Authors, philosophers and preservationists have long struggled to define wilderness. While many describe wilderness as an area where the earth and its community of life are untrammelled by man, where man himself is a visitor who does not remain (US Wilderness Act, 1964), some perceive it as a concept, a state of mind or an opportunity. In Britain today, there are very few places left that are undisturbed by human activity and therefore there are barely any areas that can be described as wilderness. Arguably the one exception is the Scottish Highlands, which remains largely uninhabited and uncultivated, sustaining a massive diversity of flora and fauna. The management of the prevailing wildlands for the purpose of protecting and preserving the natural environment is of immense importance, not only for the purpose of sustaining the rare and unique qualities and character of the wildlands, but also for the enjoyment of present and future generations. The need to manage human uses and influences to maintain wilderness naturalness and solitude extends to wilderness wildlife (Hendee et al., 1990). Wildlife is an essential aspect of wilderness, with their presence is part of the common modern-day perception of wilderness. However, due to the decline in the area and diversity of wilderness in Britain over the years due to the rise in human population, certain British wilderness wildlife have now become endangered or even extinct.

 Due to the decline in British wilderness wildlife, management programs have been implemented to restore the threatened species these include:

Not all of these approaches, however, have been successful, because of our lack of understanding of the complex nature of wildlife ecosystems, population dynamics and habitat species relationships. In addition, reintroduction management programs have been proposed and in some cases implemented. Reintroduction is commonly understood as "the release of animals of any origin into an area within their historic geographic range, usually where populations have significantly declined or disappeared owing to human interference or natural catastrophes. Re-introduction refers to the release of animals held in captivity before the release and is intended to re-establish a self sustaining population in the release area," (Brambell 1977; Nielsen and Brown 1988; Kleiman 1989; Cited by Moore & Smith, 1990). The focus here will be firstly to consider the history of British heroic species, where the term ‘heroic’ has been taken as culturally significant, brave and occasionally dangerous. Secondly, to examine present environmental legislations relating to reintroduction, and then finally to discuss the benefits and problems of successfully achieving the reintroduction of heroic species into Britain, with specific attention to the reintroduction of the wolf.

"Since 1979 there has been a clear obligation under international law for European states to reintroduce native species" (Rees, 2001a). National laws in the UK are only just beginning to recognise these obligations stated in international law.

3.1. International Law for European States

Each government therefore has a duty to at least investigate the reintroduction of species, which have previously become extinct. There is however, no mention in the Directive of any specific obligations to reintroduce. The Directive also fails to indicate how far back in time a Member State should look in order to establish whether or not a particular species is to be considered native to their territory.

3.2. UK Law

The Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981 states no specific regulations for the obligation of reintroductions but does strictly control releases into the wild. Under Section 14 (1) of the Act it is an offence to introduce non-native species. It states that "if any person releases or allows to escape into the wild any animal which (a) is of a kind which is not ordinarily resident and is not a regular visitor to Great Britain in a wild state he shall be guilty of an offence". There is a list of animals and plants that are established in the wild in Schedule 9 of the Act.

 The Countryside and Rights of Way Act 2000 Section 74(3) appears to have now imposed a duty on the governments of England and Wales to restore and enhance as far as reasonably possible, those priority species listed in the UK Biodiversity Action Plan.

3.3. Future Proposals

If our legal obligations to reintroduce species are to be fulfilled, domestic courts must both interpret national laws in the light of the international obligations undertaken by governments and carry the majority of the public with them.

 It is important to the success of future reintroduction programmes that the scientific agencies that are responsible for implementation of these programmes co-operate with the legislators who produce the legal framework within which they operate (Rees, 2001).

 It can be seen that the number of certain species in Britain are in decline where once they were plentiful. Furthermore, there is a growing pressure in Britain to investigate the benefits and problems with reintroduction programs.

4. THE POTENTIAL BENEFITS OF THE REINTRODUCTION OF HEROIC SPECIES INTO THE UK

The reintroduction of wild species to Britain offers a range of potential benefits both in terms of the contributions made to ecosystems, habitats and other species and also from a cultural perspective of restoring part of our natural heritage. There is also the possibility that reintroduction may bring economic benefits to wild areas. The potential benefits will, to some extent vary, depending on the particular species, specifically the ecological benefits provided. Furthermore many issues relating to reintroduction of species in Britain remain controversial and as a result different groups may differ in their opinions of what constitutes a benefit or negative impact. The benefits of reintroduction can be divided into three groups, cultural, ecological and economic.

