Rewilding – One Step at a Time - Unit 12

C1 Advanced · Multiple Choice Reading · Ready for C1 Advanced 4th Edition, Macmillan Education

You are going to read a magazine article about an approach to conservation called rewilding. For questions 1–6, choose the answer (A, B, C or D) which you think fits best according to the text.

Rewilding, in essence, is a simple concept: areas of wilderness are identified for restoration, native animals and plants are re-introduced, and natural processes take over. The term itself was coined in the 1990s by American conservationist Dave Foreman, a founding member of The Rewilding Institute. But language, much like nature, undergoes continuous transformation, reshaping and refining. To some, rewilding now incorporates the idea of building ‘corridors’ so that species can cross from one area of wilderness to another, as they would have done in pre-human times. To others, it is about letting ‘natural chaos’ take over; meaning any human interference is prohibited. Certainly it provokes alarm amongst farmers and landowners, so much so that some committees overseeing restoration projects are reportedly avoiding the word altogether. Why might the average person be drawn to the idea of rewilding? The reason is not, as some critics have implied, nostalgia. Most of us can’t say, ‘Ah yes, where did all those Adonis Blue and Red Admiral butterflies go, that were once so common in my back garden?’ or ‘How I miss the nightingale song I used to hear in my local woods.’ We cannot recall things that are beyond living memory, let alone a time when wild pigs and deer ran rampant through forests. Indeed, we need not be remotely sentimental to see why biodiversity is desirable. There are numerous benefits to rewilding. At the most pragmatic level, without healthy ecosystems, our crops will fail and obviously we will not survive. A viable food chain must start with pollinators, such as bees and hoverflies. Intensive farming, however, has largely eliminated the wildflowers they feed on and turned much of our landscape into lifeless soil. Only by reintroducing missing insects, plants and animals can we reverse this trend. And if hard-nosed sceptics are worried that rewilding comes at a cost to the taxpayer, they should note the income derived from wildlife tourism for struggling rural communities, as is apparent in parts of Scotland, Finland and France, where ospreys, bears and vultures have been returned respectively. The notion of rewilding has certainly caught the public eye in Britain, and journalists have played their part in this. Some have warned about the potential dire consequences, and accused rewilders of being naïve at best, and extremists at worst. Others have written with more enthusiasm, heaping praise on such schemes as releasing beavers back into English streams and voles into Scottish rivers. Devoting attention to efforts like these is no bad thing, yet rewilding is something different altogether: an entire ecosystem becoming self-regulatory and self-sustaining. Furthermore, if the public and policymakers are to be persuaded of the merits of rewilding, they must be confident that journalists are providing the full picture. In Spain’s Guadarrama hills, for example, wolves appear to be breeding, to the joy of conservationists, and to the consternation of shepherds, some of whom have already lost sheep and cattle to these predators. Honest discussion about this kind of issue is required. In rewilding projects, it has to be said, do not always go as planned. And when they do, the results are controversial. Oostvaardersplassen is a case in point. Once a vast industrial zone, it is now a nature reserve east of Amsterdam in Holland, where red deer, horses and cattle roam free, and a variety of small mammals and insect species thrive. Not so long ago Oostvaardersplassen was held up as a rewilding success story, internationally renowned amongst ecologists. Then, following a particularly harsh winter, numbers of the larger animals plummeted. While those in charge of Oostvaardersplassen simply saw evidence of natural processes, many ordinary Dutch citizens were appalled at the losses. How to make the ‘circle of life’ more acceptable to wider society will be no easy task for pioneers in the rewilding movement. The idea that we should allow nature to reclaim parts of our landscape is, at the moment, far more divisive than say, any proposal for reducing plastic waste or tackling the illegal ivory trade. Few people would be blind to the advantages of limiting plastic consumption or argue against protecting elephants from poachers. Yet not so long ago, no-one gave a second thought to these things. It took the incredible efforts of a few passionate, principled individuals to educate the majority of us through long campaigning and evidence-based argument. Hopefully, fifty years from now, with ecosystems flourishing again, people will question why our generation ever saw rewilding as controversial.

It may be understood differently by people helping ecosystems to recover.

It is often used inaccurately by opponents hoping to spread misinformation.

It has been rejected by people who depend on agriculture for a living.

It fails to describe the range of activities environmentalists are engaged in.

What does the writer say about the term ‘rewilding’?

explaining why habitat restoration is important

describing some of his childhood experiences

prioritising species that should be protected

dismissing a view about habitat restoration

What is the writer doing in the second paragraph?

They will become more obvious as environmental problems worsen.

They are hardly worth the investment regional authorities must make.

They are clearly evident in some groups in society.

They are not what some people might imagine them to be.

What does the writer suggest about the benefits of rewilding in the third paragraph?

overlook the achievements of rewilders doing work in other countries.

cannot distinguish rewilding from other kinds of conservation project.

do not focus sufficiently on rewilding ventures that are small-scale.

produce articles on rewilders that are sometimes disrespectful in tone.

The writer is concerned that some British journalists

stress the importance of consulting different experts.

criticise a policy that led to a decline in certain species.

Available as a free printable PDF worksheet with an optional answer key.

More C1 Advanced Multiple Choice Reading practice · All C1 Advanced practice