• Abandoned lynx, roaming wild boar, ‘beaver bombing’ – has rewilding got out of hand?

    From unauthorised species releases to small groups buying up land, ‘#guerrilla_rewilding’ is going mainstream. But experts worry that these rogue efforts could do more harm than good

    Visions of habitats teeming with nature are powerful, particularly so in an age of extinction. Rewilding, which offers the promise of such transformations, was once something most would have imagined happening far away, carried out by people unlike them, but times are changing. The wilderness is getting closer to home and more personal.

    In the past few months, there have been two suspected lynx releases and one of feral pigs in a small area of the Cairngorms, along with reports of a rise in “beaver bombing” on England’s rivers, and wild boar roaming Dartmoor.

    These acts may have Robin Hood appeal, but the rearing and release of large mammals goes some way beyond the well-established phenomenon of “#guerrilla_gardening”, where people sow native plants on land without express permission, or even the letting loose of rare butterflies in nature reserves (also a trending phenomenon).

    On the latter point, butterfly specialist Matthew Oates notes that ad hoc butterfly releases have been going on for more than two centuries, with Winston Churchill a notable practitioner.

    The latest wave of rogue activity, Oates says, is “fuelled by butterfly enthusiasts seeing a plethora of seemingly suitable but unoccupied habitat, which isn’t going to get colonised naturally, and a degree of disillusionment with nature conservation bodies”.

    As with mammals, trying to establish what has been unofficially introduced, as opposed to arisen from natural colonisation, involves “a lot of mythology and assumption,” he says. But there are many “highly reputable” breeders of butterflies with long-established reputations – something that rings less true when it comes to large animals.

    “I think some people who have taken matters into their own hands potentially have a quite romantic view of what it’s like to be a wild animal out there. It’s not just about opening the crate and letting them go,” says Roisin Campbell-Palmer, head of restoration for the Beaver Trust.

    “We should always put the animals first. We can celebrate the enthusiasm and the attitude of some people to shove two fingers to the system, but if those animals aren’t accepted and if they face prolonged or ongoing persecution, then I struggle ethically when asking: ‘Is this right, have we all done a good job here, and can we truly call this species restoration?’”

    She acknowledges that without rogue releases, beavers would not be back in Britain on a more formal basis – but fears that some bridges have been permanently burned because of the experiment. “Fingers can always be pointed. In retrospect, it’s very hard to encourage people to then accept the animals and coexist with them when they feel it wasn’t their choice and they weren’t involved.”

    A group of scientists working to restore predator communities have come out strongly against the Scottish lynx releases. It’s a view Campbell-Palmer shares. “What was the long-term outlook likely to be for those animals? They weren’t behaviourally ready for the wild. And to me, that’s just thrown up a big potential case of straight-out cruelty,” she says.

    “I hope that’s been a bit of a wake-up call for people who think you can just put large mammals back and it’ll all be fine. I’m very empathetic with people who get frustrated with the speed of change, but this rationale of ‘just get them out there and they’ll be accepted in the end’, I do struggle with that.”

    While charismatic species wandering free grab many of the headlines, a less bombastic phenomenon is growing: community groups are buying smaller patches of the landscape to interpret rewilding as they see fit.

    The Covid-19 pandemic prompted many to dream of wide-open spaces and nature in bloom, but one group in Harrogate, North Yorkshire, decided to get on with making it happen.

    The collective, from a variety of professional backgrounds, began by getting 3,000 shareholders to buy a £50 stake through a crowdfunding platform to acquire the 12-hectare (30-acre) #Long_Lands_Common on the outskirts of the town. They have recently completed another fundraising drive to add another 24 hectares of land, known as #Knaresborough_Forest_Park, which has been out of public hands since 1770.

    “Everyone’s come together around this singular ambition, to protect, to restore, and to just provide more space for nature in the community. We’ve found there are very few people who don’t seem to agree with that,” says George Eglese, a designer and the youngest member of the team behind the project.

    “I think before #Long_Lands existed, there wasn’t really anyone in the area who was doing this kind of work, and there was a lot of apathy in the town: people wanted change, but felt they couldn’t effect it. Long Lands created a platform, and there’s a sense that ‘we’ve got all this resource now – let’s do as much as we can to ensure the safety of our natural environment’.”

