In the early nineties, in the last throes of Margaret Thatcher’s premiership, the government published its landmark white paper on the environment, This Common Inheritance.

The document was hailed as a major breakthrough at the time, ratcheting the environment up the political agenda and setting out what was then a big vision for a new National Forest in the Midlands.

Fast forward just more than 25 years, and the current government is publishing a new environment plan to much fanfare, this time heralding a new Northern Forest.

A Green Future

The new plan, A Green Future, charts the next 25 years for the environment and has been warmly received by most commentators.

Getting these plans right is not always easy: too many instant actions and you are accused of lacking vision, adopt a long-term view and the doubters decry it is all fine words with no delivery.

What is striking about this plan is that once you delve beyond the headlines around plastics, it does signal what I think is a fundamental shift in approach.

Firstly, it genuinely feels like a cross-government plan and not one just firmly parked in the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs.

Moreover, it recognises the multifaceted benefits of our natural environment, acknowledging that our economic prosperity is inextricably tied to the condition of ‘natural capital’. 

And finally, it is ambitious – inspiring even – in its scope, moving beyond simply settling for environmental protection and pledging to enhance our environment within a generation.

Plain sailing

Okay, you can argue that this will require firm legislative backing and clearer funding mechanisms to make it happen, but these can always follow once the Brexit landscape has settled.

The plan also makes welcome reading for tree lovers, finally recognising the multifunctional benefits provided by woodlands, with an estimated value of £270 billion.

It is great to see environmental regeneration positioned in this way, contributing to job creation, health and wellbeing and quality of life, recognising the value that can be achieved with both public funds and private investment. 

However, our policy landscape is littered with grand initiatives that never found their time.

Indeed, it wasn’t all plain sailing for the National Forest itself. ‘The Notional Forest’ was a favourite label from those detractors, smirking even as the young saplings began marching across the landscape.

Retaining focus

But now look what has been achieved with 8.5 million trees planted and forest cover increasing from six percent to more than 20 percent across the 200 square mile area of the Midlands.

Together with increases in property values, a burgeoning visitor economy and a renewed sense of community pride, this is a success story that successive governments can be proud of.

What the National Forest has taught us is the importance of a strong vision and leadership, shared commitment from farmers, planners, and communities to make things happen, and the alignment of local funding mechanisms and policies as enablers. Without just one of these, everything will fall down.

At some 20 times the size of the National Forest, the challenge for the Northern Forest will be on retaining focus and coherence, and making a visible difference on the ground over such a large and diverse area. 

The Northern Forest is a bold statement of intent. The next 25 years will be the real test of success, and while this is a blip in the life of a forest we know it is a long time in politics.

This Author

John Everitt is chief executive of the National Forest Company, which is responsible for coordinating the creation and management of the 200 square mile National Forest spanning parts of Derbyshire, Leicestershire and Staffordshire.

Higher road density leads to lower grizzly bear density, scientists from the University of Alberta have confirmed. This is a critical problem for a species still rebounding from a long period of human persecution.

The research examined dataset of grizzly bear activity in British Columbia based on “non-invasive DNA” taken from hair collection. 

Clayton Lamb, who is currently completing his PhD at the University of Alberta, said: “The problem with grizzly bears and roads is a North American-wide issue. This is the first study that strongly links roads to decreased grizzly bear density.”

Not only do bears die near roads, bears also avoid these areas, making many habitats with roads through them less effective. By closing roads, we can reduce the negative impact in a lot of ways. We can’t turn roads back into forest tomorrow, so the best thing we can do right now is to close them. The effects are immediate.”

Bear populations 

Lamb and his colleagues studied a threatened population of grizzlies in the Monashee Mountains, just east of the Okanagan, the leading edge of bear recovery efforts in British Columbia.

Lamb described the population as low but recovering, with a few bears slowly recolonising the Okanagan where they used to roam but are currently locally extinct, or extirpated. His comments came after the December 2017 closure of the grizzly bear hunt in British Columbia.

