Oscar Avatare & Riley Rogan

June 5, 2017

Honors 392 Paper 2

Seattle Homelessness and the Conflict of Public Space Usage

Seattle is well known for high quality parks, but at the same time, high rates of

homelessness. The combination of these two things that Seattle is known for makes for a very

contentious dispute of what the best use of our public land is. Although it can be said that parks

are a poor use of public land due to the fact that there is a need to provide shelter for the growing

homeless population, the benefits that parks provide and the alternative solutions to the lack of

shelter make having parks a reasonable decision.

Philosophy of the land and the camping ethic

To understand the tension regarding parks and their usage, it is important to examine the

philosophy behind how they came into being. While parks are the manifestation of the desire to

allow the land to serve humans in a utilitarian manner other than for natural resources, the actual

implementation of setting aside land to do this didnt occur until 1864. The first location where

this was done was in the United States was the Yosemite Valley, when Abraham Lincoln signed

an act of Congress stating Yosemite Valley would be held for public use, resort, and

recreation...inalienable for all time.1 In 1890, it would be made into Yosemite National Park,

preserving an even larger area for visitors to enjoy.2 Yet this thinking of preserving the land was

a new one, opposite of the thinking of the explorers from the previous century who found the

untamed land to be a wicked wasteland, only meant to be conquered to enable civilization.3 The

1
"Yosemite National Park History & Culture." National Parks Service. U.S. Department of the Interior, n.d.
Web. 03 June 2017.
2
Ibid
3
Cronon, W. The Trouble with Wilderness. N.p.: Shiplee, B, 2004. Print. Page 8.
people at the forefront of this philosophical change were John Muir and Henry David Thoreau.

Both advocated for seeing the wilderness from a sublime point of view, meaning that the

wilderness was sacred, and was a place where one could see the face of God.4 This would allow

emotions to overcome an individual, giving an individual the opportunity to gain a deeper insight

into themselves. Through this, the wilderness that was transformed into national parks became

mythical locations, and places sought out by people for recreation and camping.

Yet Muir and Thoreau both place crucial limits on what they found to be an appropriate

usage and visitations into the wilderness, that begin to form a camping ethic. This is a

paradigm I created for the purpose of this analysis inspired by Leopolds land use ethic and from

reading both Muir and Thoreau. To me after synthesizing and analyzing both Muir and Thoreau,

I concluded a camping ethic based on their writing would have three distinct parts. It would

examine the intent, duration, and location of an individual in a park to determine if they are

following the camping ethic or not. Based off my analysis, the intent that determines the

camping ethic asks why someone is spending their time in a park. For Muir and Thoreau, this

intent must be for the development of the individual or recreation. Any other reason of spending

time in the wilderness runs afoul of their thinking in regards to why someone would camp.

Duration is also a crucial aspect here as camping is meant to be a temporary escape, not a

permanent refuge. Man cannot stay in the wilderness forever and therefore camping is a

temporary state of being, because permanent camping would mean the arrival of civilization in a

place where it is not meant to be. Finally, there is location, which determines where it is

appropriate to camp. For both Muir and Thoreau, camping is meant to be an escape from

civilization, therefore for them camping must be away from cities and towns, in as wild of a

place as possible to gain the enlightenment that camping can provide.

4
Ibid. 9.
 Olmsted and Seattle parks

John Charles Olmsted also comes into the picture once he starts creating urban parks,

which differ from the parks that Muir and Thoreau glorified, but still follow the camping ethic

I have described. He wanted to make his parks symbols of urban sophistication, and designed

parks that were scenic and naturalistic as well as socially useful and functional.5 This philosophy

saw the park as a space for democracy, recreation, and improved public health.6 He derived this

philosophy from his father, who believed in the leisurely appreciation of nature and a policy of

recreation, but also saw American parks as akin to the ancient antiquities of Rome, giving the

United States landmarks that could compare with the best Europe had to offer.7

Even during Olmsteds time, there was issues with transients in Seattle parks. They

would hunt for food in his parks, and squatters remained a persistent nuisance along Alki Beach

for two decades.8 Additionally, the Great Depression would send thousands into Hoovervilles

built around Seattle on public lands. Therefore, from the perspective of Olmsted, he would

oppose the usage of parks as places for the homeless to inhabit. The social utility he dreamed of

occurring within his parks would be impossible if they were being used to settle the homeless.

This is because of the views that the Olmsteds held, but also because of the camping ethic that

looks down upon camping in an urban area.

