Compared to many other ecological readings, such as the previous Vitousek and Kareiva articles, Rambunctious Gardens is a more reader friendly version. Within the first two pages, Emma Maris clearly states her thesis of the book by saying “this book is about a new way of seeing nature” (Marris, 2.) She combines the theme of the articles by Vitousek and Kareiva in the first two chapters, by arguing that “we are already running the whole earth,” (2) and that baseline conservation techniques are harmful because regardless of human influence the earth is forever changing.
The first chapter, Weeding the Jungle, focuses on the concept of how modern nature should be defined. Marris does this through the term Rambunctious Gardens, which she defines as nature that is “tended by us”, and describes that as any strip of land surrounding us that contains greenery, even “in your backyard [and] on your roof” (2.) She then gives a description of the modern conservation techniques of maintaining a pristine wilderness, which contrast her idea of a Rambunctious Garden. One thing that Marris does, which makes her book more approachable to the non-informed reader, is give a brief background history of the ecological terms she uses. For instance, the term baseline is clearly defined, given examples of, and her opinion of it is plainly stated. The two points that Marris makes about baseline conservation techniques is that there is no such thing as “pristine wilderness” anymore because humans have touched all parts of the earth, and that baseline conservation techniques are damaging to the present ecosystem because “conservationists must shoot, poison, trap, fence, and watch, forever watch” the “invasive species” that enter these ecosystems. Marris backs up this argument by giving several examples of areas that she visited, including the Scotia Sanctuary in Australia. She indirectly conveys this message by giving examples of how maintaining a baseline defies the idea that the pristine wild is “unmanaged” (12.) Marris offers a new outlook on conservation by saying we should be “layering goals and managing landscapes with an eye to the future “ (15.)
Marris continues on in the second chapter, The Yellowstone Model, with ideas from the first chapter. In the first chapter she argues against the assumption that a baseline is “good” and extends this argument by challenging the assumptions that there is a “balance of nature” and that areas devoid of humans is necessary for pristine wilderness. This chapter in general contains more history because she explains the “Yellowstone Model,” and how conservationists over the years have come up with concept of “setting aside pristine wilderness areas and banning all human use therein” (18.) She accounts this model to the famous park advocate, John Muir who was a forefather in the idea of “pristine wilderness.” The consequence of having a human free park, was the displacement of the native tribes that lived on the land, and according to Marris these were the people doing the “least harm” (26.) Furthermore, Marris discusses this concept of having a “static or stable nature” (27.) She goes back and gives a brief history of the concept of the balance of nature derived by Clement, for those of us part of the less informed scientific community. She disproves his point by the experiments of Scientist Botkin, who proves that the “balance of nature,” which Clements believed to be true, was false because through his studies he found that “chaos, rather than equilibrium, is more common” (30.) Marris continues on by going against this concept of global warming, and says that regardless of human intervention climate will increase because “we’re in an interglacial now,” meaning that the earth is getting out of the ice age (32.) Essentially her point for the second half of he chapter is that there is no correct baseline to look back to because the earth is constantly changing, and these conservation efforts that look at the baseline are all going to waste. Overall, Marris summed up her thoughts and ideas cohesively for the common individual to understand.
