By Ludlow Morris | US Environmental Policy Student
As the climate crisis intensifies and human destruction of natural ecosystems continues to shape the modern world, we must look at different strategies to repair the natural environment. Rewilding emerges as an ever more popular concept and strategy. It evolved from early ideas of “wilderness recovery” in the 1980’s and broadly encompasses the idea of restoring natural processes and increasing biodiversity.i As opposed to traditional conservation, rewilding focuses on reviving the self-sustaining processes of an ecosystem so that it can function with minimal human intervention, and in some cases also sustainably provide great human benefit. Successful projects range in scale from the reintroduction of wolves in Yellowstone Park to financially viable enterprises such as Knepp Farm in the UK. The US government can achieve this success through the introduction of a subsidy program for private landowners to adopt this new idea into their managed lands.
Michael Soulé, an American biologist, defines rewilding as “the science-based restoration of self-regulating ecosystems and… a transformation in human-nature relationships”.[i] It is a process that allows for the creation of self-sustaining environments that support biodiversity and are climate resilient. This also keeps in mind the idea that ecosystems are ever-changing. What has been central to most rewilding conservation efforts is the reintroduction of keystone species, such as large herbivores or predators regulating prey populations. Its other key concepts include: an ecocentric world view[ii] (one where human dominance plays a very small part), being inclusive and collaborative[iii] (where local human populations and their knowledge and expertise are valued), embracing autonomy and a lack of imposed order, and most importantly, being future focused[iv] (it does not try to recreate conditions from the past and focuses on the future potential of an ecosystem).[v] This is exemplified by the co-management plan enacted at Bears Ears National Monument in Utah.[vi]
The benefits of rewilding expand on those of traditional conservation.[vii] [viii]By focusing on an ecosystem in its entirety, as a method, it is able to enhance biodiversity to a greater level and support a wider range of species. Through this, it then supports larger natural ecosystem processes, such as carbon sequestration, improved soil quality and increased resilience.v Lastly and most appealingly, it has the ability to provide sustainable economic opportunities, such as ecotourism and recreation or the reintroduction of sustainable agriculture. The long-term advantages suggest it is a crucial tool for restoring ecosystem balance whilst appeasing non-environmentalists.
One of the first successful rewilding stories is that of the reintroduction of wolves to the Yellowstone National Park. For more than 50 years, the Yellowstone ecosystem had been destabilized by a lack of a top-predator. There was an overpopulation of elk, which in turn over grazed vegetation and this had a cascading effect on all plant and animal species. In 1995, wolves were brought back, and this enacted a trophic cascade, whereby populations of beavers, fish, amphibians and birds increased and flourished as well as strengthened the ecosystem. It was recorded that mean number of birds and species richness overall increased since the introduction of wolves.[ix] While this effort is relatively basic in its approach, it serves as a model that shows the massive effect that a keystone species can have on the health of an ecosystem.
Recently, a more involved and extensive project was enacted at Knepp Estate in the UK. Once 3500 acres of intensively farmed agricultural land, traditional farming was abandoned when soil quality degradation had reached a level at which current practices could not continue. Its approach involved the introduction of free-range herds of Longhorn cattle, Exmoor ponies, Tamworth pigs and deer which mimic the behaviour of extinct megafauna that previously inhabited Europe. Over time, the land has regenerated to a self-sustaining ecosystem that supports a massive resurgence of native wildlife. Vulnerable species have repopulated the area such as nightingales, turtle doves and purple emperor butterflies.[x] This rewilding provides economic benefit, through selling meat from the animals and generates revenue from nature-based tourism. Overall, these case studies highlight the potential for rewilding as an environmental and economic success.
Despite its initial successes however, rewilding comes under some scrutiny. First, some ecosystems that cause a large number of human-wildlife contact, especially with large predators, create health risks and economic drawbacks, such as predation on livestock. Another concern that is raised is the ambiguity of the term itself. Given that there is no agreed upon definition, where some definitions emphasise strict non-intervention and others support more involved human intervention; this makes it hard to implement effectively through large scale policy.
