I understand that ecologists and scientists of the like would be interested in recreating ecosystems that mimic those of 13,000 years ago, but I do not agree with or understand why they would want to do this on a large scale in America. Marris tells us, “The idea is to restore long-lost processes such as intensive grazing or population control by large predators, to restore ‘evolutionary and ecological potential’ to populations of large animals just barely hanging on in their current ranges, and to inspire people to support nature conservation” (62). In my opinion, rewilding is taking conservation and research to an extreme and negatively effects present-day environments. While reading through these chapters, I found myself thinking those ecologists taking part in rewilding schemes are somewhat selfish. Vera strives to recreate a “natural-processes-driven landscape,” claiming that a “natural ecosystem is better than a cultivated one.” The irony, as Marris states, is that “the whole place is cultivated, man-made, created” (70).
Rewilding, as coined by Dave Foreman in the mid-1990s, is the idea that the resilience and diversity of an ecosystem is based on the regulation by large, top-of-the-food-chain predators (60). I understand the idea of a species being squeezed out by others, in the absence of predator regulation, but I do not agree with Vera, or any person, “playing God”–though he claims that isn’t true. It seems silly that he’s picking and choosing certain animals or species that kind-of-sort-of work as those who may have been in that untouched environment years ago. Not only is Vera, and other scientists involved in rewilding initiatives, trying to cast present-day animals as ancient megafauna, but he is taking those animals out of their current natural habitats and relocating to new environments assuming they’ll be good fits. This proves to be a serious issue when death has become a prominent component of rewilding. Sure, death is a major component of any ecosystem, but rewilding projects and “pristine” areas like Bialowieza in Poland are either attracting or implementing species into unfamiliar territories. That rare black vulture from the French reintroduction program would never had died had it not been attracted to the carcasses nearby and not been unaccustomed to the proximity to or danger of the train tracks it perched on.
“What about bringing cheetahs to Arizona or elephants to Missouri to play the parts of related megafauna?” (61). Well, not only are the Arizona or Missouri environments unfamiliar to those species, but the current conditions of those ecosystems, not to mention the current human population, might not bode well with those animals living on the land. Similarly, Donlan deciding that the species of large tortoises were better off being translocated to islands seems selfish to me–“[he] finds them to be an ideal candidate for testing out the rewilding idea” (66). Not only is there the issue of some animals possibly being unable to adapt in new environments, but Marris has told us more than once now that nature does not need human involvement. The dynamic of environments, whether that be 13,000 years ago or present-day, may be very different but all are results of natural evolution, not man-made change. Vera’s project “looks to the past, but creates an unprecedented ecosystem” (68).
