Loading AI tools
Restoring of wilderness environments From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Rewilding is a form of ecological restoration aimed at increasing biodiversity and restoring natural processes. It differs from other forms of ecological restoration in that rewilding aspires to reduce human influence on ecosystems.[1] It is also distinct from other forms of restoration in that, while it places emphasis on recovering geographically specific sets of ecological interactions and functions that would have maintained ecosystems prior to human influence, rewilding is open to novel or emerging ecosystems which encompass new species and new interactions.[2][3]
A key feature of rewilding is its focus on replacing human interventions with natural processes. Rewilding enables the return of intact, large mammal assemblages, to promote the restoration of trophic networks.[4] This mechanism of rewilding is a process of restoring natural processes by introducing or re-introducing large mammals to promote resilient, self-regulating, and self-sustaining ecosystems.[5][6] Large mammals can influence ecosystems by altering biogeochemical pathways as they contribute to unique ecological roles, they are landscape engineers that aid in shaping the structure and composition of natural habitats.[7][8] Rewilding projects are often part of programs for habitat restoration and conservation biology, and should be based on sound socio-ecological theory and evidence.[9]
While rewilding initiatives can be controversial, the United Nations has listed rewilding as one of several methods needed to achieve massive scale restoration of natural ecosystems, which they say must be accomplished by 2030[10] as part of the 30x30 campaign.[11]
The term rewilding was coined by members of the grassroots network Earth First!, first appearing in print in 1990.[12] It was refined and grounded in a scientific context in a paper published in 1998 by conservation biologists Michael Soulé and Reed Noss.[13] Soulé and Noss envisaged rewilding as a conservation method based on the concept of 'cores, corridors, and carnivores'.[14] The key components of rewilding incorporate large core protected areas, keystone species, and ecological connectivity based on the theory that large predators play regulatory roles in ecosystems.[15] '3Cs' rewilding therefore relied on protecting 'core' areas of wild land, linked together by 'corridors' allowing passage for 'carnivores' to move around the landscape and perform their functional role.[16] The concept was developed further in 1999[17] and Earth First co-founder, Dave Foreman, subsequently wrote a full-length book on rewilding as a conservation strategy.[18]
Rewilding was developed as a method to preserve functional ecosystems and reduce biodiversity loss, incorporating research in island biogeography and the ecological role of large carnivores.[19] In 1967, The Theory of Island Biogeography by Robert H. MacArthur and Edward O. Wilson established the importance of considering the size and fragmentation of wildlife conservation areas, stating that protected species and areas remained vulnerable to extinctions if populations were small and isolated.[20] In 1987, William D. Newmark's study of extinctions in national parks in North America added weight to the theory.[21] The publications intensified debates on conservation approaches.[22] With the creation of the Society for Conservation Biology in 1985, conservationists began to focus on reducing habitat loss and fragmentation.[23]
Supporters of rewilding initiatives range from individuals, small land owners, local non-governmental organizations and authorities, to national governments and international non-governmental organizations such as the International Union for Conservation of Nature. While rewilding efforts can be well regarded, the increased popularity of rewilding has generated controversy, especially in relation to large-scale projects. These have sometimes attracted criticism from academics and practicing conservationists, as well as government officials and business people.[24][25][26][27] Nonetheless, a 2021 report for the launch of the UN Decade on Ecosystem Restoration, the United Nations listed rewilding as one of several restoration methods which they state should be used for ecosystem restoration of over 1 billion hectares.[28][29]
Since its origin, the term rewilding has been used as a signifier of particular forms of ecological restoration projects that have ranged widely in scope and geographic application. In 2021 the journal Conservation Biology published a paper[2] by 33 coauthors from around the world. Titled, 'Guiding Principles for Rewilding'. Researchers and project leaders from North America (Canada, Mexico and the United States) joined with counterparts in Europe (Denmark, France, Hungary, The Netherlands, Switzerland, and the UK), China, and South America (Chile and Colombia) to produce a unifying description, along with a set of ten guiding principles.
