Rewilding – departures in conservation policy and practice? An evaluation of developments in Britain

Rewilding has been hailed as ‘radical’ and ‘agenda-setting’ in the challenge it poses to mainstream conservation. This paper questions whether that is still the case, or if rewilding is now being mainstreamed and with what consequences? Our analysis focuses upon developments in Britain, up until 2018, discussing what changes have become manifest and the barriers and restraints that have been observed. As such, we evaluate the extent to which rewilding – in practice - departs from longstanding conservation sensibilities. Discussion is structured around three key questions— Who is now involved in rewilding across Britain? What they are seeking to do, in terms of how nature is conceptualised and managed (or not)? In what ways do their objectives involve people and human-centred aspirations? Our findings reveal three key differences from current conservation approaches. First, rewilding is associated with a proliferation of new actors, new mechanisms of finance and new spaces of conservation interest. Second, rewilding as an approach exhibits clear novelty in its stated aim to be nature-led and, despite challenges, attempts to work through ongoing negotiation and experimentation. Finally, rewilding is currently being advocated and pursued as an agenda for people and nature, which moves beyond earlier nature conservation paradigms of protecting nature from human influence. However, it remains to be seen whether rewilding advocates can realise their ambitions to popularise and create peopled wild spaces across Britain's landscapes

Saving the world’s terrestrial megafauna

From the late Pleistocene to the Holocene, and now the so called Anthropocene, humans have been driving an ongoing series of species declines and extinctions (Dirzo et al. 2014). Large-bodied mammals are typically at a higher risk of extinction than smaller ones (Cardillo et al. 2005). However, in some circumstances terrestrial megafauna populations have been able to recover some of their lost numbers due to strong conservation and political commitment, and human cultural changes (Chapron et al. 2014). Indeed many would be in considerably worse predicaments in the absence of conservation action (Hoffmann et al. 2015). Nevertheless, most mammalian megafauna face dramatic range contractions and population declines. In fact, 59% of the world’s largest carnivores (≥ 15 kg, n = 27) and 60% of the world’s largest herbivores (≥ 100 kg, n = 74) are classified as threatened with extinction on the International Union for the Conservation of Nature (IUCN) Red List (supplemental table S1 and S2). This situation is particularly dire in sub-Saharan Africa and Southeast Asia, home to the greatest diversity of extant megafauna (figure 1). Species at risk of extinction include some of the world’s most iconic animals—such as gorillas, rhinos, and big cats (figure 2 top row)—and, unfortunately, they are vanishing just as science is discovering their essential ecological roles (Estes et al. 2011). Here, our objectives are to raise awareness of how these megafauna are imperiled (species in supplemental table S1 and S2) and to stimulate broad interest in developing specific recommendations and concerted action to conserve them

Rewilding

Rewilding falls within the general framework of restoration ecology, but differs from a traditional view of habitat restoration and species reintroduction. Four initial steps are required to instigate a rewilding project: identification of the issue of conservation concern; identification of the missing ecological processes; identification of the functional characteristics required; and selection and reintroduction of the most suitable species. One method of progressing rewilding to a mainstream management option is to test a priori hypotheses with quantifiable outcomes within rewilding projects. Scenario planning and the 'three horizons' analysis allow long-term rewilding projects to be considered in three phases: the current, functionally deficient ecosystem in need of restoration; a projected future scenario where the ecosystem is restored to a functional and self-sustaining state; a transition state between the first and third horizons. This chapter explores the proposed restoration of the Caledonian pine forest in the Scottish Highlands as an example. © 2013 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Rewilding: science, practice, and politics

Rewilding is being promoted as an ambitious alternative to current approaches to nature conservation. Interest is growing in popular and scientific literatures, and rewilding is the subject of significant comment and debate, outstripping scientific research and conservation practice. Projects and research are found the world over, with concentrations in Europe, North America, and on tropical islands. A common aim is to maintain, or increase, biodiversity, while reducing the impact of present and past human interventions through the restoration of species and ecological processes. The term rewilding has been applied to diverse concepts and practices. We review the historical emergence of the term and its various overlapping meanings, aims, and approaches, and illustrate this through a description of four flagship rewilding case studies. The science of rewilding has centered on three different historical baselines: the Pleistocene, the Holocene, and novel contemporary ecosystems. The choice of baseline has differing implications for conservation in a variety of contexts. Rewilding projects involve a range of practical components—such as passive management, reintroduction, and taxon substitution—some of which have attracted criticism. They also raise a series of political, social, and ethical concerns where they conflict with more established forms of environmental management. In conclusion, we summarize the different goals, approaches, tools, and contexts that account for the variations in rewilding and identify priorities for future research and practice