If we want to live in a healthy relationship with the places we call home, with each other and the rest of life, we have to understand what’s actually happening around us.
No one person can ever see the whole picture.
But what becomes visible when we weave our experiences and perspectives together?
What might be happening around you that you simply can’t see on your own?
In the 1960s, the Governor of New York called the Hudson River “one great septic tank.”
The living system was completely overwhelmed.
Everyone could smell it.
Those who allowed themselves, could feel it.
But the situation was complex and those who wanted to understand it were up against a culture that saw industrial grime as a necessary byproduct of progress and strength.
As awareness of environmental issues were growing, a small group of mostly college students and fishermen set out to understand the river for themselves. This group soon became known as the People’s Pipewatch Program.
They formed a distributed network, each person observing a different patch of the river.
This episode tells the story of how a group of people, coming together, were able to understand a complex system in a way no individual could alone, and in doing so, offer a much needed fuller picture.
It’s also an exploration of an essential practice we’re learning to host within Returning Home, which asks the question:
What becomes visible when we start weaving our experiences and perspectives together?
Visit awakeninglands.com to start your own Returning Home Practice.
Featured Sources:
Hudson River Sloop Clearwater
https://www.clearwater.org/
Hudson River Maritime Museum
https://www.hrmm.org/history-blog/the-hudson-river-then-and-now-a-brief-history-of-water-quality
Hudson River Valley Heritage
https://omeka.hrvh.org/exhibits/show/rescuing-the-river/bagging-polluters/people-s-pipewatch
After publishing this episode, I sent it to the only student from the People's Pipewatch Program who's name was listed in one of the sources.
I heard back from her and she shared that the effort was actually a small investigative team rather than a larger distributed group. Their monitoring began with what were called “permits to pollute.” Then they visited sites to see whether what companies reported matched what was actually entering the river. In doing so, they uncovered many additional, often unreported discharges.
Her message left me even more impressed with what they were able to accomplish.
A clear lesson for me: rely as much as possible on primary sources.