    As well as offering nature right next to accessible transport, and forging links with schools and charities, the project is also hoping to supply local food banks with fresh produce through a community food field, and offer a sustainable source of wood via the reintroduction of coppicing. They even hope that, in time, the site may attract some of those charismatic big beasts.

    “What we’re talking about is reversing nature depletion, and that means increasing biodiversity, whether it’s for fauna, fungi, the small and medium-sized things,” says Ian Fraser, the project’s woodland officer. “Do those things, the ecosystems are stronger, then the larger animals will come back on their own.”

    Despite doing things by the book, groups working to bring more #wildness into communities are not against a touch of righteous anger and rebellion. There’s a trend for struggles against threats to habitats turning into reimaginations of them: the story of Long Lands Common began as a protest against a relief road that would have run through the Nidd Gorge. In Liverpool, a smaller patch of habitat began with a community halting a proposed deal between the council and Redrow Homes to build on a park.

    More than simply saving Calderstones Park, the Liverpool campaign group went on to develop 1.5 hectares of semi-derelict land into a nature reserve, using some novel techniques that have won the admiration of urban planting experts. They have sown a wildflower meadow over concrete using a soil made from Mersey grit and crushed stone, introduced rescued hedgehogs, seen a big uptick in bats and are working on specialist butterfly habitat.

    “The council talked about rewilding and making it butterfly-friendly, but all that meant is they didn’t cut the grass,” says Caroline Williams from the group. “Without greater effort, a lot of it became just a sheer mess, with Himalayan balsam and Japanese knotweed [invasive plant species] coming in. There was definitely a feeling that if we don’t do it, nobody else will.”

    High-profile support has emerged for an even more personal form of rewilding. Financier and environmentalist Ben Goldsmith recently urged anyone with savings to buy land for rewilding, describing it as “the most rewarding, joyful and most impactful thing you can possibly do”.

    For those not willing to go solo and put their savings on the line, the UK has now got – at least in theory – structures in place to financially support rewilding at all manner of scales. Biodiversity Net Gain (BNG) legislation means that when new developments cannot feasibly create adequate habitat onsite to compensate for what they have damaged or depleted, plus 10% more, biodiversity projects, including relatively small community-managed patches of the landscape, can offer an offsite investment solution.

    Infrastructure is being added to BNG soon, which is likely to work especially well for projects such as the London Tree Ring, which aims to provide connective tree cover surrounding the capital, while also linking up smaller-scale community projects. Christoph Warrack, chief executive of the nature recovery consultancy Common, has been visiting potential sites.

    “This is reforestation on the edge of lots of the biggest construction and infrastructure projects in the country. It’s a really easy fit, because you can essentially connect each part to an individual development project and create the Biodiversity Net Gain credits,” says Warrack.

    “But we want those credits to happen anywhere. It’s important for quite complex mechanisms like that to be simplified and made available to communities, so that they’ve got a more powerful economic rationale for taking the plunge and acquiring their land.”

    As well as these moves to boost biodiversity on a national scale, and a boom in crowdfunding for nature, there is also philanthropic funding out there willing to support local action. Knaresborough Forest Park received a loan on generous terms from the organisation We Have the Power, while Common is being backed by the Esmée Fairbairn Foundation to build new financial models for communities to move faster in snapping up land on the market.

    British people’s love for wildlife, in a notably biodiversity-depleted country, is renowned. As such, rewilding was never going to remain purely the domain of large estates beyond the horizon. The fact that flagship projects have inspired efforts to bring the idea closer to home is a testament to their success, and it’s fair to say that was always at least partly the point.

    While most people wanting to make a personal impact are likely to find the comfort and increased financial clout of groups – and the safety of working within existing systems – the most desirable option, for some, permits and certificates, rules and regulations will always be the antithesis of nature. Officialdom will probably win the day, but the rebels could have some influence on how fast things are done.

    “Biodiversity is a whole huge multiplicity of dimensions, and then you add people, and the relationships between people and biodiversity. Welcome to planet Earth; this is life and all its glorious complexity,” says Warrack.

