City Bird: Empathy map — Mohammed Umar Ahmed

Bitrus - Groundskeeper

Trees have direct practical value to people.
Tree removal should involve the community, even when someone claims ownership of the land/tree.
Cultural and traditional beliefs should influence how certain trees are treated.
Trees are essential for keeping environments habitable and preventing land degradation/desertification.
Trees are part of a larger ecological system, not just objects belonging to individual landowners.
Wildlife has a legitimate right to occupy spaces where it finds suitable habitat.

Disturbed/upset when trees are removed without explanation or consultation.
Confused when someone cuts down a mature, culturally or ecologically valuable tree simply because it is on their property.
Protective of trees because of their shade, food, cultural significance, and ecological functions.
Concerned about environmental degradation and the consequences of losing tree cover.
Conflicted about wildlife: they appreciate birds and their ecological/aesthetic value but can also find large bird colonies disruptive.

Notices when trees disappear from the environment.
Asks community members about trees that have been felled.
Challenges decisions that could negatively affect existing vegetation.
Thinks about which plants are appropriate for particular environmental conditions, rather than simply planting whatever looks good.
Attempts to balance human needs with wildlife needs.
Observes relationships between trees and birds—for example, the Village Weavers using the sycamore fig for food.

“It’s not a human being.”
“The only one I feel anything for is when it’s providing… shade… or giving me fruits.”
“You can’t just cut down… economical trees.”
“The sound is unbearable.”
“Trees are important in the city… trees that beautify.”
“I would prefer to see more trees in parks than in urban areas.”

Trees don't inherently evoke emotional attachment simply because they are alive.
A tree becomes valuable when its benefits are directly experienced.
Fruit-bearing/economically valuable trees deserve protection.
Birds can make trees undesirable when they create excessive noise.
Despite their utilitarian view, they recognize trees have broader environmental importance.
Urban trees should primarily contribute to aesthetics rather than necessarily food production.
Trees have a more appropriate place in designated green spaces than everywhere in the urban environment.

Little/no emotional attachment to trees simply as living things.
Appreciative when trees provide tangible benefits such as shade, fruit, fresh air, or erosion control.
Nostalgic about trees from childhood and the mango tree during COVID.
Frustrated/irritated by noisy birds.
Conflicted about trees because they simultaneously provide positive experiences and attract undesirable birds.
Protective of economically useful trees, particularly fruit-bearing ones.

Uses trees as places for rest and shade.
Associates trees with childhood experiences and familiar fruit species.
Evaluates trees according to the benefits or inconveniences they create.
Has interacted directly with birds (e.g. training a pigeon).
Distinguishes between trees appropriate for urban areas and those better suited to parks.

“I heavily depend on the birds as my primary source of protein.”
“I know the birds wouldn’t be here without the trees.”
“I catch the big doves for game.”
“People chop down trees… because they want to farm.”
“Yams don’t like shade.”
“It’s not the best to cut down trees, but there are instances where I can allow it.”
“Trees help break wind.”

Birds are a practical and important resource, not simply wildlife to observe.
There is an understood connection between trees and bird populations.
Hunting birds is a normal, learned practice that began in childhood.
Tree removal is sometimes driven by legitimate livelihood needs, particularly agriculture.
Environmental management involves trade-offs between trees and agricultural productivity.
Tree conservation isn't absolute; some circumstances justify removal.
Trees provide practical environmental protection beyond food/shade.

Comfortable with hunting—it is familiar and culturally/experientially normal.
Resource-dependent on birds for food.
Pragmatic about tree cutting rather than ideologically opposed to it.
Frustrated/sceptical about enforcement, particularly when forest guards can be bribed.
Accepting of trade-offs between conservation and activities such as farming or construction.
Aware of ecological relationships despite exploiting the resources himself.

Hunts birds using a catapult.
Learnt hunting from childhood.
Shares/normalizes the practice with colleagues.
Observes bird behaviour and identifies conditions that make birds easier to hunt.
Relies on birds as a source of protein.
Observes local tree-felling and agricultural practices.
Recognizes practical functions of trees such as wind protection.