Does Central Park Work?

Vartan Pahalyants

As part of the Macaulay Honors College curriculum, the Science and Technology of New

York City seminar explores issues in science and technology that have an impact on

contemporary New York. Like historical figures, Marco Polo, Christopher Columbus and Roald

Amundsen, the students are interested in various areas on the map of the science and technology

world. At Hunter College, for example, the students looked at areas such as biotechnology, green

ethics and nutrition. Our class, in particular, taught by Professor Craig Dalton of the Geography

Department, was interested in answering the question, “Does Central Park Work?”. In order to

answer this question, our group decided to focus on two of the many concepts we have examined

throughout the semester – biodiversity and sustainable development. In class, we have had the

opportunity to gather various resources for this project: written works by scientists in these

topics, public speeches by several experts on biodiversity, as well as our own field research. All

of this, combined with outside research, allowed us to answer the aforementioned question –

because not only does the park nurture a biologically diverse community, but it also does so with

little help from humans; so to answer the question, yes, Central Park does work.

In order to find the answer to the question, we must first define the concepts of

biodiversity and sustainability. In 1987, the U.S. Congress Office of Technology defined

biodiversity as:

Biological diversity is the variety and variability among living organisms and the ecological complexes in which they occur. Diversity can be defined as the number of different items and their relative frequency. For biological diversity,

Yes – Central Park Does Work

these items are organized at many levels, ranging from complete ecosystems to the chemical structures that are the molecular basis of heredity. Thus, the term encompasses different ecosystems, species, genes, and their relative abundance. (Scientific Definitions of Biodiversity)

For us to look at Central Park through the concept of biodiversity, we must consider the kinds of

plants and animals that live there, their numbers and their roles in the mini-ecosystems of the

park. In order to look at Central Park through the concept of sustainable development, we must

use the definition outlined in the paper, Defining the Sustainable Park, by Galen Cranz and

Michael Boland. If Central Park falls under the sustainable development concept, it must meet

two characteristics: be resource self-sufficient, or in other words, use “a diverse array of

strategies to reduce the need for resources,” as well as be a part of the larger urban system, or

solve “larger urban problems outside their boundaries when they are integrated with the

surrounding urban fabric” (Cranz and Boland 106).

Prior to discussing the biodiversity and sustainable development of Central Park today, we must

learn about its past. New York City was not

always the Big Apple or the City That Never

Sleeps, and before Jay-Z and Alicia Keys sang

about the “Concrete Jungle,” it was literally a

jungle. As Eric Sanderson writes in his book,

Mannahatta, Mannahatta, as the island was then

known, “had more ecological communities per

acre than Yosemite, more native plant species

per acre than Yosemite, and more birds than the

Great Smoking Mountains National Park”

(Sanderson 10). While today, New York City’s Manhattan vs. Mannahatta

biodiversity is associated with less-than-pleasant sightings of pigeons and rats, about 400 years

ago it was associated with:

… wolves, black bears, mountain lions, beavers, mink, the river otters; whales, porpoises, the seals, the occasional sea turtle visited its harbor. Millions of birds of more than a hundred and fifty different species flew over the island annually on transcontinental migratory pathways; millions of fish – shad, herring, trout, sturgeon, and eel – swam past the island up the Hudson River and in its streams during annual rites of spring. Sphagnum moss form the North and magnolia form the South met in New York City, in forests with over seventy kinds of trees, and wetlands with over two hundred kinds of plants. Thirty varieties of orchids once grew on Mannahatta. Oysters, clams, and mussels in the billions filtered the local water; the river and the sea exchanged their tonics in tidal runs and freshets fueled by a generous climate; and the entire scheme was powered by the moon and the sun, in ecosystems that reused and retained water, soil, and energy, in cycles established over millions of years. (Sanderson 10)

