>>8296373I come from the Netherlands and any original nature we had is gone.
From what I know Australia changed drastically in a short period. I just finished a book that talked about Aboriginals shaping the landscape using fire. Add to that novel species, changed landscape use and so on. Even hooves are novel.
I can see how one would call land that becomes less usable degraded. I am less fond of applying it to non-humans as there are both winners and losers. Even in Australia you had native winners: crocodiles, forest and (thus) koalas increased after Aboriginal fire management stopped among more.
Though sometimes we can rightly assume it is worse. I think monocultures are one of the phenomenon when intervention is worthwhile.
To come back to Australia, it seems that the lack of burning makes natural fires worse.
>>8296380>and I have heard some good things about European populations of lynx, wolverine, wolf and bear increasing.More productive farming might make farmland into ecological deserts it also allows more nature.
I've read that wolves and bears partly rebounded because of trash. I find it interesting how the wolf adapts so greatly to anthropogenic habitats.
I am wondering if they can make the Netherlands their home. I feel golden jackals fit better, a species also expanding and growing.
But I also remind myself that it are farmers who have the most skin in the game. Ecologists are all too glad to have certain species but they are often not the ones caring the burden that some bring.
It is nice seeing that farmers are more tolerant of wildlife, at least here in the Netherlands, but I hope that it remains so.
I am starting to think that it isn't that bad to think anthropocentric in the sense of a functional nature as long as there is some room of natural autonomy.
I think that wanting to opt for original ecosystems might not always be that beneficial for the planet.
I must say reading all that ecology gives me a lot of headaches.
