Emma Marris has argued throughout her novel, Rambunctious Garden, that “pristine wilderness” is unrealistic and unfeasible to recreate. Human activities have influenced nature for as long as we existed. It is impossible, if not difficult, to reverse all the impact that has been done or to restore ecosystems. Marris further supports her argument in chapters 8 and 9. She talks about creating “designer ecosystems” that can realistically benefit nature. Together with the idea of “conservation everywhere”, both humans and nature can benefit and coexist with one another.
Marris believes that designer ecosystems are “a best-case future” (Marris 131). They would “create ‘new environments that are ecologically sound, aesthetically satisfying, economically rewarding and favorable to the continued growth of civilization'” (131). Parks would still be kept for those who want that true feeling of nature, but a majority of these types of environments would be designer ecosystems. These are essentially the rambunctious gardens which Marris appropriately titles her novel. René Dubos, an advocate, microbiologist and environmental thinker, is convinced that managed nature designed to support humans and other species will prosper in the future (130). Perhaps one of the most appealing characteristics of designer ecosystems is from the economic standpoint. It would be far more affordable for governments to maintain these rambunctious gardens than “pristine wilderness” efforts. These ecosystems would utilize land and make them more efficient.
In addition, species would be aided with appropriate habitats. Marris provides us with an example of sinking old ships to provide places for coral reefs to populate (126). Another example would be penguin habitat manipulation. “The manipulation doesn’t return penguin habitat to any particular baseline; it makes the habitat better than ‘normal’ for the birds (127). Nonetheless, there are many people who argue in favor of “Island Civilization”, where “humans retreat to very dense cities, voluntarily limit their own population, and let the rest of the planet run wild” (132).
In these chapters, Marris clarifies why rambunctious gardens are more realistic and beneficial to nature and society. I certainly favor the idea of designer ecosystems simply because it is more plausible to achieve man and nature coexistence. I understand the beauty and love for “pristine wilderness”, but we can create just as beautiful (or even more) ecosystems. Historian Roderick Nash addresses that the “garden scenario” is “human control of nature” that is both total and beneficent” (130). Soil composition and fertility is well maintained, rivers are clean and pure. If designer ecosystems can benefit in many ways, it seems as if we have the best of both worlds. There will still be true nature in addition to these created environments. This can please advocates of pristine wilderness and rambunctious gardens. Moreover, a lot of money will be saved that can be used to better both systems.
