RESIDENCY SURVEY: ARTIST

With supporting quotes from collaborating scientists Marcus Yates (SERF) & Gabrielle Lebbink (now an independent ecologist), David Tucker (QUT/SERF) and Eleanor Velasquez (TERN).

Date:  6/12/24                  

1. a) Motivation

• What were your original reasons and motivations in applying for the residency and did these change during the residency?

My reasons and motivations for the residency were inflected not only by my longstanding engagement with art+(ecological) science practices and environmentally engaged/activist practices – but also by the relatively recent focus on AI that had accompanied the release of mainstream tool Chat GPT (released Nov 2022). I was interested in counterbalancing the apparently ubiquitous discussions around artificial intelligences at that time – which predominantly focussed upon intelligences with traits predominantly ‘like us’. Given the innate link between AI and our longstanding extractivist (and often self-destructive) ontologies, my interest lay in understanding other kinds of intelligences that might help us shape better futures. It struck me that the more than human worlds clearly possess extraordinary intelligences – that are often unlike anything that which we might routinely classify as such (i.e. things that think, behave or reason like we do).

This line of thinking coincided with an ongoing relationship I had brokered with an ecological research station in SE Qld (Samford Ecological Research Station/SERF) – where I had recently secured unprecedented permission to restore a currently cleared block of land back to high conservation-value forest. Having already conducted an initial burn of the site in winter 2023, I sensed that the very evident, ‘natural’, connective architects and the architectures of the rapid ecological transitions happening on that site, were clearly intelligences that we all could really learn from.

 

“Well, I’ve always come to understand through my work that,  there is an intelligence in our natural ecosystems. And your project was initiating this. So, from there it was all about observation and seeing how the forest would respond, .. and to observe and to wonder, and to learn from what is happening was really exciting. And that’s what motivated me to help out wherever I can”. (Marcus Yates)

 

These ideas were further inspired by the powerful writings of Karen Barad, and James Bridle who writes of:

“the complexity and variety of nonhuman intelligence, the subject hood and agency of every being, the potentiality and politics of technology, and the wealth of knowledge and ideas we have to gain by opening ourselves to the more than human world with which we are in inextricably and gloriously entangled. James Bridle”: Ways of Being: p307

My aims at the outset therefore were:

• To work with the assistance of an experienced science and land management team to encourage the re-growth of a patch of land at SERF back to what was predicted to be the originating forest, driven less by regimes of cultivation and control, but rather by allowing the innate intelligences within such ecological systems to work their magic to regenerate the forest passively. Could the site, degraded as it was, and set in a time of global warming, still successfully, slowly return to health with minimal intervention.
• To name, and consider, the re-growth of that forest as the project’s ‘meta-artwork’
• To observe whether innate intelligence of those ‘natural’ systems could in some way be able to influence/direct/interact with additional, symbiotic, process-based artworks installed across the entire site (called Forest Art Intelligences (FAI)).

My intentions were to spend the 2024 ANAT residency both deepening my connections with ecological science, observing the changes at the site and over time beginning to understand what such ‘FAIs’ might look like, behave like or become enacted as.’ The FAIs, I resolved, should be dedicated to the health and evolution of the forest (i.e. they should be primarily artworks created ‘for’ the forest). And once established, I would then find ways to bring them to public view through other extended artmaking and science processes – a stage I envisaged happening primarily after the ANAT residence in 2025. That future phase of the project would therefore ask, how future audiences might experience the artworks either across the regeneration site itself, remotely, or in galleries, festivals and exhibitions.

As part of the residency, I also intended to present early experimental outcomes of the collaborative ideas at ISEA 2024 in Brisbane, and scope a future on-line presence for the work that would become part of a range of public facing outcomes coming over 2025-6.

These motivations still fundamentally remain true at the end of the residency – and have framed the intensive work and conceptual development over the past year.

 

• Have your personal expectations been met or not? (please provide examples).

100%. I was privy to an extraordinary learning experience through my regular interactions with the science team, who were generous and willing throughout. I also got to spend significant time on Country, regularly returning to the site in ways that I had probably never had a similar opportunity to do before. And despite usual fears that such a project might be too ambitious or unrealisable – I was able to step through each process and phase slowly in a supportive environment over the extended time available – and therefore remain open, with the team, to making decisions and calls when the time was right.

It’s correct to say that despite the depth of process I engaged in over the year (evidenced I hope in the blog), there is still relatively little physically added to the site at SERF (@ Dec 2024) beyond the wonderful/prolific natural re-growth, a 2 tonne translocated log and some recording/monitoring equipment. But this is in my mind seems wholly appropriate for now – if only because sincerely the making an artwork ‘for the forest’ is a responsibility not to be squandered or taken lightly – and one that might take years to evolve. Time based work, but not at a ‘normal’ human timescale ..

So, at least for now, a large, dead Eucalyptus tereticornis log – relocated to become a habitat and site for forest encouragement, is the most subtle, tangible image of what is to come in terms of future interventions (principally those of ecological encouragement/acceleration, detection, monitoring and translation).

 

1. b) Your Project

• Can you summarise your project in two sentences?

Forest Art Intelligence (FAI) aims to understand how to develop art forms (Art Intelligences) capable of growing and evolving alongside a regenerating forest, whilst also actively benefiting that forest’s health. These hybrid/experimental/organic art forms will ultimately underpin a creative public engagement strategy designed to highlight the intelligent natural regrowth processes of a forest – thereby promoting a more inclusive definition of non-human ‘intelligence’. (For more details see this post).

“.. you know, these things kind of arise, you know, seemingly out of nowhere. But they’re all part of this sort of, you know, like natural system. And I think from my understanding, that was reflected in in in the title of your work; seeing that sort of emergent behaviour or that kind of emergent processes as a form of intelligence. So, you know, the “Forest Art Intelligence” project”. (David Tucker)

 

• What were the most important learning experiences for you during the residency?

When working with slowly evolving landscapes, take long breaths and wait till the next step makes itself known. You are a stranger in that place, with no particular authority over the artwork site, despite ‘ownership’ stories we might tell ourselves. Carefully listening to that Country (something site visitor with the ANAT team  Palawa woman Angie Abdillaclearly reminded us of), and waiting for the proper time, is something to slowly learn. Our First Nations custodians know and teach this always.

I also wanted to inadvertently avoid the project being/becoming extractive at its site – a decision which required a lot of negotiation and reflection at all levels. My mentor scientists helped me a lot with this – with my key learning being that making work that is truly beneficial and reciprocal for the site and its residents, requires long time, immense patience, necessary restraint and fine attunement of senses to the intelligences coursing through the land and air. And also spending the time to witness and learn from the attunement of others: How for example could the botanists on the team be skilled enough to identify so many plants at the outset and during the following winter in what looks to ‘you and I’ like a mowed paddock, or a wintery grassy field with emerging trees … Extraordinary ..

