Zanna's Reviews > Feral: Searching for Enchantment on the Frontiers of Rewilding

Feral by George Monbiot
Rate this book
Clear rating

by
22591633
's review

it was amazing
bookshelves: philosophy, environment

I read Monbiot's book Heat, in which he sets out a plan of how the UK could and should repond to human-made climate change by cutting carbon emissions by 90%, in 2010. I was convinced, but not optimistic; the changes we need to make are radical; the restructuring in transport for example, would be deep, and despite the strength of the argument against doing so even I have failed to stop flying (I have restricted myself somewhat, but totally failed to persuade anyone else), which has become so integral to working life and family together-time as we spread ourselves across the globe.

So when I took up Feral I wasn't expecting to find a carnival of hope and joy! There is no single narrative here; Monbiot alternates and weaves together anecdotes of his fishing expeditions, intense, dramatic and dense with description and encounters with wildlife and rural places, with discussions of progressive biodiversity loss and habitat destruction caused throughout our history by gratuitous hunting, agricultural practices and often bizarre regulation. He describes how ecosystems are kept healthy by large predators, and explores the potential for reintroducing animals such as lynx and even wolves to the UK, as well as less controversial animals like the beaver, a herbivore whose dam-building habits create opportunities for a variety of fish and all sorts of other fauna and flora to thrive. Some readers might wish Monbiot would cut to the chase but it's obviously important to him to share the sense of 'enchantment' and revitalisation that has informed his conception of 'rewilding'.

This rewilding is not a monolithic concept; it is being constructed differently by varied groups of advocates. Monbiot freely admits that, while he can make an impressive economic case, his real motivation is the yearning for reconnection and encounters with exciting ecosystems. He points out that sheep farming has left large areas of the UK biodiversity deserts, which without our intervention, would surprisingly be covered in rainforest, as diverse as the Brazilian Mata Atlantica of which it was once a part! He argues against the 'conservation prison'; the preservation of ecosystems that are actually severely depleted, having been created by historic farming practices and industrial processes. Do we really want our environment to be a museum? Monbiot wants to see areas of 'self-willed' land.

The effects of stepping back and letting nature recover are inspiring. Simply fencing out sheep for twenty years produces a startlingly rich and varied patch of woodland where previously nothing lived but grass. In the ocean, where the biodiversity disaster has been even more dramatic than on land due to destructive fishing practices and the misguided removal of predators, it is even easier to restore biodiversity and ecosystem health; simply by creating marine reserves. This is one example among many in the book of the need for nothing but political will to bring about a hugely beneficial (to the fishing industry and seafood-lovers as much as to wildlife) change at no or minimal cost and with no investment in technology or R & D. In the case of agricultural practice, one solution Monbiot advocates is the removal of a rule that forces farmers to work or graze land they would otherwise leave fallow. One of the more difficult problems is the vice-like grip of extremely wealthy landowners, often living overseas, who wield extremely disproportionate influence in government.

Monbiot is not naïve about the problems with rewilding areas of land. This is NOT a call for a return to ANY earlier stage of civilisation, to stop cultivation or reduce human populations. He balances his argument with chapters about his discussions with sheep farmers, and a cautionary discussion of the harrowing history of 'Nazi rewilding projects' that Simon Schama wrote about in Landscape and Memory. Monbiot also notes indefensible colonial 'conservation' projects, such as in Kenya, where imperial rulers have appropriated land from local people such as the Maasai, leaving them without homes or property, to create reserves.

On the other side of the argument is another example of colonial thinking; asking people in African and Asian countries to conserve dangerous animals such as big cats and rhinos sits ill with our unwillingness to tolerate predators on our own shores. The reintroduction of the wolf to Yellowstone in the USA is an incredible success story, and its slow reappearance in continental Europe is having similar effects, with many benefits to people.

Rewilding, Monbiot stresses, must be a democratic process, fully negotiated with all the stakeholders involved, but it has huge potential to enrich our land, seas and lives. Read and feel good!