The Camping Ethic and the Legality of Camping

Transitioning back to the camping ethic, it allows us to examine the modern homeless

controversy and see it in a different light. Legislatively speaking, there is legal and illegal

5
Klingle, Matthew W. Emerald City: An Environmental History of Seattle. New Haven: Yale UP, 2008.
Print. 123.
6
Ibid. 123.
7
"National Park Service History: Philosophical Underpinnings of the National Park Idea." National Parks
Service. U.S. Department of the Interior, n.d. Web. 04 June 2017.
8
Klingle.
camping, both of which are imbued with the camping ethic, and this distinction becomes

abundantly clear once a deeper look is taken into these laws. Within the construct of legal

camping, there are two main types, which are recreation camping and dispersed camping.

Recreation camping is when an established campground is used within a non-urban park, where

limits are set on the amount of time that can be spent there and the activities performed.9

Dispersed camping is the term used for camping anywhere in the National Forest or other federal

lands outside of a designated campground.10 Most of the federal land in the US is managed by

the United States Forest Service or the Bureau of Land Management, and both agencies allow for

dispersed camping, which is free and has attracted some homeless to these areas.11 Analyzing

legal camping, we can see that it generally follows the camping ethic. The camping here is

done in a recreational manner, as a temporary escape, and is away from civilization. In contrast,

illegal camping is therefore considered spending time on public land in an urban area. This is

where homelessness enters the camping ethic, and it becomes clear why illegal camping and

homelessness are symbiotic. Homelessness doesnt fulfill any of the three parts of the camping

ethic, as the purpose isnt recreation, the duration is indefinite, and they are within civilization

in urban areas. Because these parts of the societal paradigm camping ethic were violated, it

becomes clearer why cities have been hesitant to allow the homeless to use their public land and

especially their parks. However, this issue can hit quite close to home due to the issues we face

with homelessness in our state, and the struggle the homeless face to survive.

9
"General Rules." Recreation.gov - Explore Your America. N.p., n.d. Web. 05 June 2017.
10
"Recreation." Dispersed Camping Guidelines. N.p., n.d. Web. 05 June 2017.
11
"Homeless Are Flocking to America's Forests, But It's Damaging the Land." Vice. N.p., n.d. Web. 05
June 2017.
 Before 2015, the Vancouver City Council made it illegal to camp in a public place within

the city limits of Vancouver.12 This was a longstanding policy which changed due to the

Department of Justice ruling that any local ordinance making camping a crime in all places at all

times when shelter space was unavailable violated the Eighth Amendment prohibition against

cruel and unusual punishment.13 Now it is legal to to sleep outside in public places between 9:30

PM and 6:30 AM, but it is still not legal to do so in public parks.14 This demonstrates how bad

the problem has gotten, and how the camping ethic as a societal construct must sometimes be

overridden for the greater good.

Paradoxes and the Perspective of Parks on the Homeless

While allowing the homeless to camp in public, urban parks would violate the camping

ethic we have examined, in a scenario as dire as the one Seattle faces, it should certainly be

considered an option. This was proposed by the Seattle City Council in October 2016, and would

open up almost 5,200 acres of city parks for homeless encampments, including parts of

Greenlake, Woodland Park, Magnuson Park, Discovery Park, Lincoln Park, Seward Park, and

the Arboretum.15 While this policy is an ambitious and controversial one, it is important to

examine what the perspective is of urban park leaders on the homelessness issue. In a study

commissioned by the National Recreation and Park Association, sixty-five park and recreation

agencies were surveyed, and the survey found that 45% of respondents found the homeless a

nuisance and 60% agreed that it wasnt the park's purpose to serve them.16 Additionally, most

12
"One Year Later, Camping Ordinance Yields Little Change for Areas Homeless." The Columbian. N.p.,
n.d. Web. 05 June 2017.
13
"Get the Facts About the City's Camping Ordinance." City of Vancouver Washington. N.p., n.d. Web.
04 June 2017.
14
Ibid.
15
Daniels, Chris. "Council Plan Would Allow Homeless Camps on Thousands of Acres." KING. N.p., 07
Oct. 2016. Web. 06 June 2017.
16
"Homelessness in Parks: A Summary of Results from an NRPA Membership Survey." NRPA. N.p., n.d.
Web. 5 June 2017.
urban park and recreation agencies do not permit people to encamp on public land overnight,

with more than half of agencies permitted to remove people with little or no notice.17 Also, three

