In Rambunctious Garden: Saving Nature in a Post-Wild World, Emma Marris presents a lot of research to debate and argue that humans have changed every inch of planet Earth. Our actions have changed everything on land, in water and in air. In fact, Marris states that “Nature is almost everywhere. But wherever it is, there is one thing nature is not: pristine.” (Marris 2) Finding a “pristine” place is nearly impossible – there is simply no wilderness left. For nature to be pristine, it would have to be completely unaffected by any human actions and activities. But for the past few centuries, we have been striving for that state of nature. Ecologists use baselines to imagine and recreate what a particular place may look like before human influence. Then, they undergo a tedious process of removing introduced species, one by one. Marris talks about Cathcart killing feral animals such as cats and rabbits in Australia in an effort to bring back indigenous species. (11) Another example would be her second chapter, “The Yellowstone Model”. The conservation of Yellowstone Park only provided an idea of pristine wilderness that other countries tried to imitate. These included Australia, Canada, and many African countries. Ultimately however, it is true that Earth will not be able to return to its prehistoric state. Human influence has gone too deep. For thousands of years, humans have been heavily reshaping ecosystems. With this issue, Marris proposes a solution – humans should adopt the idea of a “rambunctious garden” and accept tamed wilderness. We should be take care of certain parts, but other parts should be left up to nature. We should embrace the “nature” that we do have around us, including our own backyards. The concept of a “rambunctious garden” is essentially redefining the relationship between humans and nature. Marris’s solution offers inspiration and hope for the future of nature.
Opting for a “rambunctious garden” seems favorable to me. Hence, I agree with Marris’s solution. If we continue to believe in restoring “pristine wilderness”, it will only lead to more disappointment. To even get close to that state, governments would have to spend a fortune and ecologists would have to spend an ample amount of time. Cathcart waited almost 200 days to catch a single cat. It took a lot of patience and perseverance. With all the time and money spent to hopefully achieve pristine nature, we could have developed landscapes and incorporate more nature into urban areas. In addition, ecosystems are always changing, even without the influence of human activities. If nature reshapes itself, it is pointless for us to keep tampering with it. Marris states that “Around the world, no single goal will provide for a sensible, well-rounded conservation program.” (14) Therefore, it is good idea for society to accept Marris’s more approachable and plausible interpretation of man versus nature.