The group wrote, 'Commonalities in the concept of rewilding lie in its aims, whereas differences lie in the methods used, which include land protection, connectivity conservation, removing human infrastructure, and species reintroduction or taxon replacement.' Referring to the span of project types they stated, 'Rewilding now incorporates a variety of concepts, including Pleistocene megafauna replacement, taxon replacement, species reintroductions, retrobreeding, release of captive-bred animals, land abandonment, and spontaneous rewilding.' [2]
Empowered by a directive from the International Union for the Conservation of Nature to produce a document on rewilding that reflected a global scale inventory of underlying goals as well as practices, the group sought a 'unifying definition', producing the following:
'Rewilding is the process of rebuilding, following major human disturbance, a natural ecosystem by restoring natural processes and the complete or near complete food web at all trophic levels as a self-sustaining and resilient ecosystem with biota that would have been present had the disturbance not occurred. This will involve a paradigm shift in the relationship between humans and nature. The ultimate goal of rewilding is the restoration of functioning native ecosystems containing the full range of species at all trophic levels while reducing human control and pressures. Rewilded ecosystems should—where possible—be self-sustaining. That is, they require no or minimal management (i.e., natura naturans [nature doing what nature does]), and it is recognized that ecosystems are dynamic.'[2]
Ten principles were developed by the group:
A paper was published in 2024 that offered a "broad study of rewilding guidelines and interventions."[30]
Rewilding can respond to both the causes and effects of climate change and has been posited as a 'natural climate solution'. Rewilding's creation of new ecosystems and restoration of existing ones can contribute to climate change mitigation and adaptation through, inter alia, carbon capture and storage, altering the Earth's albedo, natural flood management, reduction of wildfire risk, new habitat creation, and enabling or facilitating the movement of species to new, climate safe habitats, thus protecting biodiversity and maintaining functioning, climate resilient ecosystems.[31][32][33][34][35][36][37]
The functional roles animals perform in ecosystems, such as grazing, nutrient cycling and seed distribution, can influence the amount of carbon that soils and (marine and terrestrial) plants capture.[38] The carbon cycle is altered through herbivores consuming vegetation, assimilating carbon within their own biomass, and releasing carbon by respiration and defecation after digestion.[39][40] The most beneficial effects on biogeochemical cycling and ecosystem structure are reported through rewilding large herbivore species.[41][42] A study in a tropical forest in Guyana found that an increase in mammal species from 5 to 35 increased tree and soil carbon storage by four to five times, compared to an increase of 3.5 to four times with an increase of tree species from 10 to 70.[43] A separate study suggested that the loss of megafauna that eat fruits may be responsible for an up to 10% reduction in carbon storage in tropical forests.[44] Furthermore, acceleration of nutrient cycling through browsing and grazing may increase local plant productivity and thereby maintain ecosystem productivity in grassy biomes.
It is also posited that grazing and browsing reduces the risk of wildfires (which are significant contributors of GHG emissions and whose smoke can alter the planet's albedo - the Earth's ability to reflect heat from sunlight)). For example, the loss of wildebeest from the Serengeti led to an increase in un-grazed grass, leading to more frequent and intense fires, causing the grassland to turn from a carbon sink to a carbon source. When disease management practices restored the wildebeest population, the Serengeti returned to a carbon sink state.[38][45]
Rewilding's effect on albedo is not only through potential reduction of smoke from wildfires but also through the effects of grazing itself. By reducing woody cover through browsing and trampling, large herbivores expose more ground surface and thus increase the albedo effect, reducing local surface temperatures and creating a net surface cooling effect during spring and autumn.
