171
7
However, this study by Johansen et al. (2014) is flawed in several ways. First, the
study involved a number of questionable normative assessments. For instance, one
of the mapped land-use categories is labelled ‘worn lichen pastures’. These are
lichen pastures above the tree line, and no dramatic changes in this category were
detected over time. Yet, surprisingly, this category was not included in the estimates
of lichen changes by Johansen et al. (2014). There is also the question of what
‘worn’ implies. What are the conditions that these pastures are being compared to?
Or, what is an acceptable amount of lichen and who decides what this amount
should be? This is after all an old pastoral landscape in which reindeer pastoralism
has been practiced for hundreds of years. Therefore, one should naturally expect a
pastoral impact on the vegetation, meaning that this is not an untouched wilderness.
In addition, and even more problematically, the loss of lichen cover only refers
to a category called ‘lichen ground’. These are open areas below the tree line dominated by lichen. It is quite logical that this land-use category has decreased as there
is encroachment of bushes and trees in such areas in most Norwegian mountains.
Tømmervik et al. (2009) found, for instance, a doubling of birch in this area between
1957 and 2006. This is an ongoing process of landscape change all over Norway,
which is usually attributed to climate change leading to warmer and wetter summers
(Aas 1969; Bryn 2008) combined with reduced grazing by livestock in some areas.
Despite this, in discussions of landscape change in Sámi pastoral areas, this conclusion seems to be forgotten, and instead overstocking of reindeer is blamed.
Based on the satellite data, simplified colour maps are made to illustrate the
threat of overstocking. . Figure 7.3 is such a map, which is reproduced from the
most recent report of the office of the Auditor General (Riksrevisjonen 2012: 51). In
this figure, the complexities of the pastoral landscape are reduced to a rough colour
map, with a large section in red labelled ‘overgrazed’ and a small, ever shrinking part
in white labelled ‘intact’. The connotative purpose of using red is obviously to indicate danger (see 7 Chap. 2 on the connotative meaning of images). However, one
wonders what the baseline is of the notion of ‘intact’ being invoked here: an ‘original’ landscape from the 1970s, which would have remained exactly the same without
reindeer pastoralism?
This map is powerful as a political tool and is often used by ministers or government officials eager to demonstrate that there is an overabundance of reindeer in
comparison to the grazing resources available. . Figure 7.3 efficiently communicates the perceived danger of overstocking.
In his seminal book ‘How to lie with maps’, Monmonier (1991) points out that
maps are often used in political propaganda:
» A good propagandist knows how to shape opinion by manipulating maps…
The propagandist molds the map’s message by emphasizing supporting features, suppressing contradictory information, and choosing provocative, dramatic symbols. People trust maps, and intriguing maps attract the eye as well
as connote authority. Naïve citizens willingly accept as truth maps based on a
biased and sometimes fraudulent selection of facts (p. 87).
7.1 · Debates About Overgrazing
7
However, this study by Johansen et al. (2014) is flawed in several ways. First, the
study involved a number of questionable normative assessments. For instance, one
of the mapped land-use categories is labelled ‘worn lichen pastures’. These are
lichen pastures above the tree line, and no dramatic changes in this category were
detected over time. Yet, surprisingly, this category was not included in the estimates
of lichen changes by Johansen et al. (2014). There is also the question of what
‘worn’ implies. What are the conditions that these pastures are being compared to?
Or, what is an acceptable amount of lichen and who decides what this amount
should be? This is after all an old pastoral landscape in which reindeer pastoralism
has been practiced for hundreds of years. Therefore, one should naturally expect a
pastoral impact on the vegetation, meaning that this is not an untouched wilderness.
In addition, and even more problematically, the loss of lichen cover only refers
to a category called ‘lichen ground’. These are open areas below the tree line dominated by lichen. It is quite logical that this land-use category has decreased as there
is encroachment of bushes and trees in such areas in most Norwegian mountains.
Tømmervik et al. (2009) found, for instance, a doubling of birch in this area between
1957 and 2006. This is an ongoing process of landscape change all over Norway,
which is usually attributed to climate change leading to warmer and wetter summers
(Aas 1969; Bryn 2008) combined with reduced grazing by livestock in some areas.
Despite this, in discussions of landscape change in Sámi pastoral areas, this conclusion seems to be forgotten, and instead overstocking of reindeer is blamed.
Based on the satellite data, simplified colour maps are made to illustrate the
threat of overstocking. . Figure 7.3 is such a map, which is reproduced from the
most recent report of the office of the Auditor General (Riksrevisjonen 2012: 51). In
this figure, the complexities of the pastoral landscape are reduced to a rough colour
map, with a large section in red labelled ‘overgrazed’ and a small, ever shrinking part
in white labelled ‘intact’. The connotative purpose of using red is obviously to indicate danger (see 7 Chap. 2 on the connotative meaning of images). However, one
wonders what the baseline is of the notion of ‘intact’ being invoked here: an ‘original’ landscape from the 1970s, which would have remained exactly the same without
reindeer pastoralism?
This map is powerful as a political tool and is often used by ministers or government officials eager to demonstrate that there is an overabundance of reindeer in
comparison to the grazing resources available. . Figure 7.3 efficiently communicates the perceived danger of overstocking.
In his seminal book ‘How to lie with maps’, Monmonier (1991) points out that
maps are often used in political propaganda:
» A good propagandist knows how to shape opinion by manipulating maps…
The propagandist molds the map’s message by emphasizing supporting features, suppressing contradictory information, and choosing provocative, dramatic symbols. People trust maps, and intriguing maps attract the eye as well
as connote authority. Naïve citizens willingly accept as truth maps based on a
biased and sometimes fraudulent selection of facts (p. 87).
7.1 · Debates About Overgrazing