4.1. Cultural benefits

Historically there is a strong cultural link between wildlife and wild areas which are seen as interdependent, therefore the loss of these species represents significant degradation not only of the natural environment but also of the heritage and cultural value of that area. Heroic species often come to symbolize the countryside, especially wilder areas, and therefore add significantly to the experiential value of these areas for visitors. In Britain many species have been lost through human actions, therefore reintroduction offers the potential benefit of restoring some key parts of Britain’s cultural heritage.

 As a result of these links between wildlife and natural heritage, many consider that we have a duty to restore some of the damage that has been done and to replace species that have been lost through human actions for example through hunting or the destruction of habitats. The organization Trees for Life consider that "We have a moral and ethical obligation to reverse the degradation of the past" (Trees for Life, 2002) Furthermore Scottish Natural Heritage found this to be one of the key reasons stated by those in favour of reintroduction of the beaver during its public consultation on reintroduction in 1998 (SNH, 1998). Wildlife also provides a strong focus for environmental protection and therefore may offer the potential to further protect valuable ecosystems in addition to the protection of the species being reintroduced.

4.2. Economic benefits

The economic benefits are closely linked to the cultural benefits and the key role that wildlife plays in the value of wild areas as a recreational resource. The principle economic benefit is the likely increase in tourism following the reintroduction of species such as the beaver. As one of the main attractions for many visitors to wild areas, the possibility of seeing wildlife and especially species that had become extinct, could generate a greater number of visitors to these areas. This would benefit domestic tourism through increased revenues and offer potential for further developments. Scottish Natural Heritage (2002), believes that the reintroduction of the beaver would bring not only direct economic benefits to the areas where the beavers were reintroduced but also to the country as a whole. The reintroduction of "dangerous" species such as the wolf may also have positive impacts and prove to be a significant attraction to visitors. However it should be noted that increased visitor pressure would require careful management.

4.3. Ecological Benefits

Many species that have been lost to ecosystems in Britain may have played a vital role in the maintenance of those ecosystems, for example by enhancing species diversity, developing habitat for other species, as predators, or as a food source. By reintroducing heroic species ecosystems, may be improved and habitats restored. For example the beaver, which may be reintroduced to Scotland (Trees for Life 2002), is seen to have many potential benefits to both its native riparian ecosystems and other species. One benefit they provide is encouraging the growth of young shoots and trees by means of the natural coppicing process formed by the felling of trees to make their dams. The dams themselves also play an important role as the ponds they create encourage the growth of aquatic vegetation, and thereby increase populations of invertebrate species and provide a food source for other fish, amphibians and birds. In turn there are also benefits from the increased food supply for species further up the food chain such as otters and grey herons. The ponds also provide a habitat for some birds to build their nests such as teals, goldeneye and mallard ducks. Contrary to widespread beliefs beavers do not pose a significant threat to fish populations. The dams also assist in improving the quality of the rivers through decreasing the water flow and encouraging the self-purification of the channels (SNH, 2002).

Another species under consideration for reintroduction is the Wild boar, which also plays an important ecological role through the uprooting of soil, encouraging the regeneration of trees and providing feeding opportunities for some smaller creatures (Dennis, 1997).

The role of certain heroic species as natural predators is also important. Some people consider that it is not possible for humans to replicate the activities of natural predators in terms of controlling healthy populations of prey species. Natural predators kill throughout the year, taking from a wide range of age groups and tending to prey on the weaker members of the species, and therefore encourage the healthy growth of prey populations (Dennis, 1997), while human culling tends to be far less selective. The wolf, if reintroduced to Scotland, could play a significant role in reducing the red deer population and encouraging the restoration of the native pinewoods (Spinney, 1995). Currently, overgrazing by red deer represents a major problem leading to habitat degradation, resulting in annual cull of red deer to reduce the population (The Highland Wolf Fund, 2002). However the reintroduction of wolves remains controversial in Scotland.

 Reintroduction may offer the further benefit of promoting the long-term survival of species at a worldwide level. This is particularly important for species that are currently in danger or under threat from ecological or human pressures. For example the IUCN classifies the European Beaver as "vulnerable" meaning it could be in danger of extinction in the future. Reintroduction of the beaver to Scotland could therefore assist in the long-term protection of the species(SNH, 2002). Indirect ecological benefits may result from the reintroduction of species if they are accompanied, as many suggest, by the restoration of suitable habitats currently under threat. For example Trees for Life suggest that the reintroduction of the beaver should be accompanied by the expansion of riparian woodland ecosystems over the next 10 years (Trees for Life, 2002). Planting native tree species especially the oak, and further protection of existing semi natural areas of woodland would promote habitat suitable for the wild boar as well as creating greater species diversity in woodland areas (Howells and Edwards-Jones, 1996).