Other forms of ecological restoration as part of rewilding can also assist with mitigating climate change. For example, reforestation, afforestation and peat re-wetting can all contribute to carbon sequestration. [46] While carbon sequestration could allow carbon offsetting and carbon trading as a way to monetize rewilding there has been concern that the highly speculative nature of carbon markets encourages 'land grabbing' (i.e., buying large areas of land) and 'greenwashing' from natural capital investors and multi-national companies.[47]
.jpg)
Passive rewilding (also referred to as ecological rewilding)[48] aims to restore natural ecosystem processes via minimal or the total withdrawal of direct human management of the landscape.[49][50][51]
Active rewilding is an umbrella term used to describe a range of rewilding approaches all of which involve human intervention. These might include species reintroductions or translocations and/or habitat engineering and the removal of man-made structures.[52][49][53]
Pleistocene rewilding is the (re)introduction of extant Pleistocene megafauna, or the close ecological equivalents of extinct megafauna, to restore ecosystem function. Advocates of the approach maintain that ecosystems where species evolved in response to Pleistocene megafauna but now lack large mammals may be in danger of collapse.[54][55] Meanwhile critics argue that it is unrealistic to assume that ecological communities today are functionally similar to their state 10,000 years ago.
Trophic rewilding is an ecological restoration strategy focused on restoring trophic interactions and complexity (specifically top-down and associated trophic cascades where a top consumer/predator controls the primary consumer population) through species (re)introductions, in order to promote self-regulating, biodiverse ecosystems.[56][57]
Ecosystem engineers are ‘organisms that demonstrably modify the structure of their habitats’. [58] Examples of ecosystem engineers in rewilding include beaver, elephants, bison, elk, cattle (as analogues for the extinct aurochs) and pigs (as analogues for wild boar).[59][60][61][62]
A keystone species is a species that has a disproportionately large effect on its environment relative to its abundance.
Apex predators may be required in rewilding projects to ensure that browsing and grazing animals are kept from over-breeding/over-feeding thereby destroying vegetation complexity[19] and exceeding the ecological carrying capacity of the rewilding area, as was seen in the mass-starvations which occurred at the Oostvaardersplassen rewilding project in the Netherlands.[63] While predators play an important role in ecosystems, however, there is debate regarding the extent to which the control of prey populations is due to direct predation or a more indirect influence of predators (see Ecology of fear).[64] For example, it is thought that wildebeest populations in the Serengeti are primarily controlled by food constraints despite the presence of many predators.[65]
Some national governments and officials within multilateral agencies such as the United Nations, express the view that 'excessive' rewilding, such as large rigorously enforced protected areas where no extraction activities are allowed, can be too restrictive on people's ability to earn sustainable livelihoods.[26][27] The alternative view is that increasing ecotourism can provide employment.[66]
Rewilding has been criticized by animal rights scholars, such as Dale Jamieson, who argues that 'most cases of rewilding or reintroducing are likely to involve conflicts between the satisfaction of human preferences and the welfare of nonhuman animals'.[67] Erica von Essen and Michael Allen, using Donaldson and Kymlicka's political animal categories framework, assert that wildness standards imposed on animals are arbitrary and inconsistent with the premise that wild animals should be granted sovereignty over the territories that they inhabit and the right to make decisions about their own lives. To resolve this, von Essen and Allen contend that rewilding needs to shift towards full alignment with mainstream conservation and welcome full sovereignty, or instead take full responsibility for the care of animals who have been reintroduced.[68] Ole Martin Moen argues that rewilding projects should be brought to an end because they unnecessarily increase wild animal suffering and are expensive, and the funds could be better spent elsewhere.[69]
The environmental historian Dolly Jørgensen argues that rewilding, as it currently exists, 'seeks to erase human history and involvement with the land and flora and fauna. Such an attempted split between nature and culture may prove unproductive and even harmful.' She calls for rewilding to be more inclusive to combat this.[70] Jonathan Prior and Kim J. Ward challenge Jørgensen's criticism and provide examples of rewilding programs which 'have been developed and governed within the understanding that human and non-human world are inextricably entangled'.[71]
Some farmers have been critical of rewilding for 'abandoning productive farmland when the world's population is growing'.[72] Farmers have also attacked plans to reintroduce the lynx in the United Kingdom because of fears that reintroduction will lead to an increase in sheep predation.[73]