in four park and recreation agencies are using, or are considering the inclusion of, design and

infrastructure elements that discourage people from staying overnight in parks.18 However, parks

are still at the forefront of helping the homeless, with roughly three in five park and recreation

agencies are partners in their cities mitigation strategies.19 While parks discourage the homeless

from spending the night in them, during the day over half offer services to their homeless

population, including access to restrooms and showers, shelter during periods of inclement

weather, and access to computers and telephones.20 Clearly, there is hostile policies against the

homeless from parks in terms of camping, but they seem to accommodate the homeless through

other humanitarian policies. Yet this is just one of the paradoxes that we must examine when

analyzing the topic of parks, the camping ethic, and homelessness. We also face paradoxes in

how what we consider to be the appropriate and optimal usage of urban and non-urban parks.

Additionally, there is the paradox of how the land we have set aside for recreation cannot be

used to support people on the margins of society. Ultimately, we face an irony that we have

preserved land to be enjoyed by those who have the time and means to do it, but we dont let

those who truly need the land access to it to survive. We have drawn such a large divide between

the kind of camping we consider appropriate and inappropriate that the two seem almost

irreconcilable at this point. While allowing the homeless to inhabit Seattles parks might not be a

feasible or optimal solution, the fact that we do not do so in Seattle shows how societally

17
Ibid.
18
Ibid.
19
Ibid.
20
Ibid.
entrenched we still are within the ideals of Olmsted and the camping ethic of Muir and

Thoreau.

The camping ethic, Homelessness, and its Potential Solutions in Seattle

Subsequently, it is important to connect these philosophical ideas to the present day to

show their relevance and discuss possible solutions to the growing problem of camping and

general homelessness. An alarming statistic from Seattles homelessness response blog contends

that 11,643 individuals living in the Seattle area are currently homeless.21 This issue is so

alarming that Mayor Ed Murray called in a state of emergency in the fall of 2015 so that more

funds from federal and local levels can be allocated to solve this growing issue. Murrays

contributions to bring an end to the problem have been poorly received due to the fact that he has

been going back and forth on the best possible solutions. Earlier this year, he developed a plan to

aggressively combat homelessness by raising money to go directly to homeless services by

levying a property tax, but then he changed his mind and took a more passive approach. His new

plan is an income tax that is projected to raise less money in a longer period of time and is not

necessarily all for stopping homelessness.22 Understandably, Seattleites are getting frustrated

with the lack of decisive action from the mayor and the city so they have begun to look to other

outlets for solutions. Some of the actions that have been taken include relocating homeless

individuals to safer areas, sanctioning more encampments, and building permanent shelters for

the homeless.23 So far, these solutions have not been enough: the rate of homelessness has only

continued to increase in the past two years. In the long run, these policies and buildings should

21
Homelessness Response. "New Count Provides City with Additional Tool to Address
Homelessness." Blog post. Homelessness Response Blog. Seattle.gov, 1 June 2017. Web. 4 June
2017.
22
Groover, Heidi. "Mayor Ed Murray Bails on Plan for Homelessness Levy." The Stranger. Index
Newspapers LLC, 3 Apr. 2017. Web. 5 June 2017.
23
Homelessness Response.
be able to make a difference, but it is incredibly difficult to find an immediate solution for the

11,643 people that are currently living on the streets. It is projected that a city-sanctioned

homeless shelter that can house 700 homeless people a year will be completed sometime this

summer, but that project wont be nearly enough to solve the problem. It is clear that the city

needs more housing for the homeless, but the issue is where to put this housing. This brings up

the idea that Seattle parks could be legal places where the homeless live during the night when

they have nowhere else to go. Although this sounds like a good idea in theory, legally

sanctioning this would have severe impacts on the environment and the amount of people

visiting them for recreation. These parks like Ravenna, Woodland, and Magnuson, would all be

overrun with tents and homeless people. In our society, most people would not want to visit these

locations because the way they see homeless camping is as if their natural aesthetic beauty of the

pars was marred by the sights of tents. But is this supposed aesthetic liability really more

important than providing a place for transients to inhabit legally? In some cases, the answer

would be yes. Parks are an integral part of our culture and serve as a reminder of the cultural

landscape that has evolved from before the city even existed. Camping on these locations is a

direct violation of the camping ethic that was previously discussed in the paper. However, there

has to be a better way to compromise and find a way to shelter the homeless and still be able to

enjoy our parks. Fortunately, according to Maxwell Baker of the University of Washingtons