5. THE POTENTIAL PROBLEMS OF THE REINTRODUCTION OF HEROIC SPECIES INTO THE UK

Although many conservationists are enthusiastic about the prospect of reintroducing certain species into the UK there are many important problems which go along with this which are often overlooked.

5.1 Costs

Reintroducing species requires a significant amount of planning and monitoring prior to and after the event. These processes can be time consuming and expensive. Furthermore, captive breeding comes at a very high cost and can often be unsuccessful. There are a lot of people and organisations that need to be involved including vets, geneticists, zoos, local and national government, all of which require funding. The problem of costs becomes more difficult because it is hard to place an economic value on the benefits of reintroduction (Chivers 1991).

5.2. Techniques for capture, breeding and training/release

Capturing animals often requires permission from many different groups and also requires local support. Capturing and transporting animals is very stressful and there is a high risk of injury and in some cases fatalities, also requiring appropriate expertise and equipment. Successful reintroduction is dependent on the presence of an intact social group which may pose problems.

Breeding animals is notoriously difficult in captivity as it is often seen that when animals are forced together they become defensive in an alien environment. It is also important not to interbreed animals as this can cause genetic difficulties which will be discussed later (Chivers 1991).

Training for release is a difficult problem and is often overlooked. If it is not suitably assessed then there is a much greater risk that animals will not adapt to their new habitat and will rapidly die out. This theory especially relates to predator prey interactions and was exemplified by Banks et al (2002) using voles in Finland. If the animals were released straight back into the wild they were naïve and remained where they were released, they did not have an innate predator avoidance capabilities and so were unaware of the risks of their new environment. Also due to their inability to find their own food the population rapidly declined.

5.3. Disease

One of the most important factors is that of disease. This can have an impact in many different and important ways, whether it is the natural population or the reintroduced species which is being affected. Impacts of disease have been largely neglected in the past and this may be one of the reasons why many reintroductions have failed. When animals are reintroduced to an area it is generally in relatively small groups, making them more susceptible to disease. In addition, animals can be exposed to new agents of disease during captivity including human disease, and can therefore act as carriers when released. Furthermore, reintroduced animals may have difficulties with endemic diseases due often to a lack of acquired immunity, for example, with certain parasites non-pathogenic so leading to the decline of a population which has not been exposed to them. Problems of disease can easily be avoided by performing certain checks and test but this increases the costs (Viggers et al. 1993).

5.4. Site availability and suitability – space, predation and competition

One of the major problems with re-introductions in the UK is that of space. The UK is not very large especially in terms of wild areas and therefore there are often very few suitable locations, if any, for animals to be released into. Many species which are being considered for reintroduction, although not necessarily dangerous would be unsuitable for location close to populated areas. Also species often require specific conditions, such as availability of suitable prey in the case of wolves or proximity to woodland rivers in the case of beavers (Lever 1980). Population density is important and although there may be suitable sites they are often not large enough to maintain a viable population for example wild boar have an average population density of 5/km² (trees for life 2002). Beavers also require a lot of space as they continuously move to fresh areas. There are very few suitable locations large enough in the UK which is why most re-location programmes centre on Scotland. A further problem in Scotland is that farmers and landowners control much of the Scottish Highlands and generally do not support re-introductions especially of species such as wolves which may cause a potential threat to their livestock (Trees for Life 2002).

Predation is a problem associated with many re-introductions especially species lower down the food chain. This is often due to the fact that animals which are re-introduced are naïve and unaware of their new environment. This can be seen in many species where predation is much higher during the first few days after release. During this time animals remain close to the release site as they are unfamiliar with food source locations. This causes problems associated with scent as, due to remaining in the same location for a long period of time, they accumulate a lot more waste and odour. As many predators hunt using odour this makes them more vulnerable to attack. A further problem is that although some species are born with innate predator avoidance capabilities others are not and do not recognise danger in their new environment (Banks et al. 2002).