    “At the heart of that are some simple principles about place and people that have been clearly mapped out. What all these projects and ideas have in common is nature and nature recovery. And that is in everybody’s interest.”

    https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2025/apr/12/abandoned-lynx-roaming-wild-boar-beaver-bombing-has-rewilding-got-out-o
    #rewilding #réensauvagement #castors #lynx #sauvage #faune_sauvage #privatisation #biodiversité #nature

  • Acheter des terres pour en faire des réserves de vie sauvage, l’Aspas et Wild Bretagne passent à l’acte
    https://splann.org/nature-sauvage-bretagne

    Laisser la place à la nature sans la « gérer », c’est le principe du réensauvagement qui se propage actuellement en France. En Bretagne, plusieurs réserves dites de vie sauvage ont été créées. Un phénomène qui s’observe aussi à cause de la déprise agricole, mais qui soulève encore des inquiétudes. L’article Acheter des terres pour en faire des réserves de vie sauvage, l’Aspas et Wild Bretagne passent à l’acte est apparu en premier sur Splann ! | ONG d’enquêtes journalistiques en Bretagne.

    #Artificialisation_des_terres #biodiversité #écologie #libre_évolution #rewilding

  • Quelle place pour la nature sauvage en Bretagne ?
    https://splann.org/rewilding

    Laisser la place à la nature sans la « gérer », c’est le principe du réensauvagement qui se propage actuellement en France. En Bretagne, plusieurs réserves dites de vie sauvage ont été créées. Un phénomène qui s’observe aussi à cause de la déprise agricole, mais qui soulève encore des inquiétudes. Défendre l’idée de nature sauvage […] L’article Quelle place pour la nature sauvage en Bretagne ? est apparu en premier sur Splann ! | ONG d’enquêtes journalistiques en Bretagne.

    #Sans_catégorie #biodiversité #écologie #libre_évolution #rewilding

  • The Danger of Anti-Immigrant Extremism Posing as Environmentalism—and Who Funds It

    With President Joe Biden in the White House and Vice President Kamala Harris providing the deciding vote in the Senate, a range of long-sought Democratic policy goals are back in play, albeit just barely. That includes ambitious agendas on immigration and the environment.

    Could this be the administration that pushes through comprehensive immigration reform after decades of failed attempts? Will youth activists and the burgeoning movement for a Green New Deal provide a pathway to major climate legislation? If so, advocates and their funders alike face a tough road ahead, including an obstructionist congressional minority and opponents on both fronts that will look to appeal to the public’s darkest impulses to build opposition.

    At this inflection point, a report this month from the Center for American Progress, “The Extremist Campaign to Blame Immigrants for U.S. Environmental Problems,” offers a timely overview of the history of how opponents of immigration falsely portray it as a threat to the natural world—a strategy we’re likely to see more of in the months ahead. The report offers a valuable review of these efforts, ranging from the past anti-immigrant stances of some of the nation’s best-known environmental groups to the funders that have bankrolled the nation’s largest anti-immigration groups.

    Four years of an administration defined by its opposition to immigration, plus growing attention to climate change, breathed new life into the toxic and racist narrative of immigrants as a cause of environmental degradation. As the report lays out, this argument—often part of a right-wing, white supremacist ideology known as ecofascism, though CAP’s report does not use the term—found allies in the top echelons of government and media, including a former head of the U.S. Bureau of Land Management and conservative commentators like Ann Coulter and Fox News host Tucker Carlson.

    In contemporary politics, this strategy is mainly seen as a right-wing phenomenon or an artifact of the racist and Eurocentric early history of conservation. Yet the fact that anti-immigrant sentiment found a home within top environmental groups, including Earthfirst! and the Sierra Club, which had a major faction in support of these ideas as late as 2004, is a reminder that it has found fertile soil in a variety of political camps. That makes the narrative all the more dangerous, and one against which funders working in both immigration and the environment ought to take a firm and vocal stance.

    Who’s funding anti-immigration work in the name of the environment?

    Although not comprehensive, the report highlights three funders as key backers of anti-immigration groups: Colcom Foundation, Weeden Foundation and Foundation for the Carolinas. The first two are, in their branding and language, environmental funders—and make those grants in the name of preventing further damage to the natural world.