In the quote above, the author does more than simply state what was the biodiversity of the

island in the past was; as he also states why it was there – the unimaginable variety of animals

and plants for today’s New Yorkers was made possible by the ecosystems’ ability to recycle

resources, an important element of the sustainable development concept. Later, Eric Sanderson

points out that the geographical location of Mannahatta contributed to the rich biological

diversity as well, because the island lies at a crossroads between the northern and southern

wildlife (Sanderson 142). The park’s geographical location also plays a key role in the park’s

biodiversity today, as Marie Winn, the author of Red-Tails In Love as well as Central Park in the

Dark, points out. Central Park is a key pit stop in the spring and fall migration of millions of

birds, and several species, such as Baltimore orioles, choose to nest in the park (Winn). Finally,

the author addresses the main reason for the disappearance of these animals and plants – humans.

Even prior to the arrival of Henry Hudson and his crew in 1609, humans had have influenced the

biodiversity of the island. Lenape, the Native American people who then lived on the island,

have shaped the ecosystems of Mannahatta. For instance, Harlem was supposed to be a “deep,

lush forest, given its soil type and climate,” however, historical records describe it as an open

field – the reason for the discrepancy is the Lenape practice of burning “’immense tracts of land’

to make the country ‘more open to hunt in’ and to produce a ‘greater abundance of grass for the

deer to feed on’” (Sanderson 126). The human practice of destroying some ecosystems and

creating other ecosystems has been in practice for thousands of years, however, this “human

footprint” has gotten progressively more out of hand in the last couple of hundred years. As one

can see, New York City’s past plays a big role in workability of Central Park in the present.

During the course of the semester, we have had opportunities to meet many experts in the

field. Felicity Arengo, a guest speaker at the Meet the Scientist event, was the first expert we

have met. As the Associate Director for the Center for Biodiversity and Conservation at the

Museum of Natural History, she and her colleagues are on a mission to address the threats to

global biological and cultural diversity. In her personal work, she researches the reasons behind

the failure of a biodiversity element in one ecosystem and its success in another ecosystem. For

example, she studies endangered species, such as flamingos and sea turtles, in the ecosystems

where they thrive, the high Andes and Palmyra Atoll, respectively. In addition, Felicity Arengo

and her colleagues believe in “citizen research,” where scientists work together with natives to

address the aforementioned threats to diversity. Recently,

this method has led to the discovery of 11 new species of

bees in the United States, including 4 from New York City

(Viegas). In this instance, they handed out plants to New

Yorkers interested in this type of research, who then

recorded bees that pollinated these plants – as a result, 250

species of bees were recorded. Also, Felicity Arengo stresses that we must study the role of each

Newly Discovered Gotham Bee

element in an ecosystem, because every element plays a main role, and without one character,

the whole play might fall apart. For example, the red-tailed hawks in Central Park control the

populations of pigeons and rats, two animals known for overpopulation in New York City.

Finally, Felicity Arengo points to the set of moral, practical economic and religious values as the

reason for importance of biodiversity in our lives.

We encountered another expert, Jack Caldwell, during the Annual Sophomore Trip to the

Black Rock Forest. As Operations Manager for the Black Rock Forest Consortium, which was

formed in 1989 as a center for research and education, an information network, as well as for

ecosystem management, he shared a lot of information about the work that goes on in the forest.

Today, there are around 70 different research projects that are going on in the forest. One of such

projects is done on the Tamarack Pond. As the highest body of water in the Black Rock Forest,

the pond collects a lot of acid rainfall and as a consequence, the pH of the pond ranges anywhere

from 4.5 to 5.0, which is too low for drinkable water. However, as the water runs downstream, it

becomes neutral and by the time it reaches Arthurs Pond, the pH reaches 7.0, which is perfect for

drinkable water. The research has lead scientists to believe that it is the biomass that is

responsible for the filtering of this water. If the plants whose roots absorb acid from the water

were not present, the residents of Cornwall would have to invest in water filtering systems.

