Rewilding in the English uplands: policy and practice

About: This article is published in Journal of Applied Ecology.The article was published on 2019-02-01 and is currently open access. It has received 26 citations till now. The article focuses on the topics: Ecosystem services.

Full text

Rewilding in the English uplands: policy and practice
Article (Accepted Version)
http://sro.sussex.ac.uk
Sandom, Christopher J, Dempsey, Benedict, Bullock, David, Ely, Adrian, Jepson, Paul, Jimenez-
Wisler, Stefan, Newton, Adrian, Pettorelli, Nathalie and Senior, Rebecca A (2019) Rewilding in
the English uplands: policy and practice. Journal of Applied Ecology, 56 (2). pp. 266-273. ISSN
0021-8901
This version is available from Sussex Research Online: http://sro.sussex.ac.uk/id/eprint/78992/
This document is made available in accordance with publisher policies and may differ from the
published version or from the version of record. If you wish to cite this item you are advised to
consult the publisher’s version. Please see the URL above for details on accessing the published
version.
Copyright and reuse:
Sussex Research Online is a digital repository of the research output of the University.
Copyright and all moral rights to the version of the paper presented here belong to the individual
author(s) and/or other copyright owners. To the extent reasonable and practicable, the material
made available in SRO has been checked for eligibility before being made available.
Copies of full text items generally can be reproduced, displayed or performed and given to third
parties in any format or medium for personal research or study, educational, or not-for-profit
purposes without prior permission or charge, provided that the authors, title and full bibliographic
details are credited, a hyperlink and/or URL is given for the original metadata page and the
content is not changed in any way.

Rewilding in the English Uplands: Policy and Practice
Christopher J. Sandom
1,2,*
Benedict Dempsey
3
David Bullock
4
Adrian Ely
3
Paul Jepson
5
Stefan Jimenez-Wisler
6
Adrian Newton
7
Nathalie Pettorelli
8
Rebecca A. Senior
9
1
School of Life Sciences, University of Sussex, Brighton BN1 9QG, UK
2
Wild Business Ltd, Beacon House, 113 Kingsway, London, WC2B 6PP, UK
3
SPRU, University of Sussex, Brighton BN1 9QG, UK
4
National Trust, Heelis, Kemble Drive, Swindon SN2 2NA, UK
5
School of Geography and the Environment, University of Oxford, Oxford OX1 3QY, UK

6
Country Land & Business Association Limited, 16 Belgrave Square, London, SW1X 8PQ,
UK
7
School of Applied Sciences, Bournemouth University, Bournemouth BH12 5BB, UK
8
Institute of Zoology, Zoological Society of London, London, UK
9
Department of Animal and Plant Sciences, Alfred Denny Building, University of Sheffield,
Western Bank, Sheffield, S10 2TN, UK
* Corresponding author, c.sandom@sussex.ac.uk
Keywords
Rewilding, Ecosystem processes, Ecosystem services, Biodiversity, Conservation,
Restoration, uplands, policy
5745 words

Introduction 1
Rewilding is gaining momentum as a new approach to restore and conserve biodiversity and 2
ecosystem services, despite being imprecisely defined, controversial, and with limited 3
explicit empirical supporting evidence (Lorimer et al. 2015; Svenning et al. 2016; Pettorelli 4
et al. 2018). In a case study region (the English uplands), we discuss what rewilding means to 5
practitioners and policy makers; the risks, opportunities and barriers to implementation 6
rewilding is thought to present, and potential paths for policy and practice. 7
Rewilding has had strong uptake in Europe, including the UK (Svenning et al. 2016; Sandom 8
& Wynne-Jones in press). A UK case study is particularly interesting for two reasons. First, 9
many species have been lost through centuries of increasingly intensive land use and with 10
little opportunity for natural re-colonisation species translocations are likely required for 11
successful rewilding. Second, debate around rewilding is particularly intense with the UK’s 12
impending departure from the European Union and associated potential for considerable 13
change of key policies, such as the Common Agricultural Policy (CAP), and the Habitats and 14
Birds Directives. Here we highlight perceptions, concerns and possible ways forward for 15
rewilding in post-Brexit upland England in which the 25-Year Environment Plan (25YEP; 16
DEFRA 2018a) will frame policy. We also identify general lessons for those considering 17
applying rewilding in other locations. 18
Rewilding and England’s Uplands 19
Rewilding is increasingly prominent in policy discussions and land management practice in 20
the UK. It was explicitly identified as a management option in the terms of reference for the 21
UK Government’s inquiry into ‘the future of the natural environment after the EU 22
referendum’ (Environmental Audit Committee 2016) and has been the focus of a POSTNote 23