    Colcom, founded by Mellon Bank heir Cordelia Scaife May, is far and away the largest funder. With a roughly $500 million endowment, it has provided a large share of the support for a network of groups founded by John Tanton, a Sierra Club official in the 1980s, whom the Southern Poverty Law Center (SPLC) calls “the racist architect of the modern anti-immigrant movement.”

    Recipients include NumbersUSA, Federation for American Immigration Reform (FAIR), and the Center for Immigration Studies, which we once called “Trump’s favorite immigration think tank.” The latter two are classified as hate groups by the SPLC, a designation the organizations reject.

    In keeping with the bending of reflexive political categories, it’s worth noting that May—who died in 2005—was also a substantial funder of Planned Parenthood due to her prioritization of “population control” as a means of achieving conservation. In 2019, the New York Times documented May’s dark journey to becoming a leading funder of the modern anti-immigrant movement, and the millions her foundation continued to move, long after her death, in support of ideas that gained a receptive audience in a nativist Trump administration. May’s wealth came from the Mellon-Scaife family fortune, which yielded several philanthropists, including another prominent conservative donor, Richard Mellon Scaife.

    Weeden, led by Don Weeden, has funded a similar who’s who of top anti-immigration groups, as well as lower-profile or regional groups like Californians for Population Stabilization, Progressives for Immigration Reform—which CAP calls the “most central organization in the anti-immigrant greenwashing universe”—and the Rewilding Institute.

    Both Weeden and Colcom, as well as the groups they fund, generally say they are neither anti-immigrant nor anti-immigration. Aside from restrictionist policy positions and racist comments by former leaders, it is revealing that the groups they fund are the favored information sources for some of the most virulently anti-immigrant politicians, both historically and among those who rose prominence during the Trump administration. For a deeper dive on Weeden and Colcom, see my colleague Philip Rojc’s excellent 2019 piece on these grantmakers.

    Finally, there is the Foundation for the Carolinas, which in many ways is a typical community foundation, with initiatives on topics from COVID-19 relief to local arts. But it also hosts a donor-advised fund that has supported several anti-immigration groups, including Center for Immigration Studies, FAIR and NumbersUSA. That fund channeled nearly $21 million to nine such groups between 2006 and 2018, according to the report.

    There’s a connection here to a larger problem of private foundations and DAFs, some of which are housed at community foundations, supporting 501(c)(3) nonprofits identified as hate groups, according to a recent analysis from the Chronicle of Philanthropy. Foundation for the Carolinas also made its list of top donors to these groups.

    An ideology funders must fight against

    As the debates over both immigration and climate policies move forward under this new administration, and the opposition marshals efforts to defeat them, this report offers a helpful guide to this enduring and noxious myth. It’s also an important reminder that if these ideas are not called actively combated, they can take root within well-intentioned efforts. Though it seems only a small number of foundations directly fund groups advancing these ideas, anti-immigrant sentiment is insidious.

    For example, while some commentators are suggesting that acceding to Trump-fueled demands for a border wall is how Congress could reach bipartisan action on immigration reform, the report notes how the existing sections of wall are ineffective against furtive crossings, disruptive to species migration, and in violation of Indigenous sacred sites. These facts—and more broadly, the connection to white supremacist and fascist movements—should put foundations on guard, whether they support grantees pushing for immigration reform, action on climate or both.

    With the United States and other nations facing greater and greater pressures from climate change—particularly as it forces migration from regions like Latin America and the Middle East—philanthropy would do well to be proactive now and draw a bright line in countering this ideology’s propagation.

    https://www.insidephilanthropy.com/home/2021/2/24/anti-immigrant-environmentalism-is-resurgent-new-report-looks-at
    #extrême_droite #anti-migrants #USA #Etats-Unis #environnementalisme #environnement #migrations #nature #dégradation_environnementale #écofascisme #éco-fascisme #suprématisme_blanc #extrême_droite #Ann_Coulte #Tucker_Carlson #racisme #Earthfirst #Sierra_Club #deep_ecology #fondations #Colcom_Foundation #Weeden_Foundation #Foundation_for_the_Carolinas #Mellon_Bank #Cordelia_Scaife_May #mécénat #John_Tanton #NumbersUSA #Federation_for_American_Immigration_Reform (#FAIR) #Center_for_Immigration_Studies #Planned_Parenthood #démographie #contrôle_démographique #néo-malthusianisme #néomalthusianisme #protection_de_l'environnement #philanthropie #Richard_Mellon_Scaife #Weeden #Don_Weeden #Californians_for_Population_Stabilization #Progressives_for_Immigration_Reform #Rewilding_Institute

