Relative Wildness Map

Discussion
In terms of the relative wildness maps ability to help identify suitable areas of rewilding, its benefits are limited. It helps identify the perceived wildest areas but the idea of rewilding is to improve areas that are not already ‘wild’ to benefit biodiversity. The idea of rewilding also has so much more factors than just the current wildness of the landscape as shown in the second part of the study. It can, however, be useful when used alongside these factors.
When creating the wildness map there were some differences found between individuals’ perception and scientific knowledge. For example, the burning of gorse and bracken (swaling), deemed as necessary by the National Park to limit scrub growth, is unnatural according to scientists as well as NGOs including the
However, these locations are not suitable for a rewilding project for various reasons. The limiting factors in terms of land ownership, especially common land and the MTZ reduce potential sites in high wildness areas. Also, the steep river valleys on the east side of the moor are often NNRs or SSSIs in favourable condition. They are also surrounded by more productive farms. However, examples of rewilding elsewhere in the UK and Europe also show that projects can take place surrounded by highly populated areas and intensive farming (e.g. Knepp and Oostvaardersplassen). The initial starting point of relative wildness doesn’t have to be high as it will eventually revert to a wilder state within time. The naturalness of the land will increase, vegetation heights will increase on average, meaning less visual man mad artefacts, and the potential for increased biodiversity and wildlife will also increase individual’s perception of wildness within Whiteworks (as shown in the questionnaire