Some conservationists have expressed concern that rewilding 'could replace the traditional protection of rare species on small nature reserves', which could potentially lead to an increase in habitat fragmentation and species loss.[72] David Nogués-Bravo and Carsten Rahbek assert that the benefits of rewilding lack evidence and that such programs may inadvertently lead to 'de-wilding', through the extinction of local and global species. They also contend that rewilding programs may draw funding away from 'more scientifically supported conservation projects'.[74]
Both grassroots groups and major international conservation organizations have incorporated rewilding into projects to protect and restore large-scale core wilderness areas, corridors (or connectivity) between them, and apex predators, carnivores, or keystone species. Projects include: the Yellowstone to Yukon Conservation Initiative in North America (also known as Y2Y), the European Green Belt (built along the former Iron Curtain), transboundary projects (including those in southern Africa funded by the Peace Parks Foundation), community-conservation projects (such as the wildlife conservancies of Namibia and Kenya), and projects organized around ecological restoration (including Gondwana Link, regrowing native bush in a hotspot of endemism in southwest Australia, and the Area de Conservacion Guanacaste, restoring dry tropical forest and rainforest in Costa Rica).[75]
In North America, a major project aims to restore the prairie grasslands of the Great Plains.[76] The American Prairie is reintroducing bison on private land in the Missouri Breaks region of north-central Montana, with the goal of creating a prairie preserve larger than Yellowstone National Park.[76]: 187–199
Dam removal has led to the restoration of many river systems in the Pacific Northwest in an effort to restore salmon populations specifically but with other species in mind. As stated in an article on environmental law:
'These dam removals provide perhaps the best example of large-scale environmental remediation in the twenty-first century. [...] The result has been to put into motion ongoing rehabilitation efforts in four distinct river basins: the Elwha and White Salmon in Washington and the Sandy and Rogue in Oregon'.[77]
In 1997, Douglas and Kris Tompkins created 'The Conservation Land Trust Argentina' with the goal of transforming the Iberá Wetlands. In 2018, thanks to a team of conservationists and scientists, and a donation of 195,094 ha (482,090 acres) of land by Kris Tompkins, an area was converted into a National Park, and jaguar (a species that had been extinct in the region for seven decades), anteaters and giant otters were reintroduced. A spin-off of the Tompkins Foundation, Rewilding Argentina, is an organization dedicated to the restoration of El Impenetrable National Park, in Chaco, Patagonia Park, in Santa Cruz, and the Patagonian coastal area in the province of Chubut, in addition to Iberá National Park.[78]
The red-rumped agouti and the brown howler monkey were reintroduced in Tijuca National Park (Rio de Janeiro state, Brazil), between 2010 and 2017 with the goal of restoring seed dispersal.[79] Prior to the reintroductions, the national park did not have large or intermediate -sized seed dispersers, the increased dispersal of tree seeds following the reintroductions therefore had a significant effect on forest regeneration in the park.[79] This is significant since the Tijuca National Park is part of heavily fragmented Atlantic Forest and there is potential to restore many more seed dispersal interactions if seed dispersing mammals and birds are reintroduced to forest patches where the tree species diversity remains high.[80]
Colonisation has had a significant impact on Australia's native flora and fauna, and the introduction of red foxes and cats has devastated many of the smaller ground-dwelling mammals. The island state of Tasmania has become an important location for rewilding efforts because, as an island, it is easier to remove feral cat populations and manage other invasive species. The reintroduction and management of the Tasmanian devil in this state, and dingoes on the mainland, is being trialed in an effort to contain introduced predators, as well as over-populations of kangaroos.[81]
WWF-Australia runs a program called 'Rewilding Australia' whose projects include restoring the platypus in the Royal National Park, south of Sydney, eastern quolls in the Booderee National Park in Jervis Bay and at Silver Plains in Tasmania, and brush-tailed bettongs in the Marna Banggara project on the Yorke Peninsula in South Australia.[82] Other projects around the country include:[81]
In 2011, the 'Rewilding Europe' initiative was established with the aim of rewilding one million hectares of land in ten areas including the western Iberian Peninsula, Velebit, the Carpathians and the Danube delta by 2020.[83] The project considers reintroductions of species that are still present in Europe such as the Iberian lynx, Eurasian lynx, grey wolf, European jackal, brown bear, chamois, Iberian ibex, European bison, red deer, griffon vulture, cinereous vulture, Egyptian vulture, great white pelican and horned viper, along with primitive domestic horse and cattle breeds as proxies for the extinct tarpan and aurochs (the wild ancestors of domestic cattle) respectively. Since 2012, Rewilding Europe has been heavily involved in the Tauros Programme, which seeks to create a breed of cattle that resembles the aurochs by selectively breeding existing breeds of cattle.[84] Projects also employ domestic water buffalo as a grazing analogue for the extinct European water buffalo.[85]
European Wildlife, established in 2008, advocates the establishment of a European Centre of Biodiversity at the German–Austrian–Czech borders, and the Chernobyl exclusion zone in Ukraine.