 

1. c) Personal Experience: Collaboration, Communication, Exchange

• What kinds of collaboration with scientists did you experience, with whom and how intensive was your exchange?

“I expected that it would be like, a pretty evolving process , depending on what was happening at the site. And also, external factors from what we were allowed to do and, time. Oh, yeah, everyone’s, various time commitments and things, but, I think naturally these kinds of things have to be an evolutionary process.” (Gabrielle Lebbink)

Being an outdoor research station that people normally visit periodically – rather than being a daily place of work (except that is for the site land manager Marcus Yates) the collaborations were always well paced and evolved organically over the weeks and months at different times and contexts.

“I guess, probably like any discipline, you tend to get a bit, stuck. .. Basically, everyone you talk to every day is doing the same thing. And you all kind of think about things in a very similar way. So, for me, you know, I think it was being able to appreciate a different perspective on how, I guess how you know a project like this, and that would unfold… So, it’s good to talk to people who aren’t in that field and who think about things in a different way, o kind of open your eyes to things that you don’t particularly see, particularly as a sort of a natural scientist.” (David Tucker)

 

 Each scientist took on a different role in the collaboration, arguably consistent with their temperament, openness to, or interest in some of the ‘extra to science’ unknowns that I was bringing into their worlds . Dr. David Tucker (QUT Landscape Ecologist) and Dr. Gabrielle Lebbink (QUT Freelance plant and Invasion Ecologist) both had strong botanical and forest restoration experience. Marcus Yates (SERF Site Technician) was SERF’s site manager/technician with a plethora of local skills including forest management and planting; Dr. Eleanor Velasquez (Education and Training Manager at Terrestrial Ecosystem Research Network (TERN) Australia) was a science educator, ecologist and someone who had had some prior experience in the arts; and occasional mentor A/Prof Caroline Hauxwell (QUT Microbiologist and Agricultural Biotechnologist) taught us about her soil fungal analysis work – also bringing her students onboard for a site post burn analysis.

“From an artistic point of view, the way of understanding, you know, something that’s essentially the same thing (as science) is more, you know, it’s free of flowing, and, you know, I guess, yeah, less rigid compared to, you know, like, a highly formal scientific approach”. (David Tucker)

 

Each scientist complemented the team in different but powerful ways – coming as to be expected with different strengths and expertise: i.e. alternately as scientific teachers, logicians, analysers and experimentalists. The science team were also open to the application of lesser known or emerging ideas that interested them – drawn either from the science or the arts – especially understanding that we were not seeking to exert precise, tight or re-creatable protocols over the site as would normally be the case. They  were also each comfortable in brainstorming and feeding back and forth around the ideas we were grappling with, and how they might best find form (i.e.  approaches to the (lite) site management, or what kind of additions would be most appropriate for the FAI components (with the general agreement that the addition of appropriate organic materials as site accelerators would work well at all levels). In these ways we all kept our expectations level and open and were happy to await developments that were agreeable to and representative of us all.

“..going back to first principles of the joy of doing something, because humans need more than just graphs. And, you know, scientifically worded reports. I think we need something that gives us that full sense, through all of our senses, of how great something is. And it’s nice to go back to that, and it’s nice to also just have that feeling, but in relation to something that you’ve studied to a very high level in a scientific way, so such as ecology, such as I have.” (Eleanor Velasquez)

Modalities of collaboration were therefore necessarily framed by the changing needs of the site. Not surprisingly ecological information or ecological approaches were well covered by Dr. David Tucker, Marcus Yates, Dr. Gabrielle Lebbink and Dr. Eleanor Velasquez – with David (Tucker) providing big picture site management and details of monitoring protocols (such as ‘acoustic observatory’ bird identification). Marcus also offered lived, practical, land management tips alongside a warm, esoteric/spiritual lens that indicated his emotive, connective and embodied relationship to the intelligent intensities alive at the site. For me, he was someone who had walked on that Country daily for decades – and it showed. A/Prof Caroline Hauxwell offered a deep passion for soil microbiology, and she invited Eleanor and I on multiple occasions to visit to her lab (e.g. experimental sessions (1), (2) & (3), and allowed us access to her students). Eleanor interestingly crossed somewhat across all these spectrums, with both her pragmatic lenses honed by her role as an education manager at TERN – in a world of deep data protocols – in tandem with her overt desire to engage with the more subjective creative aspects of the site and the process (as evidenced in her lucid explanatory video for the SERF science engagement trail FAI stop. (Also see this associated blog page).

 

“I guess it, you know, be very fluid in your thinking and be scientific, but also creative in that space, which I find very appealing to the way I think”. (Eleanor Velasquez)

Consulting across the team both separately, and collectively (especially for big decisions) allowed us to work with our broad and evolving range of perspectives – but always in an atmosphere that was supportive. In essence we all knew innately that we were members of the same ‘Community of Care’

 

• Was it difficult for you to communicate with and understand the scientists?

Normally no – until of course they went into the deeper levels of their science, which I think they often filtered out for me – but if not, would lead me to do a lot of background reading and learning – to understand what it was that then needed to be asked/understood. In that sense the scientists read the room and were gentle but clear with me – and were always keen, especially when prompted, to pass on papers that fascinated them – e.g. this one from Dr. Gab Lebbink which led ultimately to the log translocation experiment in late 2024.

 

• How did the people in your lab react to your creative input or your reactions? Did this include any critical or ethical feedback?

“..your adaptability, I think comes through. ..you’re a very deep thinker, very considerate of everybody’s, comments and, yeah, very considerate, I would say”. (Marcus Yates)

“I find working with Keith really easy.. Keith is just a really open person to ideas and thoughts. And I don’t think you don’t seem to me to be the sort of person to shut ideas down readily. You’re very thoughtful and considerate and a very good listener, which not everybody can do. But yes, it’s been very easy and collaborative and a wonderful experience”. (Eleanor Velasquez)

Overall, I found the science team to be extremely supportive. They welcomed me into their culture. They made me part of some very real decision-making capacity over the site and they included the project in the permanent ‘Discovering Science’ trail now installed permanently on site (with a stop on the trail specifically dedicated to the project). They also invited me to present at the SERF open day initiated by Eleanor Velasquez, and were very positive about the way the project evolved – and the care and attention that was clearly being heaped upon the site and its flourishing ecology. I also of course made myself aware of the ethics of that site to avoid us making inadvertent contraventions.