Similarly, in Central Park, the biomass helps to filter some 7.1 tons of carbon dioxide emitted by

an average New Yorker – a great benefit to the city and the world (Sanderson 16). Going back to

Felicity Arengo’s point about the importance of biodiversity in our lives, these are examples of

practical economical reasons. Therefore, the park works by the second principle of the

sustainable development concept. It is important to note that the Black Rock Forest is about

14,000 years old, whereas Central Park is only 165 years old. Moreover, the Black Rock Forest

is almost five times as big as Central Park, 3,750 to 843 acres, respectively. Keeping these two

differences in mind, the kinds of top predators in these areas are strikingly similar. The Black

Rock Forest fosters coyotes, foxes and raccoons, whereas Central Park fosters coyotes and

raccoons. If a park can support as large a predator as a coyote,

then the ecosystem must be healthy. Despite human influence,

the Central Park’s biodiversity can be compared to that of the

Black Rock Forest, and thus viewed as a success story in a

modern metropolis.

Then, we were introduced to Ken Chaya as he gave us a

tour of the park to show the great diversity of plants and animals during one of our field trips to

the Central Park. He is the man behind the most detailed map of any urban park in the world,

Central Park Entire. On the map, there are 174 different kinds, numbering 19,630 in total, of

trees and shrubs (Chaya). At one location in the park, 11 species of oak grow – more than

anywhere else in the world. There is also the 150 year-old swamp white oak, one of about 150

Olmstead original trees that are left in the park (Robbins). Another tree, though split in half by

lightning, manages to thrive. Besides all the previously mentioned native trees, there are

nonnative trees, some of which are even invasive, in Central Park. The Norway maple, for

example, is very harmful to the biodiversity of the park, as it grows fast and takes up a lot of

space, displacing other tree species. The Central Park Conservancy has to keep the tree’s

population in control and “to reduce maintenance and increase habitat values,” park managers

are replacing the tree with non-invasive alternatives altogether (Cranz and Boland 107). Hence,

the Central Park Conservancy works to increase the positive and decrease the negative impacts

of the vast number of trees and shrubs to the biodiversity and sustainability of the park. Moving

Coyote Eating a Squirrel

on, animals of the park greatly benefit from its rich plant life. Ken Chaya reiterates Marie Winn’s

point, as he claims that Central Park is one of the most important places to birds. It is the park’s

biodiversity as one of the reasons why, as he explains that the trees, such as the black cherry,

green hawthorn and sugar maple, provide birds with a variety of food sources, including fruits,

insects, sap and seeds. In return, these birds propagate the trees. As pointed out by Felicity

Arengo, such interactions are very important in healthy ecosystems. But it is not only the birds

and other mammals that feed on vegetation that are the beneficiaries of this rich plant life – it is

also the animals that prey on them. Ken Chaya gave examples of coyotes and red-tailed hawks;

the reason why they can survive in the park is that they have a variety of food sources themselves

– they feed on sparrows and squirrels. Thus, the complexity of the food chain relationships in the

park point to it healthy mini-ecosystems.

In our class, we have also visited

Central Park on multiple occasions for field

research. On one of such occasions, we

were interested in identifying the many

different kinds of plants in Central Park.

Among the most numerous trees that we

have encountered were the London Plane and Yoshino cherry, both nonnative species; birds and

mammals are responsible for their propagation: as previously mentioned, this is the case with

many trees in the park. This brings up a point by Ken Chaya, “the park is made by man but

touched by nature.” Although, Central Park still aims to portray the vision Frederick Law

Olmstead and Calvert Vaux proposed, it has been altered by the concepts of biodiversity and

sustainability. In their vision, they did not plan to have thousands of cherry trees, but because

Bald Eagle With Prey Flying Over Central Park

they are such a big element in the biodiversity of the park and greatly add to its sustainable

development, they blossom and are allowed to blossom. On another occasion, we were interested

in identifying the many different kinds of animals in the park. The most obvious animal is the

feral pigeon, an invasive species; it shows the “human footprint” in Central Park. A key to the

success of feral pigeons in the park and in the city is the abundance of food and shelter provided

by New Yorkers and the absence of predators, for which New Yorkers are also responsible.