Urban Planning Masters program, there is. In his 2016 thesis Baker proposed an innovative way

to combat homelessness. He developed a plan to take advantage of liminal spaces as sanctioned

homeless camps and to use the surrounding structures to build off of. To describe how these

spaces come to be Baker wrote, Numerous bridges, overpasses, and viaducts are employed in

the citys transportation system to overcome physical impediments such as rivers and steep
slopes, creating voids or liminal spaces in the urban landscape beneath them.24 Seattle has

been booming in population lately, so as a result of that it is difficult to financially justify setting

aside prime Seattle real estate for people who cant afford to pay to live there when there are so

many individuals who are more than willing to do so. However, the reason why this proposition

is so appealing is because it would be making use of spaces that are not used for any productive

means, so there would be no opportunity cost of building in these spaces. This would make it so

that Seattle could shelter the homeless, but at the same time, do it in a location away from the

beautiful parks that the city has to offer. It would take advantage of both the natural and

manmade landscapes in the city and modify their culture into safe and natural places for the

homeless. The best liminal spaces to create shelters at were based on the criteria of proximity to

service centers, availability of transit, and the current use of the space. A location in the Ballard

and another in Interbay have been highlighted as the two most suitable locations for these liminal

spaces to become shelters. By distinguishing these locations as permanent places for the

homeless, the residents of these locations would no longer be in violation of the camping ethic.

Instead of squatting, these displaced individuals would be living on an approved location, with

the intent to get back on their feet, for a duration that would be long enough for them to achieve

this goal. That would satisfy all three of the criterion for the camping ethic, but unfortunately,

this solution does not seem to be immediate. Baker himself states, Only through the use of

Seattles covered liminal spaces will [providing for the growing homeless population] likely be

possible, making it imperative that such areas be considered in the future.25 This conclusion is

that this solution is more of a long term one due to current complications with land ownership,

24
Baker, Maxwell. "Under the Bridge: Utilizing Covered Liminal Spaces for Formal Homeless
Encampments in the City of Seattle." Thesis. University of Washington, 2016. Proquest LLC, 2016.
Web. 1 June 2017. Page 3.
25
Ibid. Page 143.
pollution near freeway overpasses, and city laws, so even though this is an excellent idea, it will

need more time and resources before it can become a reality.

Additionally, popular Seattle blogger Cliff Mass has his own proposed solutions about

this growing problem. Mass, an atmospheric scientist professor, is not the most orthodox source

by any means, but he is still worth including because he is proposing plans that are getting much

more positive feedback than Mayor Murrays proposals. He demands that Seattle needs to,

Build large amounts of very low cost housing so that every individual has a bed in a warm place

with complete protection from the elements, bathroom and washing facilities, access to basic

food, the availability of medical and mental health clinics, and on-site workforce counseling. 26

Although this is no small feat and will require many resources, Seattle should be able to pull it

off. Paul Allen donated 30 million dollars and the city matched 5 million dollars to be dedicated

to putting an end to the growing problem of homelessness. Seattleites, Mass and Allen included,

are tired of this issue in the city, and they dont want to settle for the forfeiture of their parks as a

solution to the problem. However, Mass contends that, Something is very wrong with the way

money for homeless is spent. Every year, Seattle spends around $50 million dollars on homeless

services, but the situation continues to degrade.27 Thats why Masss plan is one of the only

logical solutions. It satisfies the camping ethic and involves sheltering thousands of people in

low cost housing, which is incredibly expensive, but it is still more efficient than the current way

the citys money is spent because no progress is being made. Having permanent structures built

and having helpful common resources included in these shelters will be a long term solution to

the overall issue by getting people off the street and rehabilitating them back into society, and

thus out of Seattle Parks and streets. This solution would be a win for the culture of the city by

26
Mass, Cliff. "The Homeless Crisis in Seattle: Time for a New Approach." Blog post. Blogspot, 9
May 2017. Web. 28 May 2017.
27
Mass.
having even more contributing members of society and a win for the culture of the parks by

restoring them to their original purpose of preserving the beautiful Seattle landscape. No matter

how high the price is, this would be well worth the money to make Seattle known for its vibrant

culture and parks as opposed to our citys inability to deal with homelessness.