 

“I’d say, Yeah, most people were, you know, in the in the at the very least, curious and mostly highly supportive of the collaboration”. (Dave Tucker)

“I think everyone was super interested in the project. And keen. I think there’s a lot of people keen to science art, collaboration, because they are really good examples of it. Improving science, communication. And,  also, yeah. Being able to communicate the things in science that we can’t communicate with numbers necessarily. I think there’s a lot of things that are, like, qualitative. And I think that, side of that helps. , so, yeah, I think everyone was super keen”. (Gabrielle Lebbink)

1. d) Knowledge production

• Can you describe your working methods and processes in the lab?

Observing, discussing, walking, listening, sitting, installing, spying, browsing, reflecting, reading, weeding, iterating, rendering, meditating, poring over, examining, writing, deciphering, translating, photographing, filming, scanning, recording, iterating  ..

 

“You’re always asking questions, Keith, and conversing with, with all involved, yeah, the questions you were always interrogating”. (Marcus Yates)

—

“I know that Keith has been very interested in actively reading papers that the other scientific members sent. Gabrielle was, always coming up with really interesting papers that she’d read that were related to the project, and Keith was involved in a survey of the site and the transect work and things like that”. (Eleanor Velasquez) 

—

“Well, I got the impression you had many, technical skills. So .. even though you’re, nonspecialist as far as the scientific research goes, you have very strong technical skills and a strong interest in in the scientific process. And it’s probably a bit like I, you know, I was saying, before you, you know, both, the scientific approach to understand the world and an artist’s approach to understanding a world, are both highly creative processes”. (Dave Tucker)

—

 “I guess, a slow and measured approach that he (Keith) allows the time, .. he has the ability to allow the time – to take the time to listen and to absorb what might work for a project without rushing in, and we had the fortune of not .. having a very strict time frame. And yes, it was a year. But there was always that – I think that feeling of it’s gonna be a longer-term project, when the main artwork or modification to the site really happens”. (Eleanor Velasquez)

• What level of access did you have to scientific research (data, visualisations, field work, etc.)?

In general as much as I requested or sought out, i.e. access to historic data and scans on the site, access to all of TERN’s database through collaboration with Dr. Eleanor Velasquez, and access and processing of LiDAR scans of the site, some of which I commissioned.

 

• Has your art practice been influenced by the working environment in the lab? (Please provide examples).

In numerous ways: for example, adaptability to working outside, deploying light-weight and weather sensitive approaches, and particularly balancing question, intention, structure and community responsibility with creative licence/flow. Having such a responsibility to care for the site , and with that consideration inflecting all choices – the venue, arguably unlike a gallery, impacted the entire process – and almost always, I sensed, in a good way. It reminded me again that past traditions of our disciplines, such as land art or even much of environmental art, was really not in the interest of the more than human world – and that sincere and lasting contributions from the arts ‘for’ and ‘to’ ecology had a relative dearth of strong prior examples. I too had arguably failed this challenge in the past and at this late career moment I felt/feel the need to seek out better pathways through this process.

 

1. e) Artistic influences on the scientific environment

• How and what did the scientists learn from you and what kind of traces will you leave in the lab at the completion of the residency?

I think that the scientists would have observed that contemporary artists have a far more diverse set of practices than they might have previously imagined. I believe that I demonstrated that we artists are good listeners, and avid interconnectors, capable of bringing disparate things together in ways that can make new forms of sense and capitulate new forms of sense-making – despite sometimes breaking the self-imposed rules of other disciplines. I believe that I demonstrated that we are rigorous and methodical, and yet never fearful of taking apparent low middle or high roads towards destinations that may appear hard to discern or describe:- and that what we find there sometimes, maybe unexpectedly to us all, can make sense, maybe even be change making..

“To bring elements into the forest, for example, the log and the decomposing ability of the log and its presence within forest systems; that is so funky. Yeah. So funky indeed, and the images that you’ve captured and the sounds – a compliment to ever evolving forest. And to bring that into a visual piece of art is wonderful. Yeah, it truly is wonderful”. (Marcus Yates)

The project outcome will ultimately be a fully functioning forest – that will evolve over decades whether I am or am not involved – a forest allowed to come back to full life. My hope is that as that forest evolves in perpetuity – which is currently the intention, long after the any tangible artforms and additional materials have re-integrated themselves back into that sacred place.

 

1. f) Broader influences

• Do you think the residency had a wider influence (on your lab, the research organisation, society in general)?

“Oh, most definitely. Yeah. Keith will always be present for eternity within that project! Yeah. Your presence, through my eyes always be there, and I think through other people’s eyes as well, what you’ve been a part of in creating is, timeless and yeah, very exciting”. (Marcus Yates).

—

“I feel like Keith was, or this project had .. an allowance for percolation and listening”. (Eleanor Velasquez)

–

The impact on the site/SERF is clear in terms of the footprint of the artwork, and the trust that this has generated will make other projects that come after mine there be all the easier to instigate. Artists, I believe I showed, are able to work within respectful and ethical guidelines that govern sites such as these, but also pursue sympathetic outcomes that were never envisaged when those guidelines were set.

–

“And I guess,  you know more broadly as society. I mean, you know, we’ve kind of I mean, just recently started opening up the facility to the broader public, and we’ve had people in, like, local community groups and stuff like that. But there are people coming in and seeing what we’re doing there. And this is part of, you know, promoting that sort of collaboration and research. , more broadly as well”. (David Tucker)

—

“Yeah, well, the site’s still there, so it’s gonna be there for a long time. So, you know, that’s gonna be your legacy that you’re gonna have, like, a forest growing there. It’s gonna be pretty good. I mean, like I said, I went there the other day, and it’s amazing, like, you know, like, in the next two years, those trees are going to get pretty big. I imagine so”. (David Tucker)

Obviously, any broader social impacts remain to be seen as the project evolves into the future – and whilst its notoriously hard to satisfactorily connect the presentation of artworks with changed social attitudes and behaviour patterns, I’d hope that the works when realised will make their own small mark. 2024 after all has been marked by dangerous lurches to the right – in our state (Qld), federally and in the US and Europe – almost all of which come with reduced care for land, and its first Nations custodians. Our responsibility as artists and change makers therefore becomes ever the more critical – to use our skills to pursue justice for all, especially those of us in a position of significant privilege and profile – i.e. like ANAT Synapse residents.

 

• What is your impression of the residency in retrospective: did it contribute to a better exchange between art and science?

Yes, in the case of the particular sciences that I engaged. Without overly generalising – the project was widely discussed across my collaborators’ peer and colleague group with majority enthusiasm (both for the objectives, the possibilities of telling better stories around science and the possibility of what might emerge through the art-science process that could be beneficial to conservation movements more generally).