Another common animal is the gray squirrel, which once again shows a link between the

diversity of plants and animals. Finally, the most common animal we found was the bee –

combined with Felicity Arengo’s findings, this is very significant. Around the world, there is a

widespread disappearance of bees, known as the Colony Collapse Syndrome. However, in New

York City, as Jason Gibbs, a zoology professor at Cornell University, remarks:

It's remarkable that so many bees are able to live in such a major urban area… Natural areas like urban parks and rooftop and botanical gardens provide the nesting sites and floral diversity that bees need. (Viegas)

In other words, the health of Central Park ecosystems greatly contributes to the diversity of bees

in New York City, which promotes the idea that the park’s biodiversity is successful.

Next, we should consider the biodiversity of Central Park today in greater depth. In 2008,

during a BioBlitz, over 350 scientists and volunteers gathered in the park and in 24 hours, they

catalogued over 800 species of plants and animals – 393 plants, 102 invertebrates, 78 moths, 46

birds, 14 fungi, 10 spiders, 9 dragonflies, 7 mammals, 5 bats, 3 turtles and 2 frogs (Roach).

Although only 46 birds were recorded because of the time of the year, in the summer when the

BioBlitz occurred migratory birds had already left the park on their way to the North, there were

actually many more species in the park. For the reasons mentioned earlier, there are 275 bird

species that come to Central Park every year, of the 800 total in North America (Kakutani). In

the park, there is also a relatively rich aquatic life. For instance, carp and goldfish live in the

Duck Pond, in addition to many types of crayfish and largemouth bass that live in Rowboat Lake

(Winn). Upon the last restoration of the Lake in 2008, the Central Park Conservancy staff has

identified 2,963 fish in the lake, including black bullhead catfish, bluegills, golden shiners,

pumpkinseed sunfish and white crappie (Dunlap). In these bodies of water, the smaller fish

population supports the larger fish population – and all the variety of fish suggests a healthy

ecosystem. While few in numbers, certain amphibians and reptiles, such as bullfrogs and

snapping turtles, add on to the aquatic population of the park. There is also a big number of

insects in the park, among which are 48 species of ants and over 100 species of months (Winn).

It is true that the mammal population pales in comparison to the bird and fish populations,

however, the park has recently seen reintroduction of some mammal species. For instance, the

Virginia possum has returned to the park (Winn). In addition, with the New York City

Department of Parks and Recreation’s effort to reintroduce new species of plants and animals to

Central Park, mammals such as chipmunks and rabbits

may return to the park in the future. Based on this

information, the park works as a very biologically

diverse place in a megacity.

In order to better evaluate the biodiversity of the

park, we should compare it to other urban parks – in our

case, Golden Gate Park in San Francisco and Stanley

Park in Vancouver were chosen because of their comparable natures to Central Park. Golden

Gate Park and Stanley Park are Central Park’s contemporaries and are 1,017 and 1,000 acres big,

respectively. Golden Gate Park is often compared to Central Park because of their similar shapes.

Virginia Possum

In terms of biodiversity, the two foster comparable number of bird species, with 20 more in

Central Park; however, in terms of plant and mammalian species, Central Park is behind by

about 600 and 380 species, respectively (Nature and Science). The reason why Golden Gate Park

is more biologically diverse is not simply because it works better. Instead, it is the fact that it has

more “ecological communities” (Sanderson 138). In addition to Central Park’s lone type of such

“neighborhoods” – forest area – it has grasslands, scrublands and wetlands, allowing for greater

biodiversity. The fact that Central Park can compete in terms of the bird population is remarkable

of its great biodiversity. On the other hand is Stanley Park, which like Central Park only has

forest area as its ecological community. According to its official website, Stanley Park fosters

around 230 species of birds, 45 less than in Central Park; it is also home to a fewer number of

plant species, 200, and a comparable amount of mammals. It is important to note that Stanley

Park has several restricted areas to protect some plants and animals, unlike Central Park, which

is all open to visitors. Despite all of this, the example of Stanley Park supports the idea that

Central Park has great biodiversity and once again, that the park works.

