REWILDING: REASONABLE OR REBELLIOUS? The Fight to Protect Europe's Wildlife
Arianne Zajaç
R
ewilding is characterised by conservative efforts in restoring or protecting natural processes and wilderness. There is an emphasis (interestingly, as it involves humans intervening) on stepping back. It has become increasingly popular over the last few decades to the point that the UN claims it is necessary in the fight against climate change. However, rewilding is not as plainly institutional as it first appears. Rather than simply being a process taken up by governments and organisations to resolve the current environmental crisis, it is an act of contention. Sometimes rejected by organisations as not scientific enough, it also has a history of radicalism and activism.
The group sprouted out from RARE II, which they felt to be a sell out to mainstream activist movements. However, it was refined by conservation biologists Michael Soulé and Reed Noss in a paper published in 1998. The concept had been first established somewhat earlier in 1967 by R.H. MacArthur and Edward O, however organisations have been slow to pick it up and the approach has been academically criticised. According to Rewilding Europe, rewilding is built on the idea that ‘nature knows best’ and humans are simply there to give a ‘helping hand’. Within rewilding, keystone species and top predators are reintroduced; consider wolves in Europe or large grazing mammals.
The term rewilding was originally coined by Earth First – a radical environmental advocacy group and movement, founded in the 1980s.
There are many examples of successful rewilding, Castle Knepp being one. The Castle was formerly agricultural land, inherited by Sir Charles Burrell, 10th Baronet, from his grandparents at age 21 in 1983. As he struggled with managing the farm, he transformed the estate into nature reserve and the area became the first major lowland rewilding project in England.
A ‘hands-off’ naturalistic grazing system was adopted in 2002, which allowed free-roaming herds of old English longhorns, Exmoor ponies, and Tamworth pigs as proxies for the aurochs, tarpan and wild boar that would once have roamed the British countryside, as well as red and fallow deer. Nevertheless, there are many tensions within the process of rewilding. Often farmers and landowners can be resistant and feel alienated. Many feel it is irresponsible to abandon productive land when the world’s population is growing, but the fact of the matter is most farming can no longer keep up with the now globalised industry. As farming is increasingly intensified, it frees up land which can be turned into conservation areas. This is not the only contention with rewilding. If done in an ill-thought-out manner, it can have dire consequences for the present wildlife. There are worries in Scotland of re-introduced wild boar carrying the antibiotic-resistant strain of MRSA, that is potentially lethal to humans. However, as the clock ticks on climate change and the reduction of natural habitats increases at an alarming rate, many criticise that not enough is being done. In this camp, the radical, activist origins of rewilding shine through. Often, it is mainly men who take it upon themselves to carry out the work that they feel conservationist organisations are failing to do. Conservationists often focus on habitat reconstruction, rather than simply reintroducing individual species, meaning they must work with the area as a whole.