In addition, successful rewilding projects in the past have required large funding from government bodies. The Yellowstone reintroduction program cost around $30 million to initially implement and while ecotourism in the area contributes over $35 million annually, initial hurdles lay in getting funding approved and public backing.[xi] Knepp Estate, still relies on government subsidies in the form of the Countryside Stewardship Scheme, even though it brings in large profit from ecotourism,.x The US can take inspiration from this program. Around sixty percent of land in the US is privately owned and introduction of subsidies would bring economic incentive for conservation. This will become more and more important, especially for farmers whose land is continuing to degrade over time. These subsidies could be easily implemented or attached to existing subsidy conservation programs. Congress could expand the Farm Bill conservation programs to include explicit rewilding incentives for private landowners. This allows for easy integration of the legislation as it is already managed by the USDA. Funding could be sourced by expanding allocations to Farm Bill conservation programs, which already reach $6 billion annually.[xii] An initial test program of $100 million could be trialled and this system that would allow current bipartisan support.[xiii]
Overall, rewilding as a process can involve different levels of human intervention and have different economic outcomes. However, something that we need to address is increasing people’s desire for “more meaningful coexistence between people and nature”.v Historically, human dominance over nature has been defined by control, and what makes rewilding as a concept hard to accept, is that it challenges this paradigm. This is where rewilding’s most pressing challenge lies as it disrupts this binary way of thinking. In addition, rewilding needs to be seen as a flexible process that can be adapted to specific situations. Some projects, such as Yellowstone, require significant initial investment through government backing, and others like Knepp, show that projects can be economically viable. The key to expanding these efforts to other parts of the world lie in integrating rewilding into mainstream thinking and land-use policies. It needs to be made accessible and appealing financially to landowners, policymakers and the public. Rewilding provides a hopeful solution a
[i] Soulé, Michael, and Reed Noss. “Rewilding and Biodiversity: Complementary Goals for Continental Conservation.” Wild Earth 8, no. 3 (Fall 1998): 19–28. https://rewilding.org/wp-content/uploads/2012/04/RewildingBiod.pdf.
[ii] Deary, Holly, and Charles R. Warren. “Divergent visions of wildness and naturalness in a storied landscape: Practices and discourses of rewilding in Scotland’s wild places.” Journal of Rural Studies 54 (2017): 211-222.
[iii] Murray, Martyn. “Wild pathways of inclusive conservation.” Biological Conservation 214 (2017): 206-212.
[iv] Pires, Mathias Mistretta. “Rewilding ecological communities and rewiring ecological networks.” Perspectives in ecology and conservation 15, no. 4 (2017): 257-265.
[v] Carver, Steve, Ian Convery, Sally Hawkins, Rene Beyers, Adam Eagle, Zoltan Kun, Erwin Van Maanen, et al. “Guiding Principles for Rewilding.” Conservation Biology 35, no. 6 (December 2021): 1882–93. https://doi.org/10.1111/cobi.13730.
[vi] Kate Magargal et al., “Gathering Firewood—and Redefining Land Stewardship—at Bears Ears,” SAPIENS, October 30, 2024, https://www.sapiens.org/culture/bears-ears-comanagement-tribal-sovereignty-justice/
[vii] Rewilding Britain. “Rewilding and Conservation.” Rewilding Britain, April 26, 2025, https://www.rewildingbritain.org.uk/why-rewild/what-is-rewilding/an-introduction-to-rewilding/rewilding-and-conservation
[viii] Mossy Earth. “Rewilding vs Conservation.” Mossy Earth, April 26, 2025, https://www.mossy.earth/rewilding-knowledge/rewilding-vs-conservation
[ix] Smith, Douglas W., and Edward E. Bangs. “Reintroduction of wolves to Yellowstone National Park: history, values and ecosystem restoration.” Reintroduction of top‐order predators (2009): 92-125.
[x] Dempsey, Benedict. “Everything under Control? Comparing Knepp Estate Rewilding Project with ‘Traditional’ Nature Conservation.” PLOS ONE 16, no. 6 (June 1, 2021): e0241160. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0241160.
[xi] Rappaport Clark, Jamie. “We Were Wrong About Wolves, Here’s Why.” Defenders of Wildlife, March 21, 2020. https://defenders.org/blog/2020/03/we-were-wrong-about-wolves-heres-why.
[xii] Theodore Roosevelt Conservation Partnership. “Farm Bill Conservation Programs.”, April 26, 2025, https://www.trcp.org/farm-bill/
[xiii] National Wildlife Federation. “Farm Bill Frameworks Share Common Ground on Conservation.” May 2, 2024 https://www.nwf.org/Home/Latest-News/Press-Releases/2024/5-2-24-Farm-Bill-Frameworks