    • The Extremist Campaign to Blame Immigrants for U.S. Environmental Problems

      With growing frequency over the past four years, right-wing pundits, policymakers, and political operatives have fiercely and furiously blamed immigrants for the degradation and decline of nature in the United States. William Perry Pendley, who temporarily ran the U.S. Bureau of Land Management under former President Donald Trump, saw “immigration as one of the biggest threats to public lands,” according to an agency spokesperson.1 A handful of right-wing anti-immigration zealots, including Joe Guzzardi, have repeatedly misused data published by the Center for American Progress on nature loss to make xenophobic arguments for anti-immigration policies.2 This so-called “greening of hate”—a term explored by Guardian reporter Susie Cagle—is a common refrain in a wide range of conservative and white supremacist arguments, including those of Ann Coulter, Fox News host Tucker Carlson, neo-Nazi Richard Spencer, and the manifestos of more than one mass shooter.3

      The claim that immigration is to blame for America’s environmental problems is so absurd, racist, and out of the mainstream that it is easily debunked and tempting to ignore. The scientific community, and the little research that has been conducted in this area, resoundingly refutes the premise. Consider, for example, the environmental damage caused by weak and inadequate regulation of polluting industries; the destruction of wildlife habitat to accommodate wealthy exurbs and second homes; the design and propagation of policies that concentrate toxic poisons and environmental destruction near communities of color and low-income communities; the continued subsidization of fossil fuel extraction and trampling of Indigenous rights to accommodate drilling and mining projects; and the propagation of a throw-away culture by industrial powerhouses. All of these factors and others cause exponentially more severe environmental harm than a family that is fleeing violence, poverty, or suffering to seek a new life in the United States.

      The extremist effort to blame immigrants for the nation’s environmental problems deserves scrutiny—and not merely for the purpose of disproving its xenophobic and outlandish claims. The contours, origins, funding sources, and goals of this right-wing effort must be understood in order to effectively combat it and ensure that the extremists pushing it have no place in the conservation movement. The individuals and organizations that are most fervently propagating this argument come largely from well-funded hate groups that are abusing discredited ideologies that were prevalent in the 19th-century American conservation movement in an attempt to make their racist rhetoric more palatable to a public concerned about the health of their environment.

      While leaders of the contemporary, mainstream environmental movement in the United States have disavowed this strain of thought and are working to confront the legacies of colonialism and racism in environmental organizations and policies, a small set of right-wing political operatives are trying to magnify overtly xenophobic and false environmental arguments to achieve specific political objectives. In particular, these right-wing political operatives and their deep-pocketed funders are seeking to broaden the appeal of their anti-immigration zealotry by greenwashing their movement and supplying their right-wing base with alternative explanations for environmental decline that sidestep the culpability of the conservative anti-regulatory agenda. In their refusal to confront the true reasons for environmental decline, they are hurting the people—immigrants, Indigenous peoples, and people of color—who bear a disproportionate burden of environmental consequences and are increasingly the base of the climate justice and conservation movements.

      (...)

      https://www.americanprogress.org/issues/green/reports/2021/02/01/495228/extremist-campaign-blame-immigrants-u-s-environmental-problems

  • L’ Europe à la reconquête de la biodiversité | ARTE
    https://www.arte.tv/fr/videos/078695-000-A/l-europe-a-la-reconquete-de-la-biodiversite

    La réintroduction de grands mammifères sauvages comme solution à la restauration d’écosystèmes menacés. Un tour d’Europe des programmes engagés.