(Wentworth & Alison 2016). The charity Rewilding Britain has identified 13 active examples 24
of British rewilding projects (Rewilding Britain 2017), although many others exist (Sandom 25
& Wynne-Jones in press). Rewilding is being considered and pursued as a land management 26
option by environmental NGOs (John Muir Trust 2015; Woodland Trust 2017) and private 27
landowners. The environment is a devolved matter in the UK meaning the four national 28
governments have legislative mandates to adopt their own environmental strategies. Here we 29
focus on England and consider wider implications in our conclusions. 30
Approximately 12% of England is considered upland, which is reported to provide an 31
estimated 70% of the country’s drinking water, contain 53% (by area) of its Sites of Special 32
Scientific Interest, 25% of woodland, 29% of its beef cows and 44% of its breeding sheep. 33
Upland National Parks in England receive c.70 million visits annually (various sources, 34
summarised in Upland Alliance 2016). The uplands are central to both biodiversity 35
conservation and society as a whole, and their management has cascading impacts for the 36
UK. To date, policy and practice in the uplands has primarily focused on food production and 37
forestry, with secondary goals of supporting biodiversity and providing additional ecosystem 38
services. Low soil fertility and steep slopes mean most upland farms are considered ‘Severely 39
Disadvantaged Areas’ (DEFRA 2018b) and currently receive subsidy payments from the 40
CAP (Pillar I) that makes up on average 19% (£18,104) of farm revenue in less favoured 41
areas. A further 12% (£11,172) revenue for these farms comes from CAP agri-environment 42
schemes (Pillar II) which seek to support conservation on farmland (Harvey & Scott 2016). 43
The Department for Environment Food and Rural Affairs (DEFRA 2018b) reports that these 44
uplands areas have the potential to benefit from new environmental land management 45
schemes that could help ‘encourage biodiversity, protect water quality and store carbon’. 46

Frequently asked questions

Q1. What is the common approach to rewilding in the uplands?

In large 184 ecosystems that are either largely intact or where the potential for natural re-colonisation is 185 high, passive rewilding is perceived to allow natural processes to support a diverse, 186 functional, and ‘service-rich’ ecosystem. 

Q2. How many visits do upland national parks receive each year?

33 Upland National Parks in England receive c.70 million visits annually (various sources, 34 summarised in Upland Alliance 2016). 

Q3. What was the common thread between the descriptions?

The 117 common thread linking these descriptions is the focus on restoring ecological processes to 118 create more self-organising and self-sustaining ecosystems. 

Q4. What are the risks, opportunities, barriers, and solutions discussed here?

361The risks, opportunities, barriers, and solutions discussed here have relevance to other 362 regions of the world where society has largely tamed nature, has strong policy and cultural 363 connections to productive or other traditional land uses, and has nature conservation policy 364 focused on management of rare habitats and species that remain. 

Q5. how many groups could give a range of scores during the workshop?

The groups 420 could give a range of scores during the workshop, e.g. medium to high, totals represent 421 summing maximum risk or opportunity scores. 

Q6. What could be done to improve the condition of key species and habitats?

This could include linking clusters of NNRs to create larger conservation areas 337 where rewilding is encouraged for interlinking land and water, or establishing new 338 experimental rewilding zones as part of the proposed Nature Recovery Network (25YEP). 

Q7. What are the main reasons why rewilding is being considered and pursued in the UK?

Rewilding is being considered and pursued as a land management 26 option by environmental NGOs (John Muir Trust 2015; Woodland Trust 2017) and private 27 landowners. 

Q8. What are the main reasons why farmers in the uplands are aware of this?

Interviewees reported that farmers in the uplands are often aware that some of their 168 land may be better suited to uses other than agricultural production, such as supporting 169 wildlife or buffering wetlands. 

Q9. What is the key to introducing conservation property relief?

283Conservation property relief: Introducing Conservation Property Relief to match Agricultural 284 Property Relief for inheritance tax would remove a key barrier, providing opportunities to 285 improve biodiversity conservation and the delivery of diverse ecosystem services.