***Update***
One issue in this book that has become especially topical is reasons why we now have far more flooding in the UK. Vegetation dramatically slows down run off into rivers and regulates transpiration, as well as preventing soil erosion. At one time government agencies removed fallen trees and so on from water courses to speed up the flow, and many wetlands have been drained to make way for more crops, inevitably speeding up the channels water flows in. How to prevent flooding: SLOW DOWN the movement of water. This also helps biodiversity
57 likes · flag

Sign into Goodreads to see if any of your friends have read Feral.
Sign In »

Reading Progress

Started Reading
July 19, 2013 – Finished Reading
August 8, 2013 – Shelved
August 8, 2013 – Shelved as: philosophy
August 8, 2013 – Shelved as: environment

Comments Showing 1-12 of 12 (12 new)

dateDown arrow    newest »

message 1: by Anuj (new) - added it

Anuj Kamboj Interesting


message 2: by Jan-Maat (new)

Jan-Maat Rainforest? Isn't it wet enough in Wales as it is?

I don't remember the nazi rewilding in Landscape and Memory, only the quotes from Pan Tadeusz and the happy days of 18th century British politicians gorging themselves on whitebait.


Zanna Haha I haven't read it! Monbiot's attribution.

I should update my review, I've just remembered that the most topical point in it is that trees prevent flooding...


message 4: by ^ (new)

^ Forget controlling sheep, what we need to do is to control the human population. In a socially acceptable way, of course.


Zanna while I am also inclined to feel 'there are too many people', what with all those 'if everyone lived like this we'd need 3 earths' statistics, the ridiculous behaviour of the Catholic church and others in forbidding contraception and so on, I still think that the meme is highly problematic.

the language you used, for example (please don't take this as a personal criticism - I understand what you meant and I have spent years saying the same things!)

'control the human population' - this sounds totally authoritarian, and it is. For many hundreds of years, white people engaged in our colonial projects have enacted and precipitated genocidal killing of black and brown people. We have exploited reproductive labour of black and brown women, but more often worked to destroy and criminalise black and brown life through a wide range of channels, including forced sterilization and lack of access to pre & post natal care and support, eugenics programs and racism in the police and judiciary (often inadvertant). It's not even just white people doing this (though I tend to think it's usually traceable back to us). Black feminists created the framework of reproductive justice to combat the reproductive control and coercion that has affected them, unaddressed by the demands of white feminists for access to contraception and abortions.

The idea of population control always focusses on poor (and usually black/brown) people. When the target is elsewhere, the oppressed brown female body is evoked is pressed into service as usual to support the argument. She needs education and contraception from white saviours in the 'developed' economies where birth rates are plummeting, right? Well, thinking back, the sex ed I received in school from other white people in a rich nation was totally useless. I have attended fantastic workshops on SRE during teacher training and I think everyone should be getting great SRE from reception class. But we aren't, so the birth rate must be dropping for other reasons... and it is, it's dropping because working and middle class people have less money to spend on increasingly expensive children, so the way to help women in developing economies secure reproductive autonomy is not 'western' style SRE (some woman you've never seen coming into class and putting a condom on a banana) but ending poverty, which has been created and is sustained by white colonialism.

In terms of domestic policy, reducing the birth rate is usually couched in highly classist and racist rhetoric, mentioning teenage mothers, the 'traditional' high fertility of 'backward' immigrant groups and folks seeking extra 'child benefit'. It tends to sound a bit like a petulant holiday-maker on a crowded beach.

'in a socially acceptable way' the phrase suggests that it is the presentation that is the problem, not the act of 'controlling' ie removing reproductive autonomy (cornerstone of feminism - so what the heck would I be doing trying to take it away?). People can be manipulated to find all kinds of coercion acceptable...

I know what you meant! Let's have good SRE and reproductive autonomy for women - I am with you 100% - but I would call this ethically acceptable rather than socially acceptable


message 6: by Soumen (new)

Soumen Daschoudhury A very informative review Zanna and nicely presented.


Zanna Thanks a lot Soumen = )


message 8: by ^ (new)

^ Zanna wrote: "while I am also inclined to feel 'there are too many people', what with all those 'if everyone lived like this we'd need 3 earths' statistics, the ridiculous behaviour of the Catholic church and ot..."


I have read that raising female educational attainment tends to result in a natural reduction in family size.


Zanna Of course, because it gives women more autonomy :-)


message 10: by ^ (new)

^ Exactly.


Catherine Halstead Zanna - Completely agree with your point about ‘controlling human population’. This is eco-facist and will only perpetuate the discrimination & marginalisation already faced amongst minority groups. Also, the white western population disproportionately contributes far more to emissions and environmental damage than any other group. We need to change our lifestyle rather than blaming others who have few other options and are not the real culprits here.


Zanna Thanks Catherine, yes, I think you are raising the other side of the population argument - that affluence drives emissions (and the most populous nations have vastly lower per capita emissions than the white majority countries).


back to top