–

“.. as it’s opened up (i.e. access to SERF) and these sort of, projects have, become more established ..I think it’s made it a lot more vibrant. You know, it’s and it’s sort of, making people aware of,  I guess the thing the same thing can be valued in different ways, you know?” (David Tucker)

—

yeah, I think totally. I think, I think in general, it’s refreshing for us scientists to view things through an artistic lens, and I think it does .. really help to capture some of those things that we don’t usually capture. And I think a lot of those things are actually the more tangible stuff so that people the most people can kind of relate to. So, yeah, I think it’s great. (Gabrielle Lebbink)

 

• Did the residency have any public reach or engagement?

1. ISEA 2024 Showing (Analog Intelligence)
2. Leonardo Laser Talk at ISEA 2024
3. ANAT Micro Talk, 10 Oct,2024
4. A permanent station and web presence for the SERF Discovering Science Trail
5. Public Presentation and Analog Intelligence artwork preview at the 2024 SERF Open day
6. Keith Armstrong’s ANAT Blog, artist website (embodiedmedia) and use of images for ANAT Synapse 2025 campaign.
   (ANAT/TERN/Embodiedmedia) social media and news campaigns ongoing and ANAT Digest
7. Internal publicity at QUT – and via the MoreThanHumanFutures group.
8. Google Arts and Culture (forthcoming)

 

• Were there any unexpected outcomes?

Better understanding of the responsibilities of making work that is truly non-extractive, that is ecologically active rather than being only ‘expressive of something’, and that is beneficial for the site itself, rather than being a vehicle for varied forms of human consumption, aesthetic, political or otherwise. . And never knowing how close you might be able to come to that ideal .. which necessarily will limit mark making on site maybe more than I had initially imagined.

A pivot ½ way through the year – from an earlier approach of active revegetation in the gulley area of the site – to a passive/steady state revegetation approach because of a rare quail visiting the site.

An ongoing challenge to establish who has Traditional Ownership of the SERF site and who we can consult with – something that the site’s managers had intended to resolve – but that have as yet been unable to deliver.

 

1. g) Suggested improvements

• What could be improved for future residencies?

n/a

1. h) Further comments

• Would you like to add anything further?

This 2024 residency has been a definite career highlight. I am very thankful for this second extraordinary experience (prior Synapse was 2012) – another amazing, productive process-driven year. And thank you also for the ongoing online profile that ANAT have generated – so many thanks!

—

“I am thoroughly enjoying this journey with Keith. And, the rest of the scientists Eleanor, Gabe and, and David. I’m so much looking forward to every day, as you walk through that area the Forest Art Intelligence site,  yeah, I’m in awe, really of, how the earth can heal itself if left, to its own devices and to observe that, and connect art and science together is really exciting. I’ve used that word many times, but it is truly exciting to be a part of that and to, and to walk through there on most days of the week”. (Marcus Yates)

—

“It was really interesting, like, you know, a different experience. I never thought I would get to do that. And it .. was something I’ve been thinking about, I guess reinvigorating my creative side for a while in a more formal sense. So, it was really nice to be able to play in that space through this project. (Eleanor Velasquez)I think it’s useful for these collaborations to continue. .. I think it’s important that people get an idea of the perspectives of people from different disciplines, and particularly how we understand, you know, the environment using different, you know, creative approaches, whether that be art or science”. (David Tucker)

Date: 3-4 Dec 2024

The following texts are transcriptions from interviews conducted with each of the scientists in early December 2024.    They are unedited  except for any repetition of words/phrases in spoken sentences..    

The science team were:  Marcus Yates (SERF) & Gabrielle Lebbink (now independent), David Tucker (QUT/SERF), Eleanor Velasquez (TERN)  with additional input from A/Prof Caroline Hauxwell                                                

Quote key ..
Marcus Yates = (MY)
Dr. Gabrielle Lebbink = (GL)
Dr. David Tucker = (DT)
Dr. Eleanor Velasquez = (EV)

“The forest art intelligence project

provides this really unique opportunity

to bring together two very different

disciplines of art on one hand and

science on the other and use the lenses

of these different disciplines to

translate the innate intelligence of an

ecosystem and the regrowth of that

ecosystem into a different form.”

Eleanor Velasquez from ‘SERF Engaging Science Trail’,
YouTube accessible video.

 

Organisation:

1. a) Motivation

• What were your original reasons and motivations to participate in the residency project?

“.. when you initially approached, and you wanted to do a project and let an area effectively be without any human invent intervention. I thought that a completely exciting and project that was outside my life history of re-foresting, where there’s, intense human activity involved with the preparation and the planting and then the establishment of the forest to let a previously regimentally cleared and slashed block of land, fallow and see what the result of that is that that was, really interesting to me”. (MY)

 

“The art side of it. The creative aspect of it.  Well, I’ve always come to understand through my work that,  there is an intelligence in our natural ecosystems. And your project was initiating this. So, from there it was all about observation and seeing how the forest would respond, to no human intervention and to observe and to wonder, and to learn from what is happening was really exciting. And that’s what motivated me to help out wherever I can”. (MY)

 

“Providing another avenue for science communication”
(G L)

I think after having those kinds of initial chats with you, about nature intelligence, ..I thought it was, kind of a unique way of demonstrating those, I guess, the intricacies of the connectedness of nature and the intelligence of at different levels. And I think the concept of looking at nature intelligence was quite interesting for me. (GL)

 

“I guess from a scientific perspective, .. there was kind of a fairly clear research question, on top of what you were doing as well, Like, I mean, basically trying to understand how, you know, an historically modified pasture – how that responds to passive regeneration processes. I mean, Marcus (Yates) had been actively revegetating parts of SERF. And but there hadn’t been any attempt to just, you know, leave something alone and see how it responds, except accidentally at some places. But typically, that would get cleared again. But this was the first time .. that had happened on the property. So, like I said from my perspective, yeah, it was to see how .. how the re how the vegetation and the ecosystem more broadly responded to those passive regeneration effects”. (DT) 

 

“it’s interesting, .. I guess, probably like any discipline, you tend to get a bit, stuck. .. Basically, everyone you talk to every day is doing the same thing. And you all kind of think about things in a very similar way. So for me, you know, I think it was being able to appreciate a different perspective on how, I guess how you know a project like this, and that would unfold. Really? I mean, you know, as a as an Ecologist .. you know, .. I see science as a quite a creative process. It’s,  you know, it’s highly formalised. So, you have fairly .. strong guard rails. So you can get a bit, you know, tunnel vision sometimes. So, it’s good to talk to people who aren’t in that field and who think about things in a different way, o kind of open your eyes to things that you don’t particularly see, particularly as a sort of a natural scientist.” (DT)

 