Der Biosphärenpark Wienerwald was created in Austria in 2003 with 37 kernzonen (core zones) covering a total of 5,400 ha designated free from human interference.[86]
Rewilding Britain, a charity founded in 2015, aims to promote rewilding in Britain and is a leading advocate of rewilding.[87] Rewilding Britain has laid down 'five principles of rewilding' which it expects to be followed by affiliated rewilding projects.[88][89] These are to support people and nature together, to 'let nature lead', to create resilient local economies, to 'work at nature's scale', and to secure benefits for the long-term.
Celtic Reptile and Amphibian is a limited company established in 2020, with the aim of reintroducing extinct species of reptile and amphibian (such as the European pond turtle,[90] moor frog, agile frog,[91] common tree frog and pool frog)[92][93] to Britain. Success has already been achieved with the captive breeding of the moor frog.[94][95] A reintroduction trial of the European pond turtle to its historic, Holocene range in the East Anglian Fens, Brecks and Broads has been initiated, with support from the University of Cambridge.[96]
In 2020, nature writer Melissa Harrison reported a significant increase in attitudes supportive of rewilding among the British public, with plans recently approved for the release of European bison, Eurasian elk, and great bustard in England, along with calls to rewild as much as 20% of the land in East Anglia, and even return apex predators such as the Eurasian lynx, brown bear, and grey wolf.[97][98][59] More recently, academic work on rewilding in England has highlighted that support for rewilding is by no means universal. As in other countries, rewilding in England remains controversial to the extent that some of its more ambitious aims are being 'domesticated' both in a proactive attempt to make it less controversial and in reactive response to previous controversy.[99] Projects may also refer to their activity using terminology other than 'rewilding', possibly for political and diplomatic reasons, taking account of local sentiment or possible opposition. Examples include 'Sanctuary Nature Recovery Programme' (at Broughton) and 'nature restoration project', the preferred term used by the Cambrian Wildwood project, an area aspiring to encompass 7,000 acres in Wales.[100]
Notable rewilding sites include:
The British radio drama series The Archers featured rewilding areas in storylines in 2019 and 2020.[110][111]
In the 1980s, analogue species (Konik ponies, Heck cattle and red deer) were introduced to the Oostvaardersplassen nature reserve, an area covering over 56 square kilometres (22 sq mi), in order to (re)create a grassland ecology by keeping the landscape open by naturalistic grazing.[112][113] This approach followed Vera's 'wood-pasture hypothesis' that grazing animals played a significant role in shaping European landscapes before the Neolithic period. Though not explicitly referred to as rewilding, many of the project's intentions were in line with those of rewilding. The case of the Oostvaardersplassen is considered controversial due to the lack of predators, and its management can be seen as having to contend with conflicting ideas regarding nature.[114]
Seamless Wikipedia browsing. On steroids.
Every time you click a link to Wikipedia, Wiktionary or Wikiquote in your browser's search results, it will show the modern Wikiwand interface.
Wikiwand extension is a five stars, simple, with minimum permission required to keep your browsing private, safe and transparent.