Now that we have assessed its ability to work through the concept of biodiversity, we

must look at Central Park through the concept of sustainable development. Over the course of the

last century, the park has fallen into a state of disrepair following “declining budgets, increasing

use, and the natural lifespan of non-native, non-regenerating landscapes” (Cranz and Boland

106). In order the address these problems, the park’s management had to turn to sustainable

design practices. In 1980, the Central Park Conservancy was created specifically for this

purpose. The first element of Sustainable Park Model is a park’s ability to recycle its resources to

reduce its maintenance needs. For this reason, non-native and non-regenerative landscapes were

removed, which was done to Norway maples, as mentioned earlier. Another example of this

practice can be seen at the Turtle Pond, where historic paved edges “have been softened and

replaced with plantings of bog and marginal wetland species that are not invasive” (Cranz and

Boland 107). Other techniques employed by the Central Park Conservancy to reduce

maintenance and allow nature to “take its course” are composting, community stewardship and

zone gardener programs (Cranz and Boland 109).

Composting In Central Park

In the last few years, many new practices have been developed to address the self-sustainability

element of this model. For example, the grass field at the Great Lawn requires a soil that is high

in sand to produce compaction, the use of fertilizer and irrigation, in addition to the field’s

maintenance when it is wet – “this level of care is beyond the means of most park operations

budgets and staff allocations” (Adams, Caputo, Compton, Dockwiller and Lavallee 80). The

Central Park Conservancy will address this issue with synthetic surface, which will almost

remove the need for maintenance. In addition, the staff plans to address the problem of water

erosion with newly developed porous pavements, which will prevent water runoff, which is the

cause of the erosion (Adams et al. 24). As such, the staff’s ability to continually address the

threats to Central Park’s self-sustainability makes it an example of the success of the first

principle of the Sustainable Park Model.

Under the second principle of sustainable development, a park must be a part of

something greater than itself – it must solve the problems of the city. In the original design of

Central Park, Frederick Law Olmstead and Calvert Vaux had the first park model in mind,

Pleasure Ground, which had public health as one of its social goals. In the book, Public Parks

and the Enlargement of Towns, Frederick Law Olmstead argues that Central Park, “disinfect air

by sunlight and foliage” (Olmstead 15). Many years later, in his book, Humane Metropolis, Peter

Harnik supports this argument: “trees and vegetation” still “filter out pollutants” and hence

provide cleaner air to the city (Harnik 60). There are many other benefits that the park provides

for the city. For example, the park

reduces the temperature of the city in the

summer, its trees help to filter our water;

moreover, it encourages mental and

physical activities (Harnik 60).

In addition, Central Park supports local

business by attracting visitors – as Ken Chaya has mentioned on his walk, Central Park is the

second most visited place in the United States, only behind Times Square. There are more

Baseball In Central Park

benefits still. As Colin Ellard points out in his book, You Are Here, there is a great link between

exposure to nature and our mental wellbeing. In the chapter, “Nature Is Good For Us,” he writes:

Surgical patients in rooms with windows looking onto natural features recover faster than those without such views. Views of landscapes or even the presence of indoor vegetation improves productivity of office workers. Nature scenes on the ceiling in dentist’s offices lower stress levels and heighten pain tolerance. Psychological studies in which stress levels were measured directly suggest that we are mentally refreshed by a walk in the woods. (Ellard 271)

Looking at this evidence, there cannot be denying that the park contributes to the lives of

millions of New Yorkers. Central Park thus helps solve the many problems of New York City,

and as a consequence, it meets the second requirement of the Sustainable Park Model – Central

Park works by the sustainability concept.