Lamb said: “Grizzly bears are recovering in a lot of areas, but habitat loss and human-bear conflict remain huge problems that can compromise recovery.”

“It is more important than ever that the public recognise the continuing threats to bear populations. Current road densities in British Columbia represent a problem for bear conservation.

“We are losing wilderness in the province, and there are fewer grizzly bears where road densities are high. We’re taking it another step further and advising that closing roads will do a lot to improve bear populations.”

Land management

Lamb said the findings can be applied to other habitats throughout North America.

Along with a new scientific paper, Lamb and his fellow conservation scientists produced a land management guide focused on maintaining the spatial integrity of the landscape to bolster grizzly bear density.

Lamb, who was born in British Columbia, said wildlife conservation was in his veins. “I grew up in the outdoors. I developed an increasing appreciation for wild places and conserving them. I realised that science was an outlet to protect these places and the species that inhabit them.”

On the back of Lamb’s work, road closures are already being planned for the Monashee Mountain area.

This Author

Catherine Harte is contributing editor of The Ecologist. This story is based on a news release from the University of Alberta. The study was recently published in the Journal of Applied Ecology.

In the early nineties, in the last throes of Margaret Thatcher’s premiership, the government published its landmark white paper on the environment, This Common Inheritance.

The document was hailed as a major breakthrough at the time, ratcheting the environment up the political agenda and setting out what was then a big vision for a new National Forest in the Midlands.

Fast forward just more than 25 years, and the current government is publishing a new environment plan to much fanfare, this time heralding a new Northern Forest.

A Green Future

The new plan, A Green Future, charts the next 25 years for the environment and has been warmly received by most commentators.

Getting these plans right is not always easy: too many instant actions and you are accused of lacking vision, adopt a long-term view and the doubters decry it is all fine words with no delivery.

What is striking about this plan is that once you delve beyond the headlines around plastics, it does signal what I think is a fundamental shift in approach.

Firstly, it genuinely feels like a cross-government plan and not one just firmly parked in the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs.

Moreover, it recognises the multifaceted benefits of our natural environment, acknowledging that our economic prosperity is inextricably tied to the condition of ‘natural capital’. 

And finally, it is ambitious – inspiring even – in its scope, moving beyond simply settling for environmental protection and pledging to enhance our environment within a generation.

Plain sailing

Okay, you can argue that this will require firm legislative backing and clearer funding mechanisms to make it happen, but these can always follow once the Brexit landscape has settled.

The plan also makes welcome reading for tree lovers, finally recognising the multifunctional benefits provided by woodlands, with an estimated value of £270 billion.

It is great to see environmental regeneration positioned in this way, contributing to job creation, health and wellbeing and quality of life, recognising the value that can be achieved with both public funds and private investment. 

However, our policy landscape is littered with grand initiatives that never found their time.

Indeed, it wasn’t all plain sailing for the National Forest itself. ‘The Notional Forest’ was a favourite label from those detractors, smirking even as the young saplings began marching across the landscape.

Retaining focus

But now look what has been achieved with 8.5 million trees planted and forest cover increasing from six percent to more than 20 percent across the 200 square mile area of the Midlands.

Together with increases in property values, a burgeoning visitor economy and a renewed sense of community pride, this is a success story that successive governments can be proud of.

What the National Forest has taught us is the importance of a strong vision and leadership, shared commitment from farmers, planners, and communities to make things happen, and the alignment of local funding mechanisms and policies as enablers. Without just one of these, everything will fall down.

At some 20 times the size of the National Forest, the challenge for the Northern Forest will be on retaining focus and coherence, and making a visible difference on the ground over such a large and diverse area. 

The Northern Forest is a bold statement of intent. The next 25 years will be the real test of success, and while this is a blip in the life of a forest we know it is a long time in politics.

This Author

John Everitt is chief executive of the National Forest Company, which is responsible for coordinating the creation and management of the 200 square mile National Forest spanning parts of Derbyshire, Leicestershire and Staffordshire.

Higher road density leads to lower grizzly bear density, scientists from the University of Alberta have confirmed. This is a critical problem for a species still rebounding from a long period of human persecution.