.. I think a project such as this one, for me, as someone who first trained in theatre and then came over to science but still definitely plays in both spaces in my brain. Although I was in denial for many years, gives us that feeling of, going back to first principles of the joy of doing something, because humans need more than just graphs. And, you know, scientifically worded reports. I think we need something that gives us that full sense, through all of our senses, of how great something is. And it’s nice to go back to that, and it’s nice to also just have that feeling, but in relation to something that you’ve studied to a very high level in a scientific way, so such as ecology, such as I have. (EV)

 

“.. and having seen your presentation of your artwork, Keith, at the SERF Community Day, which I think led to me just emailing you. So, is there anything that we can work on together? , because I, I think I have capacity in this role at turn. And also, I think, going beyond traditional scientific communication is a perfect, what perfectly aligns with education and outreach, which is my role at TERN” (EV)

 

“So, yeah, I think that’s for me. It’s just like that beautiful marriage of the different things and sort of being able to in within this context of this project, I guess it, you know, be very fluid in your thinking and be scientific, but also creative in that space, which I find very appealing to the way I think”. (EV)

 

• What kind of expectations did you have, and have they been met?

“I wanted to go in there without any expectation. , because I didn’t want to have a I. I still want my subjective view to, to influence my , observation of it. And the observation is sight and sound and smells and colours. And yeah, it was simply that he (keith) had no expectations”. (MY)

 

“I don’t know if I had any strong expectations. I expected things to change, but I didn’t I actually didn’t realise how much they would change. I mean, I was just on the site yesterday and I’d been there a little while ago. But, you know, we’ve had a lot of rain, and it’s started to warm up. And I’ve always known, you know, because I’ve been, you know, walking around that place for over 10 years now. And I always known on that little hill to be quite diverse and species rich. So, I’d always noticed that there were plants there that I wouldn’t see somewhere else. Or I’d see a lot of, a lot of, plants that would be retained that for some reason, we were missing, basically in other areas that were kind of quite similar. .. So, yeah, Like I said, I expected something to change. But walking around yesterday, I noticed how, how large some of those Eucalypts and Acacia had become just by essentially removing a tractor, you know, running over the top of them all the time.  and so, I was actually quite surprised how well it’s responded in the short period of time that it’s just been kind of left to its own devices”. (DT)

 

“I expected that it would be like, a pretty evolving process , depending on what was happening at the site. And also, external factors from what we were allowed to do and, time. Oh, yeah, everyone’s, various time commitments and things, but, I think naturally these kinds of things have to be an evolutionary process.” (GL)

1. b) The Residency

• Can you give examples of how you have been involved in the residency?

“mostly, from a consultancy point of view .. and to share with yourself and David and Eleanor and Gabby, my aspect of my historical working life within forestry systems from previously managing forest systems and establishing reforestation projects”. (MY)

 

“I guess Keith and I explored some avenues that were .. I think additive. I don’t think they subtracted anything from the process, but like going into labs and being taught scientific protocols for specific microbiology, what would you call it? Methodologies, for soil microbial and then sort of making the call. I guess at some point that we weren’t gonna by through discussion, lots of discussions. But we weren’t gonna go there. And then the other part .. spending quite a bit of time at SERF, as part of the project. And as part of my role in TERN earlier this year, we’re still in 2024 not quite out, I developed a scientific educational trail in collaboration with SERF, and I made sure that Keith’s project, or our project, was part of that trail , if I wasn’t running that project, I don’t know if we would have made it onto the trail, but we did so that’s a good thing, I think. And we got some really amazing, collateral out of that. Such as the videos that, that Nico Rako videoed of us explaining the project for that trail, and then just sort of when Keith needed me, I was sort of around, and sometimes I came out to SERF and we would discuss options for, you know, what was it? The accelerators and the small modification type things that we would do with carefully and in a considered way, at the site and how that would play out. So, a bit of a sounding board, perhaps. What’s my role? yeah, yeah. And trying to sort of bring anything that I knew from my own personal, I guess background in ecology, and career. But also, things that I learned in my role at TERN and what TERN could assist with”. (EV)

 

“My main involvement, I guess, was in the plant monitoring side of things, so, well, I guess in the initial phases, I kind of workshopped some general ideas around the science behind the project. , but then my main involvement was doing and designing the plant surveys helping Dave (Tucker)” (GL)

 

“.. so broadly, I guess it’s scientific support. particularly, with vegetation survey and some fauna monitoring, I guess mainly, through the use of, acoustics and some advice on camera traps and phenocams. , but, yeah, but and I guess you know how to, set up, you know, a plot, more broadly, you know, from an ecological point of view, like as far as, the scientific monitoring of that plot. , over time”. (DT)

 

• Can you summarise the project by your guest-artist here in the lab?

“I think discussing the project with you from the first time we talked, it is certainly evolving daily.  And, from your artistic perspective, it’s difficult to me to conceptualise .. But that brings an excitement as well. For instance, you know, setting up doing the science analysis in, is exciting in itself to measure and to quantify, however, to bring elements into the forest, for example, the log and the decomposing ability of the log and its presence within forest systems., that is so funky. Yeah. So funky indeed, and the images that you’ve captured and the sounds, a compliment to ever evolving forest. And to bring that into a visual, piece of art is wonderful. Yeah, it truly is wonderful”. (MY)

 

“So that leads me back to the to the name of the project, the Forest Art Intelligence Project, which, It’s I guess allowing the intelligence of natural systems, that are extremely complex and interconnected. And by which we can only use, you know, our limited human, you know, faculties our sight, our touch, our ability to count. And I classify things, in the scientific sense, I guess, and also to just admire in terms of the aura and beauty of it. But to try and translate the intelligence intelligences of that system into something else, so and also at the same time, thinking of the time scale, my favourite one of my favourite parts is the time scale side of it. , so looking at something how it changes through time, in one place and then thinking of a future state – an unknown future state, because we can never know how an ecosystem will evolve”. (EV)

 

“I guess one thing that happens in complex systems in natural systems is the idea of emergence. So, you know, like the systems, you know, certain surprising or novel processes and properties can become apparent. , that you wouldn’t predict, you know, like, you know, it’s not sort of like, very linear or it’s not, necessarily, highly predictive in lots of ways. You know, these things kind of arise, you know, seemingly out of nowhere. But they’re all part of this sort of, you know, like natural system. And I think from my understanding, that was reflected in in in the title of your work, as I seeing that sort of emergent behaviour or that kind of emergent processes as a form of intelligence. So, you know, the Forest Art intelligence project, so really, that was broadly my understanding of what you were trying to achieve”. (DT)

 

“I guess, like, quite, like literally. It’s like a restoration project, that’s aimed at restoring an ecosystem that had been cleared. But I think importantly, there’s like, another main part of it is to, like, capture that journey in various different ways.  and yeah, I guess highlight thefacets of nature intelligence in that.” (GL)

 

1. c) Personal Experience: Collaboration, Communication, Exchange

• What kinds of collaboration with the artist did you experience?