Another problem relates to disruption of the food chain. Although the species was once present in the environment in to which it is to be reintroduced, this environment has since adapted to a new set of conditions. It was seen in the USA that when wolves were re-introduced into Yellowstone National Park they rapidly reduced the elk population by almost 20% (Ripple et al. 2001).

5.5. Genetic diversity and composition

Genetic diversity and genetic composition are important problems that need to be assessed when re-introducing animals into the wild. This can often be expensive and time consuming to assess as special expertise are required. Genetic composition differences between residents and animals being re-introduced can lead to problems due to differences in disease resistance. If animals are only introduced in small populations bottle necks may be created whereby the gene pool becomes progressively smaller (Foose 1991).

5.6. Public

One problem which can occur is related to the interaction of reintroduced populations with human communities which have increased dramatically since populations became extinct in the area. This can act both ways, car accidents are a major cause of population failure but humans can also feel threatened by released populations especially with species such as wolves or other carnivores (Glasgow Zoo, 2002).

Public perception is also an important issue. There is a large divide between urban and rural dwellers with generally large support for reintroduction from urban dwellers and strong opposition from rural dwellers. This may be because urban dwellers are more removed from any potential problems but have the opportunity to see the species if they so chose (Glasgow Zoo, 2002). Wolves in particular have a bad reputation and are often seen as a threat to people, in fact there are very few accounts of wolves killing humans with the few that do occur, usually due to rabid wolves or defensive behaviour. However wolves can provide a threat to livestock especially if the prey in the area is significantly decreased. The example of beavers also indicates potential problems which may occur between man and re-introduced species. Beavers can cause damage to crops and trees and the building of dams can lead to increased flooding. This in turn can lead to water stagnation and death of fish which in Scotland may cause a serious problem especially to the salmon industry. Indeed in Alabama the situation became so severe that the species were taken off the protected list (Lever 1980).

6. THE DIFFICULTIES AND CONSEQUENCES OF REINTRODUCING WOLVES TO THE SCOTTISH HIGHLANDS

Wolves were once the most widespread terrestrial animal apart from humans, living throughout most of the northern hemisphere. In the British Isles wolves were abundant also, and records indicate their presence in England until the 14^th century, with habitat loss in the form of deforestation being the main cause of their decline (Lambert, 1998). The last wolf (Canis lupus) north of the Scottish border was believed to have been killed sometime in the 1700’s, whereas it was not until the 19^th century that wolves were eliminated from all central and northern European countries (Large Carnivores, 2002).

 There has been a great deal of speculation regarding the reintroduction of wolves back into the wild of Britain, and in the face of considerable resistance, steps have been taken to restore them to at least a fraction of their original range, with non government organisations raising the profile of a possible reintroduction. The campaign has been stepped up in recent years after the European Unions 1992 Species and Habitats Directive, left the British government obligated to consider the possibility of reintroducing lost species to their natural environments (The Wolf Society of Great Britain, 2002).

 However, the reintroduction of the wolf is a complex and controversial subject, since to some; the return of the wolf would mean something to be hunted, to be killed, so that their cattle and sheep are not. For others the reintroduction is something of an ecological responsibility. The campaign consequently has both its supporters and opposition, with conservationists generally in favour of the idea, whereas landowners and farmers usually are not.

 If reintroduction of the wolf is to take place, the Highlands of Scotland have been proposed as the most suitable location, due to its 25,000 km² coverage and because it is perhaps one of the largest and least populated areas in Europe (The Wolf Society of Great Britain, 2002). The land is also well stocked with wild animals, with estimates of over 30,000 red deer, a number that has almost doubled over the past 30 years (Spinney, 1995), hence the need for a cull each autumn. Initial conditions for a wolf reintroduction therefore appear favourable.

As a preliminary to the reintroduction of wolves to the highlands, the island of Rhum (see below) off the west coast of Scotland has been suggested as a site for a pilot reintroduction scheme, where the success of reintroducing wolves within a UK habitat could be evaluated. Whilst wolves were never native to the island, it would appear at first hand to be an ideal place for reintroduction, since it is separated from the coast of Scotland by 14 miles, its only human inhabitants are Nature Conservancy Council staff, and it has an overabundance of deer (Wilcove, 1987). The deer themselves are responsible for the devastation of the islands native Inner Hebridean woodlands, and therefore, wolf predation has been suggested as a natural cull (Spinney, 1995; Wilcove, 1987).