The research examined dataset of grizzly bear activity in British Columbia based on “non-invasive DNA” taken from hair collection. 

Clayton Lamb, who is currently completing his PhD at the University of Alberta, said: “The problem with grizzly bears and roads is a North American-wide issue. This is the first study that strongly links roads to decreased grizzly bear density.”

Not only do bears die near roads, bears also avoid these areas, making many habitats with roads through them less effective. By closing roads, we can reduce the negative impact in a lot of ways. We can’t turn roads back into forest tomorrow, so the best thing we can do right now is to close them. The effects are immediate.”

Bear populations 

Lamb and his colleagues studied a threatened population of grizzlies in the Monashee Mountains, just east of the Okanagan, the leading edge of bear recovery efforts in British Columbia.

Lamb described the population as low but recovering, with a few bears slowly recolonising the Okanagan where they used to roam but are currently locally extinct, or extirpated. His comments came after the December 2017 closure of the grizzly bear hunt in British Columbia.

Lamb said: “Grizzly bears are recovering in a lot of areas, but habitat loss and human-bear conflict remain huge problems that can compromise recovery.”

“It is more important than ever that the public recognise the continuing threats to bear populations. Current road densities in British Columbia represent a problem for bear conservation.

“We are losing wilderness in the province, and there are fewer grizzly bears where road densities are high. We’re taking it another step further and advising that closing roads will do a lot to improve bear populations.”

Land management

Lamb said the findings can be applied to other habitats throughout North America.

Along with a new scientific paper, Lamb and his fellow conservation scientists produced a land management guide focused on maintaining the spatial integrity of the landscape to bolster grizzly bear density.

Lamb, who was born in British Columbia, said wildlife conservation was in his veins. “I grew up in the outdoors. I developed an increasing appreciation for wild places and conserving them. I realised that science was an outlet to protect these places and the species that inhabit them.”

On the back of Lamb’s work, road closures are already being planned for the Monashee Mountain area.

This Author

Catherine Harte is contributing editor of The Ecologist. This story is based on a news release from the University of Alberta. The study was recently published in the Journal of Applied Ecology.

Higher road density leads to lower grizzly bear density, scientists from the University of Alberta have confirmed. This is a critical problem for a species still rebounding from a long period of human persecution.

The research examined dataset of grizzly bear activity in British Columbia based on “non-invasive DNA” taken from hair collection. 

Clayton Lamb, who is currently completing his PhD at the University of Alberta, said: “The problem with grizzly bears and roads is a North American-wide issue. This is the first study that strongly links roads to decreased grizzly bear density.”

Not only do bears die near roads, bears also avoid these areas, making many habitats with roads through them less effective. By closing roads, we can reduce the negative impact in a lot of ways. We can’t turn roads back into forest tomorrow, so the best thing we can do right now is to close them. The effects are immediate.”

Bear populations 

Lamb and his colleagues studied a threatened population of grizzlies in the Monashee Mountains, just east of the Okanagan, the leading edge of bear recovery efforts in British Columbia.

Lamb described the population as low but recovering, with a few bears slowly recolonising the Okanagan where they used to roam but are currently locally extinct, or extirpated. His comments came after the December 2017 closure of the grizzly bear hunt in British Columbia.

Lamb said: “Grizzly bears are recovering in a lot of areas, but habitat loss and human-bear conflict remain huge problems that can compromise recovery.”

“It is more important than ever that the public recognise the continuing threats to bear populations. Current road densities in British Columbia represent a problem for bear conservation.

“We are losing wilderness in the province, and there are fewer grizzly bears where road densities are high. We’re taking it another step further and advising that closing roads will do a lot to improve bear populations.”

Land management

Lamb said the findings can be applied to other habitats throughout North America.

Along with a new scientific paper, Lamb and his fellow conservation scientists produced a land management guide focused on maintaining the spatial integrity of the landscape to bolster grizzly bear density.

