In chapters 8 and 9 of Marris’ Rambunctious Garden, Marris once again points out how ecologists shouldn’t just be concerned with restoring and taking care of a “pristine” nature, but they should embrace change and develop he nature in urban areas as well. Marris begins chapter 8 with a discussion on how ecologists have tried to restore streams. Margaret Palmer, a stream restoration expert, says “new picture of pre-European streams will just replace one arbitrary baseline with another-neither of which takes into account the changing nature of the landscape” (124). This supports Marris’ point of the arbitrary goal of many ecologists, to continue to conserve nature by restoring it to a certain baseline.
The streams are actually designed rather than restored since “no restoration reproduces exactly the ecosystem of hundreds of years ago” (125). It is the goal of restoring an ecosystem to it’s “proper” baseline that many ecologists chase. They want to restore an ecosystem to a historic baseline that is “morally better” as well as “maximally efficient” at certain ecological functions (126). In doing so they are creating new, designer ecosystems, “even if they are inspired by the past” (126). But just because an ecosystem looks as it used to, Marris points out, doesn’t mean it will behave in the same manner. She also points out that often the historic ecosystem isn’t always performing better at certain functions that novel ecosystems and often a well constructed designer ecosystem will be better than a “recreation of a historical ecosystem” (127).
Because the ecology and nature of an area is constantly changing and adapting, there is no point in establishing a baseline and striving to obtain it since the baseline is not an ideal scenario since nature is always dynamic. Often it is even impossible to restore the original ecosystem, such as in the eucalyptus woodlands in Australia, where the soil became to salty for the historical plants to live. Instead, other species that thrive with salt could grow there. Richard Hobbs states, “You are not going to get the previous ecosystem back, but you can still aim for something that is valuable” (129).
I agree with Marris’ statement that ecologists should try to stop using the word “restore” and instead just design high functioning and useful ecosystems, as well as leave some land unmanaged, “just to see what it does” (131). Marris sums up her main points in the end of chapter 9, discussing the importance to preserve and enhance nature that is all around us. She brings up an interesting point of how nature shows portray nature as pristine and untouched, yet this is very rarely the case, and they convince viewers that the “pristine” idea of nature is the only true nature that there is. Marris points out many examples of how nature is all around us and I agree with her view of nature, which includes all of the animals and ecosystems that are directly around humans. Just because nature isn’t untouched, doesn’t mean that it shouldn’t be regarded as nature.
