Boundaries of the wolf and the wild: a conceptual examination of the relationship between rewilding and animal reintroduction

Abstract

Animal reintroduction and rewilding are two widely appealing and frequently connected forms of ecological restoration. However, the critical assumption that animal reintroduction automatically helps to restore formerly wild places is under‐theorized. To fill this void, we identified three common rewilding elements from the literature—ecological functioning, wilderness experience, and natural autonomy—and screened these against a hypothetical wolf reintroduction to Scotland. Each of the rewilding elements was likely to be positively impacted by a wolf reintroduction. Yet, there is a key conceptual difficulty in that the different rewilding elements do not necessarily enforce each other, and at times may even collide. Thus, a reintroduced species like the wolf may obfuscate the clear‐cut, purified nature category to which rewilding often aspires. As a way forward, we suggest that there is merit in actively engaging with the tensions created by rewilding and reintroductions. A reconceptualisation of the nature–culture spectrum as consisting of multiple layers (e.g. ecological functioning, wilderness experience, and natural autonomy) may help to interpret ecological restoration as a tentative, deliberative, and gradual enterprise. This bears some resemblance to the notion of approaching a landscape like a ‘palimpsest’ (i.e. a text built up of different layers written on top of each other), which may support the reconciliation of conflicting views without necessarily making those disappear. When viewed as feeding into a multilayered nature–culture spectrum, animal reintroduction and rewilding can be promoted as inspiring and essentially non‐controlling forms of ecological restoration and human interaction with nature.

Abandoning or Reimagining a Cultural Heartland? Understanding and Responding to Rewilding Conflicts in Wales – the Case of the Cambrian Wildwood

“…Trustees are aware that this could serve to undermine the project, due to discontent amongst neighbouring landowners and community members, but also due to the national political presence of farming representatives. This problem is not unique to this case (Arts et al 2016;Convery and Dutson 2008), and as with other struggles over rural land-use futures, the 'outsider' status of rewilding advocates has often been a key focus in retaliations: Whilst suggestions that Welsh farmers can be equated with First Nation Peoples elsewhere are problematic, indigeneity is a characteristic that has been repeatedly invoked in discussions (e.g.…”

“…As a means to acknowledge the cultures and histories that continue to act and 'show through' in any ecological restoration work, Hourdequin and Havlick (2016) have advanced the 6 conception of layered landscapes (see also Arts et al 2016). Equally, rewilders have begun to engage in reflection and negotiation over the amount and type of human involvement in 'wild' landscapes (Lorimer and Driessen 2014;Deary 2016;Townsend 2016).…”

“…Whilst some ontological tensions do persist in rewilding discourse around the degree of human separation from 'wild nature' (Arts et al 2016;Jørgensen 2015), there are promising signs in the extent to which rewilders are now acknowledging the cultural sensitivities in their aspirations. For example, in Scotland, Mackenzie (2008) and Deary (2016) outline how the problematic history of Highland clearances, raised by MacDonald (1998; see also Brown et al 2011), 1 is now being acknowledged in conservationist discourse.…”

“…As with other conservation interventions, rewilding could be seen as an attempt from a metropolitan elite to impose their values on rural communities whom they do not understand or value (Arts et al 2016;Holmes 2007;Redpath et al 2015;Schwartz 2006;Yorke 2016). Equally, as Arts et al (2016) outline, conflict is often driven more by issues of power differentials than actual differences in stakeholders' agendas (see also Young et al 2016). Where rewilding is driven by wealthy philanthropists there are questions over whether it is a plutocratic imposition, amounting to an undemocratic land-grab (Holmes 2011;.…”

New Interest in Wild Forest Products in Europe as an Expression of Biocultural Dynamics

“…These different approaches may be based either on the stimulation of natural autonomy through enhancement of natural processes that were impaired by humans or on the improvement of the ecological functioning through the enhancement of naturalistic processes that positively impact the ecological integrity of the area (Arts et al 2016). However, it does not involve a return to a pre-human state in the sense of excluding people from nature (Hall 2014).…”