 Nevertheless, despite Rhum’s favourable conditions, reintroduction programs on a similar scale have been beset with failure. Spinney (1995) for example, suggested the proposed Rhum Island reintroduction plan draws parallels with the introduction of wolves to Coronation Island in Alaska in 1960. Not dissimilar in size and with a similar quantity of prey to Rhum Island, the experiment was judged a total failure after four years after wolf populations increased due to the inability of their prey to run/hide, this an upshot of the islands small area offering little or no places to hide. Subsequently, deer populations declined, leaving the wolves with an insufficient diet which eventually led to their demise.

It is possible similar events may occur on Rhum Island, however, some twenty five years on, packs of wolves are yet to freely roam the island, so the debate over whether Rhum could support an experimental introduction of wolves remains unanswered. Britain must therefore look to other countries in order to assess the success of wolf reintroduction programs if it is to make any progress in re-establishing the wolf itself.

 The United States has been the most successful in reintroducing the wolf to its natural habitat. The most well known example, in Yellowstone National Park, was executed in 1995 as part of a wolf restoration plan for the northern Rocky Mountains, with the plan to remove the grey wolf from the endangered species list (Fritts et. al., 1997). Despite strong resistance from opposition groups delaying the project for two decades, finally in January 1995, three packs of wolves were reintroduced back into Yellowstone Park.

 Initially the experiment was a success with wolves continuing to live in packs, residing close to their release sites, however, success was momentary since two years after relocation wolves were found to be straying out of the national park. Also, since the experimental wolf population could not overlap with native ones, later evidence of native wolves recolonising the park led a Federal Court decision to rule the experimental population illegal, and subsequently ordered its removal (The Wolf Society of Great Britain, 2002).

 Whilst Yellowstone Park’s reintroduced wolves managed to establish themselves so successfully in the short period of time they roamed freely, there is no guarantee that restoration within the Scottish Highlands would succeed, even with the favourable conditions present. However, the fact that the European wolf has managed to make a comeback in Europe so successfully, migrating from Italy to south-east France, and from Poland to Germany (Canis Lupus Corpus, 2002), in spite of its habitat being changed beyond recognition (Piechocki, 1994), suggests the wolf could do well in Scotland too, given enough space to roam.

 It’s unlikely however, that any reintroduced wolves would remain in confined areas, but would rather travel into other areas, thus laying out new territories. Continual management would therefore be a necessity, since it is generally recognised that wolves are wide ranging animals with very large territories (Fritts et. al. 1997; Piechocki, 1994).

 Such territories would inevitably include those containing livestock since it is foreseeable wolves would prey on, and scavenge off some of the 9 million sheep found in Scotland (Wolf Help, 2002). Wolves are highly intelligent animals and it is unlikely one would not waste its time chasing deer when the whole landscape is filled to capacity with sheep. Farming interests would therefore need to be swayed before any reintroduction plan could be implemented.

 Whilst this applies to the reintroduction of many species, this is particularly true in the case of the wolf where conflict with the present methods of sheep farming would be of particular concern to farmers. Reintroducing such a predator into the countryside could be the last straw for many farmers already struggling to make a living. ‘Human intolerance’ could therefore be the wolf’s biggest enemy.

 Despite the predicted success of the wolf to the Scottish Highlands it is important to be level-headed about the likelihood of reintroduction since there are many obstacles to overcome. It is unlikely that wolves will be reintroduced to Scotland in the foreseeable future owing to public opinion in rural areas, even though sufficient habitat and prey are suggested as being suitable. Even if a sound argument could be found for introducing wolves to just Rhum Island and the project went ahead successfully, the odds are stacked against their returning to the mainland.

 It is important not to lose sight of the fact that it took at least 2000 years of unrelenting hounding to remove wolves from the UK. Was this with good justification? Only by balancing up the advantages and disadvantages of a possible wolf reintroduction can this be determined.

As can be seen from the graphs below, in general people were aware of the species which are present in the UK today. The species that people frequently got wrong was the beaver, this may suggest that this species is still thought of as an integral part of UK wildlife and may therefore be a good candidate for re-introduction. In terms of whether species should be reintroduced into the UK there is an even split between those for and against. The main reasons given for reintroducing species are that they will enrich ecosystems and improve the environment, and that they naturally should occur and we should therefore right the wrongs we have created. Reasons against reintroduction suggest that reintroduced species will have a detrimental effect on the environment and may cause harm to humans or other species through competition or predation. Others suggest that suitable habitats no longer exist in the UK and that the expense of re-introduction will be too large.

