In our minds there are background of natural archetypes or conservation frames , e.g the pastoral frame of rural England, the uplands frame of Scottish Highlands, the high forest frame of central Europe.
In Europe, the main idea was conserving benchmark types. In the pastoral landscapes there were birds and species that were evoking a rural ideal. As these landscapes became endangered, there were directives and educational practices aimed at locking these ideals. At the same time, conservation institutions emerging around particular views of nature. Compositionalist archetypes - fundamentally about the conservation of species.
The rewilding frame: really quite different. With these conservation institutions we have lost sight of what is it that we want to preserve.
The compositionalist paradigm focuses on notions of balance, representative, benchmark, cultural conservatism.
The functionalist paradigm is more about flux, dynamic disequilibrium, no-analogue species assemblages. Rewilding is much more about uncertainty, more open to letting the biotic interactions decide future pathways.
Institutions exhibit path-dependency and resist change.
In Europe, the main idea was conserving benchmark types. In the pastoral landscapes there were birds and species that were evoking a rural ideal. As these landscapes became endangered, there were directives and educational practices aimed at locking these ideals. At the same time, conservation institutions emerging around particular views of nature. Compositionalist archetypes - fundamentally about the conservation of species.
The rewilding frame: really quite different. With these conservation institutions we have lost sight of what is it that we want to preserve.
The compositionalist paradigm focuses on notions of balance, representative, benchmark, cultural conservatism.
The functionalist paradigm is more about flux, dynamic disequilibrium, no-analogue species assemblages. Rewilding is much more about uncertainty, more open to letting the biotic interactions decide future pathways.
Institutions exhibit path-dependency and resist change.
Challenges include:
1. Where do re-wilded species fit into conservation legislation?
2. If habitat structure becomes dynamic and uncertain how can this align with legal requirements to maintain favourable conditions?
3. Are they wild or domestic?
5. Rubs up against animal welfare sentiments.
6Antagonises farming lobbies
However, European conservation institutions are ageing. Most primary legislation is reviewed on generation cycles. Current directives in Europe are more than a generation old. The legislation is very prescriptive and inflexible and there are emerging tensions.
This idea that we can keep rare animals from a pastoral past is looking silly, example of the European hamster, a steppe species that came in with agriculture. It costs 1300 euros per hamster to breed them
What is nature for a multi-cultural Europe? Is a pastoral archetype the right archetype. Is a rewilding frame a better archetype for nature going ahead. This is an archetype that a lot of European citizens are watching in nature documentaries.
Example of restoration of Yorkshire post-mining landscapes.
Is going forward with old conservation institutions delivering the best we could deliver for society. Maybe we can offer the rewilding option. Rewilding could be put forward as a new natural archetype complementary to the other archetypes.
Rewilding - a new network of conservation sites. What we are doing with rewilding sites is not preserve landscapes. They are more ecological experimentation sites. This network of sites is not there to please traditional conservation, but to unsettle people and reignite a public debate on our relationship with nature.
The community of people keen on rewilding need to start making a case to policy makers. A key opportunity for Europe.
Rewilding is a radical practice and has the potential to male us rethink what we mean by nature
1. Where do re-wilded species fit into conservation legislation?
2. If habitat structure becomes dynamic and uncertain how can this align with legal requirements to maintain favourable conditions?
3. Are they wild or domestic?
5. Rubs up against animal welfare sentiments.
6Antagonises farming lobbies
However, European conservation institutions are ageing. Most primary legislation is reviewed on generation cycles. Current directives in Europe are more than a generation old. The legislation is very prescriptive and inflexible and there are emerging tensions.
This idea that we can keep rare animals from a pastoral past is looking silly, example of the European hamster, a steppe species that came in with agriculture. It costs 1300 euros per hamster to breed them
What is nature for a multi-cultural Europe? Is a pastoral archetype the right archetype. Is a rewilding frame a better archetype for nature going ahead. This is an archetype that a lot of European citizens are watching in nature documentaries.
Example of restoration of Yorkshire post-mining landscapes.
Is going forward with old conservation institutions delivering the best we could deliver for society. Maybe we can offer the rewilding option. Rewilding could be put forward as a new natural archetype complementary to the other archetypes.
Rewilding - a new network of conservation sites. What we are doing with rewilding sites is not preserve landscapes. They are more ecological experimentation sites. This network of sites is not there to please traditional conservation, but to unsettle people and reignite a public debate on our relationship with nature.
The community of people keen on rewilding need to start making a case to policy makers. A key opportunity for Europe.
Rewilding is a radical practice and has the potential to male us rethink what we mean by nature