Lamb, who was born in British Columbia, said wildlife conservation was in his veins. “I grew up in the outdoors. I developed an increasing appreciation for wild places and conserving them. I realised that science was an outlet to protect these places and the species that inhabit them.”

On the back of Lamb’s work, road closures are already being planned for the Monashee Mountain area.

This Author

Catherine Harte is contributing editor of The Ecologist. This story is based on a news release from the University of Alberta. The study was recently published in the Journal of Applied Ecology.

Amsterdam has never been afraid to embrace bold new visions of the future. The world’s first stock exchange was established in the city in 1602, heralding the Dutch capital’s transformation from a regional market town into a dominant financial centre.

In 2001 the world’s first same-sex marriage took place in the city, and in 2016 Amsterdam was the setting for the testing of the world’s first driverless passenger bus in a move that could revolutionise urban public transport. 

Yesterday, Amsterdam heralded a new world-first that is set to change the face of global food and drink retail forever. The world’s first plastic free aisle was today unveiled in a supermarket in the city.

Plastic-free shopping

The aisle sits within a completely new metro-sized pilot store of the Dutch supermarket chain Ekoplaza.

Showcasing more than 700 plastic-free products, the launch of the aisle represents a seminal moment for the burgeoning global movement against unfettered plastic pollution. 

Shoppers visiting the Ekoplaza store on Jan Pieter Heijestraat in the Dutch capital’s Oud-West neighborhood today are being offered a glimpse of a radically-greener future for food and drink retail.

A huge breadth of plastic-free products are included in the pilot, ranging from meat and dairy to fresh fruit and vegetables.

The aisle will be a testbed for innovative new compostable bio-materials as well as traditional materials such as glass, metal and cardboard.

Green credentials 

Ekoplaza plans to introduce a plastic-free  aisle to its 74 branches across the Netherlands by the end of this year.

The second store with a plastic free aisle is expected to be in The Hague. It’s due to open in June this year. 

The Netherlands has a long track-record of blazing a trail on environmental issues, with the UK famed for being decidedly slower on the uptake.

With 35,000 kilometres of traffic-free cycle lanes, the Netherlands is the only country in Europe that is home to more bicycles than people. 

Beyond Amsterdam, an extensive public transport network makes it possible to reach almost every corner of the country by train, bus and tram. 

Dutch business is widely heralded for its green credentials, with Netherlands-based multinationals Philips and Unilever having become stalwarts of the Dow Jones Sustainability Index. 

Consumer pressure

With growing public consensus for tougher action against the scourge of plastic pollution, it’s high time that Britain’s biggest grocery retailers followed the example set by their Dutch counterparts.

According to a 2017 survey by Populus, more than nine-in-ten Britons back the introduction of a plastic free aisle. More than 80 percent are concerned about the amount of plastic waste that is generated in the UK. 

Plastic free aisles have attracted political support too. In January Prime Minister Theresa May used her first major speech on the environment to vow to work with Britain’s biggest supermarkets to introduce plastic free aisles in their stores.

This was less than a month after business leaders including former ASDA CEO Andy Clarke, current Debenhams Chairman Sir Ian Cheshire, and former British Soft Drinks Association Chief Executive Lord Hayward backed the move. 

UK supermarkets are now waking up to the environmental crisis that plastic has created, but have misplaced confidence in recycling as an answer to the problem.

Plastic waste

Unlike aluminium cans and glass bottles, plastic packaging cannot be recycled endlessly. All plastic is ‘downcycled’ as it becomes inferior each time it is recycled.

Irrespective of how much is spent on improving Britain’s recycling infrastructure, almost all plastic waste will make the transition from the economy to the environment sooner or later. 

The answer then is simple. We have to turn off the plastic tap before it’s too late. Plastic free aisles are the first step to a brighter future for food and drink retailing.

No longer are the public willing to choose products that will last a matter of weeks packaged in a material that will remain on the earth for hundreds of years .

With plastic’s role becoming increasing untenable in food and drink, it’s clear that Britain’s biggest retailers must introduce plastic free aisles at the earliest opportunity. 