 

“What did I experience with you? I think your excitement. Your enthusiasm, your complete openness to the project”. (MY)

 

“I find working with Keith really easy. , and I think that’s because, well, I don’t know, but because I’m I don’t know Keith that well, but I’m learning for a few years now. At least two. I think, Keith, is just a really open person to ideas and thoughts. And I don’t think you don’t seem to me to be the sort of person to shut ideas down readily. You’re very thoughtful and considerate and a very good listener. , which not everybody can do. But yes, it’s been very easy and collaborative and a wonderful experience”. (EV)

 

” so, it was It was probably, a lot of the technical side of things. So, you know, discussing the survey techniques, the species present on site. So those being mainly the plant species, but also bird species. The technical data analysis, so you know how to make sense of a lot of that, scientific information and how we document?  Ecological monitoring, so you know, like what sort of standard approaches there are to, to ecological measuring measurement and monitoring”.(DT)

 

• How did your colleagues react to having an artist in the lab?

“I suppose in discussions there was some bewilderment. It was the unknowable. I think, is it really gonna work, doubts, and excitement as well, depending on who you talk to. So, from colleagues to community members, on our science trail walks or our general walks around from citizen scientists that that visit the plot and walk through the area while doing their bird surveys and the discussions we had, yeah, it was far reaching”. (MY)

“I think very excited, like Beryl (CEO of TERN) was always very interested and excited. And I thought I had the feeling she would be very supportive. I guess other colleagues were just very,  interested and excited I think,  because we work with a lot of a very diverse team. I work with a graphic designer who was extremely interested in the project. Mindy, and actually did some really nice line drawings for us for our sign. And,  and then we have a social media specialist and a videographer and cinematographer Nico, so, weirdly enough, we have heaps of very creative people, especially in my immediate team in Brisbane. So, they were all really, supportive and excited about it all. Yeah”. (EV)

 

“Well, I mean, it was pretty unusual, I guess. I wasn’t alone like we did. You know, there were a number of people who, you know, come from different, sort of scientific disciplines, who work directly with you as well. So obviously, you know, there are people who are highly aware of the work and also involved.  I guess there’s a wider kind of community of scientists who became aware of the project. .. I would say, most people were,  broadly supportive, curious about it, you know, most people, you know, they idea of art is I mean, I mean, it’s very different .. someone who’s a professional artist, .. a lot of people, you know, like something that hangs on the wall rather than something that exists out in the world. Like, like, the reveg plot, but, you know, so they were quite curious about how that, was I guess,  how that could be become an artwork”. (DT)

 

“I know there’s a small proportion of people who maybe weren’t as well, not necessarily as positive, but they I guess, and maybe this is just I don’t know. I mean, the world’s full of different people, but they, were not as supportive, mainly because of a number of things they probably don’t necessarily understand what’s trying to be achieved. Potentially, they saw it as, that it might prevent the site being used in the future for scientific research one way or another. Or, maybe would you know that they might find themselves, that they might have difficulties themselves getting funding for such a project, if they were applying for funding through a scientific, you know, funding body, but besides that, I’d say, Yeah, most people were, you know, in the in the at the very least, curious and mostly highly supportive of the collaboration”. (DT)

 

“I think, well, I guess the times I mentioned it, I think everyone was super interested in the project. And keen. I think there’s a lot of people keen to science art, collaboration, because they are really good examples of it. Improving science, communication. And,  also, yeah. Being able to communicate the things in science that we can’t communicate with numbers necessarily. I think there’s a lot of things that are, like, qualitative. And I think that, side of that helps. , so, yeah, I think everyone was super keen”. (GL)

 

1. d) Knowledge production

• How did the artist acquire scientific knowledge at the lab?

You’re always asking questions, Keith, and conversating with, with all involved? , yeah, the questions you were always interrogating. (MY)

 

“.. yeah, we did some field work with associate professor Caroline Hawkswell. Well, so to get some skills in microbiology, also like using some of the information from the TERN protocols, like the coarse Woody debris. And now we’re talking about because we’re going to continue this work. We’re gonna look at maybe more closely the soil side of things. And I have a very good contact in Adelaide. , who leads the soil programme. And I think he’s gonna be a really valuable connection for next year. , and then I guess that’s just from my perspective. But I know that Keith has been very interested in active reading papers that the other scientific members sent. So, Gabrielle was, always coming up with really interesting papers that she’d read that were related to the project. , and Keith was involved in a survey of the site and the transect work and things like that”. (EV)

 

“you were present during all field surveys. And you also,  I mean, so, you know, just interacting with, I guess myself and Gab and Marcus and,  Carrie, you know, like so, you know, just through discussions or assisting in scientific, survey work, you actively deployed, monitoring equipment on site. , so that whether that being, you know, the cameras or, acoustic recorders, you’re also analysing, data. So, you know, so just like our discussion today, you know, like you’ve collected all this data. How do you analyse it? How do you make sense of it if you’ve got a specific, you know, question? How do you kind of structure that information in order to make sense of it?” (DT)

 

“Well, I got the impression you had many, technical skills. So, you know, like you were able to, you know, even though you’re, you know, nonspecialist as far as the scientific research goes, you have very strong technical skills and a strong interest in in the scientific process. And it’s probably a bit like I,I, you know, I was saying, before you, you know, both,  the scientific approach to understand the world and an artist’s approach to understanding a world, are both highly creative processes. But, I mean, I kind of knew this, you know, already. And I like I’ve touched on before, you know, in science, it’s so formalised and rigid, you know, like you. You have constraints. , and they’re there for a reason, you know? So, you have a testable hypothesis, and, you know you can .. sort of answer. Sort of very specific questions in in in kind of a repeatable and, robust way that, you know, hopefully yield some sort of interesting insight into the world where, you know, from an artistic point of view, the way of understanding, you know, something that’s essentially the same thing is more, you know, it’s free of flowing, and, you know, I guess, yeah, less rigid compared to, you know, like, a highly formal scientific approach”. (DT)

 

“I’m assuming how you, you know, like I would imagine in some ways, it’s kind of similar because, because they do say, you know, like in science, one of the, one of the strongest sort of motivations for any research question is just kind of looking at the world and just saying to yourself, Oh, that looks weird or, you know, like, why does you know, why does that thing do the thing that it does? , but, you know, like, you see something interesting in the world, and potentially, you know, I mean, I’m sure other people have asked the same question, but they might not have, you know, gone as far as you may go in order to find out what the answer to that question is. So I think you know that essentially, you start from a point of curiosity, about, you know, the natural world, and from there, you know, maybe things diverge a little bit more, you know, but yeah, Like I said before we you know, as a an Ecologist, you kind of have a very, stringent kind of signpost along the way to kind of reaching that point where I imagine, as an artist, you kind of have a lot more Well, maybe a less structure”. (DT)

 

“Yeah. I mean, it’s interesting, because you do that in science. .., you do find yourself, you know, it’s not necessarily a linear thing. You do tend to start going off in weird directions that you wouldn’t predict, but you’re still kind of, you still have to make sure that you you’re doing it within the constraints of the, you know, the scientific process, I guess” (DT)

 

“discussion, observation and reporting” (GL)

 

• What did you learn about the working-processes and the skills of the artist?

