It should be no secret to any of my regular readers at
this point that I, if at all possible, plan on implementing Pleistocene
rewilding strategies here in my home country, Canada. I must say that I am
disappointed with the overall lack of progress or even discussion of
significant megafauna introductions and dedicated reserves here. However, the
fact that it hasn't been done yet means I can potentially get the ball rolling
myself and put my own spin on it.
Now, I know what some of you are thinking, why Canada?
If anywhere doesn't need more wildlife, it's there. Large numbers of predators
and ungulates roam the country, many in places where human influence is practically
absent. Canada is the second largest country in the world after Russia, but
with fewer people than the state of California. We have huge amounts of land,
much of which is already put aside for nature conservation. But, the abundance
and diversity of large mammals is a shadow of it's former condition. The
prairies, forests, and tundra of this country were once huge savannahs and
steppes filled with a plethora and variety of megafauna to rival the plains of
Kenya or South Africa. It was only upon the introduction of humans fifteen
thousand years ago, that so many species went extinct and so few remained.
So, through mass introductions of absent species or
close relatives/alternatives in experimental reserves, we have the potential to
create a new, enriched, productive set of ecosystems which will benefit us in
many ways. Ecotourism would be one of the main boons, with safaris and game
hunts made much more interesting, and consequently much more profitable. Canada
is already a competitive ecotourism destination even with only comparatively
few species of large mammal. It could be so much bigger. If done sustainably,
and on a large enough scale, and assuming our population density remains low,
rewilding might even provide a healthy, humane, sustainable protein resource
for the whole nation.
Such reserves would create the necessity for huge
amounts of employment as tour guides, maintenance workers, security personnel,
administrators, and customer service representatives. They might also create
demand for hotels or even airports outside the limits of the park. Make the
parks big enough and there could be a tourist destination at each corner, thus
bringing in more revenue and creating more jobs. Many research and employment
opportunities would be created for all sorts of biologists and earth
scientists, as well as veterinarians, animal handlers, professional hunters,
and gamekeepers. Many construction workers would need to be hired to create
infrastructure and barriers for the parks and the corridors connecting them.
There is also huge potential for the conservation not
only of native megafauna, but also of the large animals brought in as
ecological surrogates for extinct species. For example, Przewalski’s horses (Equus ferus przewalski), Gobi camels (Camelus ferus ferus), and Persian lions (Panthera leo persica) are all endangered
and are all possible introductions here. They and several other species could
be given a huge boost if given the space and treatment that a Canadian
rewilding program could offer them. Backup populations of these species will be
a huge step in their conservation. Canada has already helped create such
populations of it’s own species, by donating breeding groups of muskoxen (Ovibos moschatus moschatus) and wood
bison (Bison bison athabascae) to
Russian Siberia.
So, if it is agreed that such a movement was created,
what would it be called. I’ve learned that the best way to get any real progress
done is to take the reins away from the government and privatize it. The best
way to get people to do what you want is to make it profitable. Such an
organization would need a name and a game plan. It would require very
few resources to get started, but would require a lot of public and political
support.
What would we call such an organization? Personally, I
like the “Canadian Large Animal Wildlife Society”, but if anyone has other
ideas I’d certainly like to hear them. I also considered calling it simply “Rewilding
Canada”, but seemed to imply that I have an association with the already
existing organizations “Rewilding Europe” and “Rewilding Australia”, which I do
not.
This organization would need to make ties with similar
organizations in countries from which it wished to acquire animals. Mongolia is
a big one, for it is from there that breeding populations of takhi, onager, and
camel could be acquired. I imagine a certain amount of money, and a greater amount
of promises could create a partnership there. It might be that we have animals
to offer in exchange, such as plains bison. The organization would eventually
be self-funded and potentially very profitable, but it would require a large
amount of funding to get started on fencing and introductions.
I believe the first park would be created in south-western
Saskatchewan, to the west of Grasslands National Park. Here, a restored
population of native fauna could be bolstered to high numbers. These animals
would include wolves, bears, cougars, elk, mule and whitetail deer, pronghorn
antelope, bison, and bighorn sheep. Later ecological proxies could be brought
in such as the takhi to replace Equus
scotti, the onager to replace Equus
conversidens, the wild camel to replace Camelops
hesternus¸ the guanaco to replace Hemiauchenia
macrocephala, and the Persian lion to replace Panthera leo atrox. More extreme introductions might include the takin
to replace Euceratherium collinum,
the boar to replace Platygonus compressus,
and the Iranian cheetah to replace Miracinonyx
trumani.
If this park is successful, then resources from it
could spark the creation of other parks. Similar parks could be created from
eastern BC to western Manitoba. More northerly parks in the territories could
contain fauna representative of the mammoth steppe, such as wood bison, Dall
sheep, muskox, saiga, moose, elk, caribou, horse, kiang, and camel.
Looking into the far future, such parks would create a
refuge for species brought back from extinction, for which we have no proxy.
Such species might include woolly mammoths, American mastodons, giant beavers, Jefferson’s
ground sloth, the giant short-faced bear, and the scimitar cat.
So while Canada is doing comparatively well in amount
of ecologically active land, we aren’t benefiting from that as much as we
could, nor are we giving it access to the raw material it once had with which
to create new ecologies.
I know that any ecosystem we create is not going to be
identical to past ecosystems, but that’s not really the point. The point is to
create new, more diverse, more productive systems with more space, and using
past ecosystems as a guideline for what types of species have worked in the past.