This Author

Sian Sutherland is co-founder of A Plastic Planet – the campaign for a plastic free aisle in supermarkets. To learn more about the campaign visit aplasticplanet.com. 

Conservationists with an eye for a bargain – or giving to charity from a tight household budget – are being advised to sign up to the National Trust in the next few days in order to avoid a hike in membership fees. 

The National Trust will put up its membership prices by an average of 50p a month to help fund its biggest ever programme of conservation repairs, maintenance and improvements. The extra expense comes as families are struggling after years of austerity policies and also price rises as a result of Brexit. 

The increase in monthly membership fees – which the charity is keen to point out is less than the price of a second class stamp – will help the National Trust address the increasing cost of looking after its historic homes, coastline and countryside – which rose by 15 per cent last year.

Famous gardens

The membership price changes take place from Thursday, 1 March 2018. Individuals aged over 26 will pay only £4.20 a year more for membership while the cost of family membership sees an increase of £5.40, rising from £114.60 to £120.00 a year. 

A quarter of a billion pounds has been spent by the Trust over the last two years on the conservation of its historic homes thanks to the support of its membership base – which has grown to more than five million.

Sharon Pickford, membership director, said:  “The money we raise from memberships goes directly into caring for the 300 historic properties, 778 miles of coastline and 250,000 hectares of countryside across England, Wales and Northern Ireland which the Trust looks after on behalf of the nation.

“We are a charity, we don’t receive any direct Government funding and our conservation costs are increasing. We need help from our members to look after these amazing places. Last year, we spent the equivalent of more than £2 million a week on conservation work.

“This included helping to fund big projects such as finishing the 30 year restoration and conservation of Kedleston Hall in Derbyshire, the continuing restoration of Knole in Kent and repairing the roof at the Vyne in Hampshire, plus restoring the famous gardens at Stowe in Buckinghamshire and Standen in West Sussex.”

Loyal support

Pickford added: “But it’s not just the big projects we need to fund. Money raised through membership also helps fund improvements to facilities – such as car parks, cafes and delivering a programme of events for visitors.  Over the last few years we’ve also responded to members’ feedback to open our doors for longer and for more places to open for 363 days a year.

“We couldn’t do all of this without the vital support of our members and we thank them for their continued support.”

The charity was also keen to point out that it was introducing a series of discounts and exceptions, so the price rise would not impact those who could afford them least, including both older and younger existing and potential members.

The statement on its website stated that “the Trust will write to around a million members aged over 60 to tell them it will continue to offer a 25 percent discount as reward for their loyal support. That will mean seniors, who have been members for at least five out of the previous ten years, will benefit from amongst the best value prices the Trust offers to any group.”

Grandparents and extended family relied upon for childcare will also be able to take advantage of a new-cut price £10 junior membership to take youngsters to 500 Trust places. As a result, young people currently on the young person membership – aged five to 17 – will benefit from a 70 per cent reduction in annual fees.

Concessions remain

Any member or supporter with a disability or a mobility issue can meanwhile claim a free carers’ pass – renamed the Essential Companion pass – for up to two friends or relatives to join them on a visit to any Trust place. Joint senior loyal members will see fees increase by £4.80 to £85.20, which is nearly £19 cheaper than the full price.

The new £10-a-year junior pass has been launched because around 1.5 million parents now rely on ‘informal’ childcare, according to the Department for Education – usually grandparents. Sharon said: “We know family life has changed dramatically and children are increasingly looked after by grandparents – and other family members – while their parents are out at work.

“We need to move with the times and offer more flexible memberships which reflect the changing nature of childcare in Britain; and which will help inspire the next generation to care about the hundreds of historic houses, landscapes, miles of coastline and wildlife that we look after.”

The Young Person’s 50 per cent concession remains, albeit with a revised age range (18-25) due to the introduction of the new junior membership.

This Author

Brendan Montague is editor of The Ecologist, founder of Request Initiative and co-author of Impact of Market Forces on Addictive Substances and Behaviours: The web of influence of addictive industries (Oxford University Press). He tweets at @EcoMontague.

