Hardisky, and J. H. Phillips. 1980. Wetland values—a non-consumptive perspective. Journal of Environmental Management 11:77–85.Google Scholar
  36. Reinelt, L., R. Horner. and A. Azous. 1998. Impacts of urbanization on palustrine (depressional freshwater) wetlands—research and management in the Puget Sound. Urban Ecosystems 1998:219–235.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Schneider, D. 1995. Student Power, Nature Canada, spring 1995:13.Google Scholar
  38. Smardon, R. C. 1983. The Future of Wetlands Assessing Visual-Cultural Values. Allanheld, Osmun and Co., Totowa, NJ, USA.Google Scholar
  39. Smardon, R. C. 1988. Aesthetic, recreational, landscape values of urbanwetlands. p. 92–103.In J. A. Kusler, S. Daly, and G. Brooks (eds.) Proceedings of the National Wetland Symposium Urban Wetlands. Association of Wetlands Managers. Berne, NY, USA.Google Scholar
  40. Steinhart, P. 1990. No net loss. Audubon July 1990:18–21.Google Scholar
  41. Titton, D. L. 1995. Integrating wetlands into planned landscapes. Landscape and Urban Planning 32:205–209.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Vileisis, A. 1997. Discovering the Unknown Landscape: a History of American's Wetlands. Island Press, Washington, DC, USA.Google Scholar
  43. Worley, I. 1984. Axiological and ethical factors in peatland preservation and use in the United States. p. 40–61.In Proceedings of the 7th International Peat Congress, Vol. 2. Dublin. Irish National Committee, International Peat Society. Dublin, Ireland and Helsinki, Finland.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Society of Wetland Scientists 2003

Authors and Affiliations

  • Patricia M. Manuel
    • 1
  1. 1.School of Planning, Faculty of Architecture and PlanningDalhousie UniversityHalifaxCanada

Personalised recommendations