“..your adaptability, I think comes through. Really?  you you’re a very deep thinker, very considerate of everybody’s, comments and, yeah, very considerate, I would say”. (MY)

 

“I guess, a slow and measured approach that he allows the time, he, or he has the ability to allow the time to take the time to listen and to absorb what might work for a project without rushing in.
And we had the fortune of not really we didn’t have a very strict time frame. And yes, it was a year. But there was always that. I think that feeling of it’s gonna be a longer-term project,and the main artwork or modification to the site really happens. Only in the last month with the branch was that a month ago”. (EV)

 

“I think we’re pretty aligned, like, I guess I use a lot of discussion and observation and reporting. , but I guess in terms of, like, a science perspective, I guess I’d also use, like, more quantitative means, but I think similar overall” (GL)

 

• How did the processes the artist used differ from your own style of (knowledge) production?

“I think there is a real time pressure in traditional scientific work, even in industry. And in fact, I think it’s worse in industry. We were talking about industry yesterday. In fact, David Rowlings was talking about industry yesterday and industry time frames, and they’re even shorter than election cycle time frames, which is my world of academia public service, where I’ve sort of had election cycle time frames. You might hope for someone getting voted back in or not, and you’ve got that four-year turnover, whereas industry, he was saying is more like 2 to 3 years. Yeah. So, I feel like, yeah, there’s there was the time to really consider something. And I feel like what my supervisor said to me in my PhD was true That when you are doing a PhD, that’s the longest I guess moment in your life, in some ways that you will have to contemplate something, as you know, beautiful or hopefully you like your project -you know that. And then after that, the time pressure really kicks in. I don’t know if artists feel time pressure. I suppose they do. But I feel like Keith was, or this project had ,a had an allowance for percolation and listening”. (EV)

 

1. e) Artistic influences on the scientific environment

• Did you promote/talk about the project to the rest of your staff and/or colleagues and what kind of reactions did you get? (this is a repeated question so most passed on it)

 

“I’ve commented to people in discussion while walking past there. I’ve discussed it with Lorrelle (director of SERF) and, the unknowable and the excitement with that, initially, I think it’s always excitement about what this is going to be or what’s how it’s going to, how’s it going to finish without knowing that there’s an end or a start?” (MY)

 

“I talked about it when we did the science trail, as mentioned earlier. And then Keith and I tried for a supporting grant to the Dahl Foundation, and got the support of TERN Director. Unfortunately, we missed out there, but still, there were lots of conversations had there and then we did the ANAT Interview. (Micro talk). And then once we had that recording from ANAT, I had already told my colleagues I would be interviewed, and then they, we promoted that through our TERN social media channels, and I think it may have been in the newsletter, too”. (EV)

 

• In your view, will the artist leave any traces in the lab after they’ve gone?

“Oh, most definitely. Yeah. Keith will always be present for eternity within that project! Yeah. Your presence, through my eyes always be there, and I think through other people’s eyes as well, what you’ve been a part of in creating is, timeless and yeah, very exciting”. (MY)

 

“Yes, A giant log! , so, yes, I think this project has, I guess, evolved. What was a bit of a wasteland, isn’t it on the SERF site that was just being mowed? So, because that was cordoned off for farm-based research, we now, well, Keith added, as part of the project, a an extremely large limb of Eucalyptus teretecornis, wasn’t it to the site to, promote and accelerate the forest coming back to that previously slashed area”. (EV)

 

“Oh, of course. Yeah, well, the site’s still there, so it’s gonna be there for a long time. So, you know, that’s gonna be your legacy that you’re gonna have, like, a forest growing there. It’s gonna be pretty good. I mean, like I said, I went there the other day, and it’s amazing, like, you know, like, in the next two years, those trees are going to get pretty big. I imagine so”. (DT)

 

“You know, you’ve basically got a long-term revegetation plot going on, you know, like there. So that’s gonna provide opportunities for future, you know, research. Whether that’s collaborative with between the arts and sciences or, you know, whether there’s, specific kind of scientific questions that that, people want to ask. I mean, it’s all gonna also gonna have a wider, you know, influence on, you know, all the plants and animals that are wandering around, you know, that part of the world. I mean, you’re gonna be providing some fundamental ecological services to, to the local flora and fauna”. (DT)

 

“And I guess,  you know more broadly as society. I mean, you know, we’ve kind of I mean, just recently started opening up the facility to the broader public, and we’ve had people in, like, local community groups and stuff like that. But there are people coming in and seeing what we’re doing there. And this is part of, you know, promoting that sort of collaboration and research. , more broadly as well”. (DT)

 

“Yeah, definitely. I think, the nature of the kind of projects is that it will There will always be a trace of what’s happened. You got a big log there now. A log for a start! .. I feel like that is the nature of those kind of these kind of long-term restoration things. They’re, like, very expensive. very expensive moving along as well. You know”. (GL)

 

1. f) Broader influences

• Do you think the residency had a wider influence (on your lab, the research organisation, society in general)?

 

“Yeah. The charter of SERF. Yeah, I’d say so. Yeah. I think it completely compliments all the science that we’re doing here. , the observations, to let a bad block of land, restore itself and observe. And, and measure, is completely in line with, ethos of, of the facility. And it’s part of, the science trail, that we’ve incorporated here at SERF, so many people for years to come, Will experience that during the walk”. (MY)

 

“I don’t wanna sound like I think my part of it was bigger than anyone else’s. But perhaps the (SERF Engaging Science) trail day was a really good opportunity for a wider audience to come in contact with the site and the ideas of the artwork.. , to do that .. next year (there will be) revised sign and additional science and things as part of the improvements to the trail. , but I think the trail is a good mechanism for people to see the artwork and view how it’s evolving, to a just a broader audience, isn’t it?” (EV)

 

“I think definitely (at) SERF. I think there was a lot of discussion with the Yeah, various people running the show at SERF, and I think they were keen to see it there. And I think probably learnt a lot from the process and probably will continue to learn a lot as well. Yeah”. (GL)

 

• What is your impression of the residency in retrospect: did it contribute to a better exchange between art and science?