This story is based in part on a press release from the National Trust. For more information on National Trust membership visit www.nationaltrust.org.uk/join. 

The RSPB charity is today asking people to think about their garden birds by topping up garden feeders, putting out fresh water and providing shelter as the Met Office forecasts ‘exceptionally cold’ temperatures for most of the UK this week.

Britain’s birds benefitted from mild January conditions, which saw temperatures reach 15°C in parts of southern England. However, they will now struggle to deal with the cold snap – which comes at a crucial time when they need extra energy. Prolonged periods of cold weather leave birds vulnerable as natural food sources become harder to come by and water sources freeze over, the charity has warned.

At this time of year, birds are starting to think about finding a mate and building nests to raise a family, which means they need plenty of food and water.

Helping birds

To keep their energy up during the colder months, the RSPB recommends helping garden birds by providing them with a variety of food, fatty food being especially helpful. They recommend fat balls or homemade bird cakes which can be made cheaply with kitchen scraps and lard and say seeds, fruits or dried mealworms are also suitable. 

Another vital support for vulnerable birds is fresh water for drinking and bathing. Finding sources of water can be hard for birds when there’s been a frost so the RSPB recommends floating a small ball, such as a ping-pong ball, on the surface of the water as a light breeze will stop an area of water from freezing.

Finally, providing shelter from the harsh weather is extremely important. The RSPB recommends putting up a nestbox to give birds a great place to roost in and shelter from the elements before the warmer spring arrives.

Freezing temperatures

Claire Thomas, RSPB Wildlife Advisor, said: “After enjoying the warmer conditions throughout January many of our favourite garden birds such as starlings, house sparrows, blue tits and blackbirds will be shocked by the sudden cold snap. Birds will be desperately searching for food, water and shelter to survive. 

You can make a real difference to birds in your garden and improve their chances of surviving the harsh weather the so-called “Beast from the East” will bring and successfully making it to breeding season. Birds don’t need much but by providing food, a supply of unfrozen water and somewhere to shelter from the elements, you will be rewarded with great views of wildlife in your back garden.”

Grahame Madge, a Met Office spokesman, said: “The intense plunge in temperature will create a dramatic end to winter and the beginning of spring. These cold conditions will bring freezing temperatures to the UK with a significant risk of snow, particularly in eastern parts of Britain where daytime highs in some parts are going to struggle to get above 0 °C.

This pattern is likely to remain established for some time with forecasters indicating little chance of a reprieve within the next week or so.”

This Author

Catherine Harte is contributing editor of The Ecologist. This story is based on a release from the RSPB. 

The largest expanse of intact and actively growing coral reef around Hawaiian Islands is being poorly managed with an expected fall in populations of important fish such as jacks, parrotfishes, snappers, unicorn fishes and chubs, according to the latest research.

Scientists from NOAA’s Pacific Islands Fisheries Science Center – Hawaii Division of Aquatic Resources – and The Nature Conservancy evaluated different management scenarios for one specific area: Puakō, in west Hawaii.

The current management scenario was the poorest performer—with nearly all key ecosystem indicators decreasing or with no meaningful change. Only a reduction in land based pollution would actually increase coral cover, according to the findings. 

Ecosystem stability 

Maintaining the status quo is projected to result in less highly prized fish – such as jacks, parrotfishes, snappers, unicorn fishes and chubs. There will then be an increase in undesirable fish species increase – including moray eels, hawkfishes, tobies, and porcupine fishes. Additionaly, coral reefs will likely become dominated by algae.

West Hawaii has the largest expanse of intact and actively growing coral reef in all of the main Hawaiian Islands. The wide array of ocean life makes it incredibly important for marine biodiversity and human society. 

The coastal ocean and coral reefs provide seafood, resources for tourism and recreation, protection from wave and storm impacts, and the preservation of cultural practices.

But it is also particularly vulnerable to the pressures of an increasing population, coastal development, fishing, pollution, and climate change.

A recent study published in the Journal of Applied Ecology provides a range of options to protect and restore this valuable marine ecosystem for the future.

