In chapters 3 and 4 of the Rambunctious Garden, Marris introduces a new concept called rewilding, in which scientists and conservationists attempt to recreate an ecosystem that predated human arrival by bringing native species back to their original ecosystem. However, further research suggests that humans are not solely responsible for the extinction of the “megafauna” or large animals that inhabited North America (Marris 44). As a result, scientists and conservationists introduced “Pleistocene Rewilding,” which refers to a baseline about 13,000 years ago (Marris 57). Ultimately, this baseline is deemed to be a more accurate indicator of how the land was before it was reshaped by humans and nature. Analyzing North America before the “megafauna” is a better approach because research shows that humans are not the only ones responsible for changing the land. In fact this claim is shown to be outdated, but using the Pleistocene era as a reference will provide scientists and conservationists with a better picture of the ecosystem. By researching the species that thrived on the land, scientists can then make inferences about the landscape and how it has changed over the past 13,000 years.
However, since these species have been extinct thousands of years ago, scientists and conservationists needed to use other similar species as “proxies” to determine how the ecosystem was during this era (61). The “proxies” are species that bare resemblance to the “megafauna” But this is controversial because it authorizes conservationists to move nonnative species out of the land and bring in the “native species.” Field ecologist, Josh Donlan, who worked closely with the scientists and conservationists behind “Nature,” an outlined plan for “Pleistocene Rewilding,” has actively been removing nonnative species (62). In fact, Donlan recalls working in Mexico’s Gulf of California, but because he was not able to remove all the cats on the island, the native wood-rat species went extinct. In this example, it is clear that rewilding is important to keep native species from going extinct.However, it still leaves the question of whether or not it is okay to remove a species from its habitat and put it in a new ecosystem that its ancestors have lived in thousands of years ago.
Moreover, rewilding still enforces the barrier between humans and nature; Donlan mentions that when bringing native species back to North America they will be separate from human civilization. For some, this contradicts the idea of a “pristine nature.” A prime example of this is the Oostvaardersplassen in the Netherlands, which was designed to showcase “pristine nature” however, Marris argues that is “far from pristine” because the species are living on a plot of land surronded by Civilization (70). These animals cannot roam wildly because of the Oostvaardersplassen’s proximity to people.
Even though it is important for conservationists to prevent the extinction of native species, it is also difficult to determine whether or not removing a species from its habitat and putting it in a new ecosystem will do more harm or good. Given the lack of scientific information about the Pleistocene era, scientists have to rely upon a “few long-term ecological studies” (62). This will take scientists a lot of time to analyze and compile conclusions. Rewilding is scientifically feasible but because rewilding is a new concept, the only way for scientists to conclude whether or not the concept is the best approach is to conduct long-term research on the species in their new ecosystems.
