Quote:
Originally Posted by sanderling  I found it very interesting Natural World programme...
I was suprised at how un-hostile the adjoining landowners were and seemed to appreciate the aims of the project knowing that this is an evolving vision and process with many problems to solve... the more land that can be connected up to form a larger area the better, I think thats the only way it could ever begin to function without looking like a big open plan zoo... even if that is what it will really ever be and that would be a great thing to achieve.
Where there's a will... |
I hear you..but to be honest it would never be a big open plan Zoo..the whole ethos behind rewilding is almost 'no intervention' by man...(other than the fences)..as compared to a zoo where each species is seperated or a wildlife park where certain species mix...all the animals are kept by keepers, housed, fed, etc etc...in rewilding they live and die..eat each other, numbers go up and down...and everything including vegetation is left to be just that...WILD....succession will happen, and old trees will die and fall naturally creating clearings for succession to happen all over again.
In fact some of the things he was doing in my eyes went against rewildling by planting trees etc...but i guess at the outset a little helping hand and head start is ok...the same as obviously re-introducing the large mammals which wouldt get back there naturally.
I was also a little thrown by the comment on the doc about "getting the public in"...in what sense?...i dont think true rewildling can have public access? in which case your right it does just become a safari park?..
Linear Mode