Reducing pollution

The scientists evaluated how different management strategies would benefit the coastal marine ecosystem and coral reef health.

The evaluation was based on key ecosystem services and indicators. Six different management scenarios were then assessed based on: no change in current management; reduced fishing; reduced land-based pollution; no fishing of herbivores; line-fishing only; marine protected areas.

All of the other management options show improvements in ecosystem structure and resilience. However, reducing land-based sources of pollution was the only scenario where coral cover increased.

Dive tourism would derive the greatest benefit from only line-fishing and no-take areas. The reduced fishing scenario – 90 percent Maximum Sustainable Yield [MSY] – shows positive gains in all three ecosystem services, including the largest to fisheries, however gains were minimal in comparison to other management options.

The scenario with only line-fishing represents the most balanced trade-off for all indicators with positive gains for both ecosystem structure and resilience and dive tourism and only moderate losses for fisheries.

Ultimately, the report concluded that no management solution simultaneously promotes recovery of ecosystem stability while also maximizing the delivery of ecosystem services.

Selecting the ‘best’ management strategy for the region depends on the desired balance between enhancing ecological benefits – improved ecosystem structure and resilience – and improving socio-economic benefits to fishermen and dive tourists.

This Author

Brendan Montague is editor of The Ecologist, founder of Request Initiative and co-author of Impact of Market Forces on Addictive Substances and Behaviours: The web of influence of addictive industries (Oxford University Press). He tweets at @EcoMontague. This story is based on a news release from the British Ecological Society.

Rewilding has the potential to help address the current global biodiversity crisis, but its impact will be limited unless agreed definitions can be reached, backed by further scientific research and helped by a policy backdrop that enables greater integration with current environmental legislation.

These are the key findings of a new study into the controversial technique, led by international conservation charity ZSL (Zoological Society of London) and published in the Journal of Applied Ecology.

Rewilding – a philosophy that aims to encourage greater diversity of wildlife through practices including land abandonment and reintroducing native species – has become increasingly fashionable amongst conservation commentators and policymakers in recent years.

Defining ‘rewilding’

However, this popularity has also led to increasing misunderstanding about what the term ‘rewilding’ actually means, which in turn is limiting the potential for this technique to deliver positive impacts. In particular, the lack of a clear and agreed definition of the term has made it difficult to identify and address barriers to the integration of this thinking into government policy.

Scientists are now calling for key pieces of legislation concerning biodiversity, land-use, and conservation to be reshaped to make it easier for innovative ideas like rewilding to be included.

Dr Nathalie Pettorelli from ZSL’s Insititute of Zoology and lead author of the study said: ” To date, conservation efforts have focused mainly on restoring ecosystems to their historic state, with the aim of preserving particular wildlife populations and habitats.

However, the extent of global environmental change is now driving some ecosystems beyond their limits, meaning that for these systems restoration is no longer an option.

Rewilding provides a fresh perspective on the way forward for conservation in these situations, with its emphasis on minimal human interventions rather than sustained involvement, and focus on natural processes and functions. In the face of the current loss of biodiversity, rewilding urgently needs to be added to our arsenal of solutions – but for this to happen, governments around the world need to revise existing legislation to facilitate its inclusion.”

Priority areas

The ZSL-led study details a number of priority areas where further scientific research has the potential to reinforce the case for rewilding.

These include setting better-informed targets for the recovery of ecosystems; accepting some level of risk due to the inherent unpredictability of ecological outcomes; realistically evaluating costs and benefits; and understanding the potential social impacts of rewilding initiatives.

Finally, the study’s authors are calling for long-term, practical and scientifically-sound monitoring of these projects to ensure progress against goals.

Professor Johan du Toit of Utah State University (USU) and co-author of the report added: “It is important for policy-makers to understand that rewilding can do for damaged ecosystems what repairing does for broken machinery. Sustained functionality is the aim and to achieve that might require some replacement, reorganisation, or even substitution of parts.”

This Author

Catherine Harte is contributing editor of The Ecologist. This story is based on a news release from the Zoological Society of London.