“Oh, yeah, definitely. Yeah. It brings the two together. Yeah, without a doubt”. (MY)

 

“Yes, I think so. , I think this a lot of potential to like, as Keith has alluded to keep going with the project. And it might even be like that. It gets more interesting the longer it goes because it could be like, you know, that we end up using it as an education – speaking from an educational point of view. It’s very interesting to see how a forest is regrowing. And there’s been a lot of monitoring and photography and videos taken of that particular site throughout this year. So, there’s a lot of collateral that that could be used in the future. , from a scientific education perspective, I think.” (EV)

 

“Yeah, I think so. Yeah, definitely. I mean, it’s made it a lot more visible. , in the early days when I was out there, I think I’ve told you, you know, for a long time, there’d be sort of people doing, you know, people like me who are doing, you know, fauna and some, and flora work and people doing water monitoring and soil and all that sort of stuff. But, you know, people have quite specific projects. And then, you know, we’d have, local community groups turning up once a year. But a lot of the time, it was just sort of me and Marcus sort of wandering around the place, so we we’d hardly see anyone, but, you know, as it’s opened up and these sort of, projects have, become more established. And these collaborations have started. You know, I think it’s made it a lot more vibrant. You know, it’s and it’s sort of, making people aware of,  I guess the thing the same thing can be valued in different ways, you know? So, yeah. Definitely”. (DT)

 

“Well, yes, definitely. Like I said before, you know, we have opened it up to the public. So, we have had, you know, local community members and broader public access. And we had open days, and it’s part of the new science trail, so yeah, definitely. Yeah, it’s,  Yeah, it’s, definitely, contributed to public reach and engagement. , for the research facility. All right. Brilliant. (DT)

 

“yeah, I think totally. I think, I think in general, it’s refreshing for us scientists to view things through an artistic lens, and I think it does. Yeah, really help to capture some of those things that we don’t usually capture. And I think a lot of those things are actually the more tangible stuff so that people the most people can kind of relate to. So, yeah, I think it’s great”. (GL)

 

 

• Did the residency have any public reach or engagement?

“It has… We’re very engaged in the Samford Valley community, and we do have tours within different groups of the valley. The science trial is open to the public, and it’s very much exposed, as I said, as part of the science trail, and it incorporates, the walk through the forest. It’s approximately 1.5 to 2 kilometres round trip from,  from base camp at the barracks, so yeah, very much so. It’s one of one of 14 stops within the science trail .. It’s one of 14, locations. , so science trail incorporates , different scientific instruments along the path as well as educational, structures, and also landscape, interests of the changing, forest type. So, I think it’s stop number five along the way”.  (MY)

 

“on, like, the SERF open days.. the science trail, and obviously there’s a blog ..and.. constant, constant social media presence .. What would be good is, you know how the high school students do their programmes like next door in that same paddock. I think it’d be interesting to just, like, even chat with them, the facilitators and tell them a bit about it. And they can talk to the students about it, too, because if there’s like, some noticeable differences happening like they can just go walk over and just have a look. And you’re like, this is this is a restoration site. .. So yeah, yeah, I think that’s really awesome to be part of that, you know, because even if the students or they will have access to it. (the QR code/sign at the site) And so that’s like a cool thing that,  if there is time for them to go and listen to those resources, as well as maybe getting like a little two-minute deal from either you or the ambassadors, but to have the QR. Code there ready they can go on and break and have a look”. (GL)

 

 

• Were there any unexpected outcomes?

“Yes. There was an unexpected outcome, a wonderful, unexpected outcome that influenced the direction, from my perspective, on land management. , and that’s when we, Keith came across Keith and, in, Keith came across a red backed button quail, that was present in the grass on the southern slope of his project. And so, the discovery of the Red Button, the Redback button quail was instrumental in changing our direction from a management perspective, and so we needed to create a, habitat, that would, encourage, this rare visitor”. (MY)

 

“I don’t know. I think it depends if you had really strong expectations to begin with. I’m not saying I didn’t think that anything good would come out of it, but I sort of felt like it’s a fluid process, and we just sort of take it as it comes and yeah, exactly”. (EV)

 

“I mean, not really. I mean, besides the besides the fact that it it’s become established. So quickly. Like I said before, you know, like, I’m quite amazed how  yeah, how much it’s changed and how, you know how healthy everything looks? I mean, even sort of things like,  I mean, I know there’s still weed cover in the plot and things like that, but you can see that. Generally speaking, it’s really, you know, it’s quite intact. And like I said, you know, it’s highly species diverse. And, you know, I’m pretty interested in seeing how this is going to change over time particularly, you know, with the ongoing kind of, veg and, fauna monitoring as well. It should be interesting. (DT)

 

“I guess I didn’t think that we’d move such a big log!” (GL)

 

 

1. g) Suggested improvements

• What could be improved for future residencies?

“Oh, I don’t know. I don’t have any recommendations. I mean, it’s gone really well. So, you know, like, I –  I’ve got a data point of one, so I don’t know what’s,  you know., I think it’s, you know, I think it’s ticked. All the boxes, I mean. It’s obviously, I mean, all the people who are directly involved, Though I, I get the feeling that everyone’s very happy with,  the collaboration. And I think if you just keep doing what you’re doing, and you know future residencies are the same then I, I mean yeah, I. I don’t really I can’t really add anything to it”. (DT)

 

1. h) Further comments

• Would you like to add anything further?

“I would like to add something further. I think I am thoroughly enjoying this journey with Keith. And, and the rest of the scientists Eleanor, Gabe and, and David, I’m so much looking forward to every day, as you walk through that, that area the Forest Art Intelligence site is,  yeah, I’m in awe, really of, how the earth can heal itself if left, to its own devices and to observe that, and connect art and science together is really exciting. I’ve used that word many times, but it is truly exciting to be a part of that and to,  and to walk through there on most days of the week”. (MY)

 

“It was really interesting, like, you know, different experience. I never thought I would get to do that. And it, you know, it was something I’ve been thinking about, I guess reinvigorating my creative side for a while in a more formal sense. So, it was really nice to be able to play in that space through this project”. (EV)

 

“well, besides the fact that, you know, I think it’s useful for these collaborations to continue. I think, you know, it’s  useful. , and you know, I think it’s important that people get an idea of the perspectives of people from different disciplines, and particularly how we understand, you know, the environment using different, you know, creative approaches, whether that be art or science. So, yeah, I think I think that’s about it”. (DT)