Another path to a solution is to try to get an understanding of the homeless perspective so

that people can better understand where they are coming from and be more willing to act to

improve their standards of living. An attempt to do this was carried out by Tyrone Beason and

Erika Schultz of the Seattle Times. They underwent a project to take pictures of displaced

individuals and let them write in their own words their feelings, frustrations, and dreams on

pieces of paper that they gave them. Sometimes it is easy to think that the homeless have brought

their fate upon themselves and did something that directly caused them to be without a home, but

Beason helps dispel this belief. A stunning number of the people we meet are well-educated and

highly skilled, and hold down jobs or receive government financial aid, but still cant afford to

clear their debts or pay rent on an apartment.28 Beason is able to humanize these individuals and

brings up the point that homeless people can just be a victim of circumstance, but regardless they

are still worth working to help. Beason also writes about the different camps that spring up in the

Seattle area. One in particular is called the Field of Dreams and is located in between a crossing

of underpasses in the SoDo district. However, these camps do not last for long, every so often

they will be swept by city workers due to the dangerous living conditions of these environments.

This is one way that Seattles cultural landscapes continue to constantly evolve. Entire cultures

of homeless people will set up tents in any free area they can find only to be displaced over and

over again every two weeks or so. This perpetual relocation is an inhumane way to live

especially because many of these displaced individuals have much benefit to give to society if
28
Beason, Tyrone. "Portraits of Homelessness." The Seattle Times, 4 May 2017. Web. 3 June 2017.
they could only get back on their feet. For this reason, solutions proposed by Baker and Mass

must be carried out, not only for the benefit of the currently homeless, but the benefit of the

entirety of Seattles society as well.

It is no debate that homelessness in Seattle is a problem, but the controversy comes with

how to deal with the problem. Some seem apathetic towards the issue because they dont feel

impacted by it, others would rather give up our parks than live with the great rates of

homelessness, and still more feel the desire to do all they can to protect both the parks and the

homeless at the same time. Finding shelter for the homeless would surely be worth the cost and it

would simultaneously solve one of Seattles most grievous problems while making parks more

accessible and less polluted by inhabitants with no where else to go.

 Works Cited

Baker, Maxwell. "Under the Bridge: Utilizing Covered Liminal Spaces for Formal Homeless

Encampments in the City of Seattle." Thesis. University of Washington, 2016.

Proquest LLC, 2016. Web. 1 June 2017.

Beason, Tyrone. "Portraits of Homelessness." The Seattle Times, 4 May 2017. Web. 3 June

2017.

Cronon, W. The Trouble with Wilderness. N.p.: Shiplee, B, 2004. Print.

Daniels, Chris. "Council Plan Would Allow Homeless Camps on Thousands of Acres." KING.

N.p., 07 Oct. 2016. Web. 05 June 2017.

"General Rules." Recreation.gov - Explore Your America. N.p., n.d. Web. 05 June 2017.

"Get the Facts About the City's Camping Ordinance." City of Vancouver Washington. N.p., n.d.

Web. 04 June 2017.

Groover, Heidi. "Mayor Ed Murray Bails on Plan for Homelessness Levy." The Stranger. Index

Newspapers LLC, 3 Apr. 2017. Web. 5 June 2017.

"Homeless Are Flocking to America's Forests, But It's Damaging the Land." Vice. N.p., n.d.

Web. 05 June 2017.

"Homelessness in Parks: A Summary of Results from an NRPA Membership Survey." NRPA.

N.p., n.d. Web. 5 June 2017.

Homelessness Response. "New Count Provides City with Additional Tool to Address

Homelessness." Blog post. Homelessness Response Blog. Seattle.gov, 1 June 2017.

Web. 4 June 2017.

Klingle, Matthew W. Emerald City: An Environmental History of Seattle. New Haven: Yale UP,

2008. Print.
Mass, Cliff. "The Homeless Crisis in Seattle: Time for a New Approach." Blog post. Blogspot, 9

May 2017. Web. 28 May 2017.

Muir, John. Travels in Alaska. Boston: Houghton Mifflin, 1915. Yosemite. Web. 3 June 2017.

"National Park Service History: Philosophical Underpinnings of the National Park Idea."

National Parks Service. U.S. Department of the Interior, n.d. Web. 04 June 2017.

"One Year Later, Camping Ordinance Yields Little Change for Areas Homeless." The

Columbian. N.p., n.d. Web. 05 June 2017.

"Recreation." Dispersed Camping Guidelines. N.p., n.d. Web. 05 June 2017.

"Yosemite National Park History & Culture." National Parks Service. U.S. Department of the

Interior, n.d. Web. 03 June 2017.