    Un peu partout sur la planète, les signaux sont alarmants : de nombreuses espèces végétales et animales disparaissent. Né aux États-Unis dans les années 1990, le rewilding (littéralement le « ré-ensauvagement ») représente un espoir pour la préservation de la biodiversité. Expérimentée dans ce pays, la réintroduction des loups dans le parc du Yellowstone a ainsi permis de restaurer un écosystème à bout de souffle. Suivant cet exemple, leur retour dans la forêt polonaise de Bialowieza, l’une des dernières forêts primaires européennes, d’où ils avaient disparu depuis les années 1920, donne déjà des signes encourageants. Aux Pays-Bas, le polder d’Oostvaardersplassen accueille désormais des troupeaux de chevaux koniks, d’aurochs de Heck et de cerfs, trois espèces d’herbivores complémentaires qui jouent un rôle non négligeable dans le développement de la flore et des populations d’insectes et d’oiseaux. Depuis 2014, des bisons, issus de zoos ou de réserves, ont quant à eux été réintroduits dans les monts Tarcu, dans les Carpates roumaines. Au Royaume-Uni, la gestion de la réserve naturelle d’Otmoor, située à 20 kilomètres de l’aéroport de Londres, a, elle, permis d’enrayer le déclin de deux espèces d’oiseaux : le chevalier gambette et le courlis cendré.

    Bénéfices
    Guidé par des acteurs (scientifiques, spécialistes de l’environnement…) engagés dans différents programmes de réintroduction de grands mammifères, ce tour d’Europe permet d’appréhender, sur le terrain, les bénéfices de la #mégafaune pour la préservation d’une grande variété d’#écosystèmes.

    Disponible du 04/05/2019 au 11/06/2019
    Prochaine diffusion le jeudi 16 mai à 10:40

    #réensauvagement #rewilding
    @odilon de très belles cartes qui m’ont fait pensé à tes œuvres !

  • L’ Europe à la reconquête de la biodiversité | ARTE
    https://www.arte.tv/fr/videos/078695-000-A/l-europe-a-la-reconquete-de-la-biodiversite

    Un peu partout sur la planète, les signaux sont alarmants : de nombreuses espèces végétales et animales disparaissent. Né aux États-Unis dans les années 1990, le #rewilding (littéralement le « #ré-ensauvagement ») représente un espoir pour la préservation de la biodiversité. Expérimentée dans ce pays, la réintroduction des loups dans le parc du Yellowstone a ainsi permis de restaurer un #écosystème à bout de souffle. Suivant cet exemple, leur retour dans la #forêt polonaise de Bialowieza, l’une des dernières forêts primaires européennes, d’où ils avaient disparu depuis les années 1920, donne déjà des signes encourageants. Aux Pays-Bas, le polder d’Oostvaardersplassen accueille désormais des troupeaux de chevaux koniks, d’aurochs de Heck et de cerfs, trois espèces d’herbivores complémentaires qui jouent un rôle non négligeable dans le développement de la flore et des populations d’insectes et d’oiseaux. Depuis 2014, des bisons, issus de zoos ou de réserves, ont quant à eux été réintroduits dans les monts Tarcu, dans les Carpates roumaines. Au Royaume-Uni, la gestion de la réserve naturelle d’Otmoor, située à 20 kilomètres de l’aéroport de Londres, a, elle, permis d’enrayer le déclin de deux espèces d’oiseaux : le chevalier gambette et le courlis cendré.

    Bénéfices
    Guidé par des acteurs (scientifiques, spécialistes de l’environnement…) engagés dans différents programmes de réintroduction de grands mammifères, ce tour d’Europe permet d’appréhender, sur le terrain, les bénéfices de la mégafaune pour la préservation d’une grande variété d’écosystèmes.

    https://twitter.com/brutnaturefr/status/1126735620024356864
    #grand_mammifère #mégafaune

  • Rewilding the Feminine - Living in the Future
    http://livinginthefuture.org/blog/rewilding-the-feminine

    At what cost? At what cost does a woman pursue “the path less travelled” and focus on her inner life? Although the subject of women’s spiritual journeys has been habitually scrubbed from history, can it be true that lately, we are witnessing an unearthing of the divine feminine?
    In these times of great challenge for our world, there is a need to balance the strong, extrovert, “doing” masculine energy which dominates the western culture with something that is more gentle, more yielding, more “being”. This is just the re-balancing that Claire Dunn is undertaking in her book “My Year Without Matches”.

    #femmes #sauvage #rewilding #anticiv #féminisme ?