Only recently, the world population has passed 7 billion and more than half of this

population lives in cities. It is now more important than ever for urban parks like Central Park to

be allies and not enemies to their cities. As the research illustrates, Central Park stands as the

exemplification of success of the concepts biodiversity and sustainable development in a

megacity that is New York City – it fosters a large population of plants and animals and at the

same time addresses the problems of urbanization. However, there is always room for

improvement. Careful reintroduction of plant and animal species that were displaced by the

construction of the park will aid the biodiversity of the park. In addition, the use of newly

developed windbreaker techniques can prevent future losses of trees during hurricanes and

tropical storms – reducing both maintenance costs and damages to the park’s mini-ecosystems.

In the end, Central Park does work today and the Central Park Conservancy promises to have it

work tomorrow.

Works Cited

Adams, Michele, Steven Caputo, Jeannette Compton, Tavis Dockwiller, and Andrew Lavallee.

High Performance Landscape Guidelines. New York City: City of New York Parks and

Recreation.

Chaya, Ken. "Central Park Map | Central Park Definitive Map Story." Central Park Map | The

Definitive Central Park Map. Web. 6 Dec. 2011.

<http://www.centralparknature.com/story/index.html>.

Cranz, Galen and Michael Boland. 2004. Defining the Sustainable Park: A Fifth Model for

Urban Parks. Landscape Journal. 23/2/04.

Dunlap, David. "Behind the Dam, One Fierce Holdout - NYTimes.com." NYTimes.com.

NYTimes, 18 July 2008. Web. 6 Dec. 2011.

<http://cityroom.blogs.nytimes.com/2008/07/18/behind-the-dam-one-fierce-holdout/>.

Ellard, Colin. You Are Here: Why We Can Find Our Way to the Moon but Get Lost in the Mall .

New York: Doubleday, 2009. Print.

Evans, Sara. "New York: Unlikely Wildlife in Central Park." The Telegraph. Telegraph Media

Group Limited 2011, 23 June 2008. Web. 4 Dec. 2011.

<http://www.telegraph.co.uk/travel/destinations/northamerica/usa/newyork/2167029/

New-York-City-Central-Parks-unlikely-wildlife.html>.

Harnik, Peter (Platt, R. ed.) 2006. Humane Metropolis. The Excellent City Park System: What

makes it great and how to get it there.

Kakutani, Michiko. "Books of The Times - A Night Stalker in the Center of Manhattan, Spying

on Owls and Moths - Review - NYTimes.com." NY Times. NY Times, 1 July 2018. Web.

6 Dec. 2011. <http://www.nytimes.com/2008/07/01/books/01kaku.html?

ref=firstchapters>.

“Nature and Science.” Golden Gate National Recreation Area. U.S. National Park Service. Web.

4 Dec. 2011. < http://www.nps.gov/goga/naturescience/index.htm>

Olmsted, Frederick Law. Public Parks and the Enlargement of Towns: Read before the

American Social Science Association ... 1870. Cambridge Mass: Riverside, 1870. Print.

Roach, John. ""BioBlitz" Finds 800-Plus Species in New York Park." National Geographic

News. National Geographic Society, 8 July 2003. Web. 4 Dec. 2011.

<http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2003/07/0708_030708_bioblitzresults_2.html

>.

Robbins, Liz. "A Labor of Wonder: Mapping 19,993 Trees in Central Park." The New York

Times. The New York Times Company, 30 May 2011. Web. 4 Dec. 2011.

<http://www.nytimes.com/2011/05/31/nyregion/2-enthusiasts-compose-map-of-central-

park-trees.html>.

Sanderson, Eric W. Mannahatta: a Natural History of New York City. New York: Abrams, 2009.

Print.

"Scientific Definitions of Biodiversity." California Biodiversity Council. State of California.

Web. 4 Dec. 2011. <http://biodiversity.ca.gov/Biodiversity/biodiv_def2.html>.

“Stanley Park.” Parks and Recreation. Vancouver Park Board. Web. 4 Dec. 2011.

<http://vancouver.ca/parks/parks/stanley/index.htm>

Winn, Marie. "Answers About Central Park Wildlife." The New York Times. The New York

Times Company, 23 July 2008. Web. 4 Dec. 2011.

<http://cityroom.blogs.nytimes.com/2008/07/23/answers-about