8. CONCLUSION

There is growing evidence that wild species in Britain are decreasing. In the light of this growing concern international legislation is requiring the governments in Britain to increase the emphasis placed upon the restoration and enhancement of priority species. This requires an immense amount of research to understand the factors that influence and have influenced species depletion. It has become apparent over the course of this research that there is considerable variation in the benefits and problems of reintroducing each individual species. Changes in habitat and human modification have both played a role and it is important to be able to differentiate between them, prior to reintroduction. Evolution dictates the survival of the fittest and the continuous change in the natural environment suggests that for some species the environment was no longer able to sustain their survival. In these circumstances reintroduction may not be appropriate.

Public support is essential for reintroduction to be successful, and in many cases there may be conflicts between different groups. For instance the scenario of the wolf where, although it has been shown that it is possible for the wolf to be reintroduced into the Scottish Highlands, a lack of support from local farmers and communities may prevent this from happening in the foreseeable future.

At the present time it would appear that while there are some potential benefits to reintroduction of species into the UK, the lack of suitable habitats both in terms of quality and size, and the lack of public support represent significant challenges to successful reintroduction. Successful reintroduction may be encouraged by undertaking projects to restore areas of suitable habitat for example in the Scottish Highlands, and increasing education and awareness of the public. Meddling with nature is perhaps a naïve and potentially dangerous activity and we must recognise our responsibility and question our motives for reintroduction.

9. REFERENCES

Banks, P.B. (2001) Mobility decisions and the predation risks of re-introduction. Biological Conservation, 103(2); 133-138

Brambell, M. E. (1977): Re-introduction. Int. Zoo Yb. 17; 112-116.

Canis Lupus Corpus (2002) About Wolves. http://www.canis.org.uk/aboutwolves.html Accessed 26 April 2002.

Chivers, D.J. (1991) Guidelines for re-introductions; procedures and problems. Beyond Captive Breeding Gipps, J.H.W. (ed)

Countryside and Rights of Way Act (2000): http://www.hmso.gov.uk/acts/en/00en37-c.htm

Accessed 29 April 2002.

Dennis, R. (1997): Bears and beavers in Scotland? The call of the wild comes to congress. BVA congress in ‘The Vetinary Record’ (October).

Foose, T.J. (1991) Viable population strategies for re-introduction programmes. Beyond Captive Breeding Gipps, J.H.W. (ed)

Fritts, S. H., Bangs, E. E., Fontaine, J. A., Johnson, M. R., Phillips, M. K., Koch, E. D., and Gunson, J. R. (1997): Planning and implementing a reintroduction of wolves to Yellowstone National Park and central Idaho. Restoration Ecology, 5(1); 7-27.

Glasgow Zoo (2002):

http://glasgowzoo.inyourcity.com/d599773.htm

Accessed 29 April 2002.

Hendee, J. C., Stankey, G. H., and Lucas, R. S. (1990): Wilderness Management.

Fulcrum Publishing: Colorado.

Howells, O., and Edwards-Jones, G. (1996): A feasibility study of reintroducing wild boar (Sus scrofra) to Scotland: Are existing woodlands large enough to support minimum viable populations, Biological Conservation, 81; 77-89.

IUCN, (1995): IUCN/SSC Guidelines for Re-Introductions. SSC Re-Introduction Specialist Group. http://iucn.org/themes/ssc/pubs/policy/reinte.htm

Accessed 29th April 2002.

image-In Graphics, (2002): www.image-in.ws/graphics.htm

Accessed 3 May 2002.

Kleiman, D, G, (1989): Reintroduction of captive mammals for conservation. Guidelines for reintroducing endangered species into the wild.

Bioscience, 39(3); 152-161.

Lambert, R. A. (1998): Species History in Scotland. Scottish Cultural Press.

Large Carnivores (2002): Europe’s Carnivores; A conservation challenge for the 21^st century. http://www.large-carnivores-lcie.org/994carni.pdf Accessed 27 April 2002.

Lever, C. (1980) No beavers for Britain. New Scientist, 251: 471-472

Mitchell, B. (1991): Resource management and development.

Oxford University Press: Ontario.

Moore, D. E., and Smith, R. (1990): The red wolf as a model for carnivore re-introductions. Symp. zool. Soc. Lond. 62; 263-278.

In: Gipps, J. H. W. (Ed) (1991): Beyond captive breeding: Re-introducing Endangered Mammals to the Wild. Clarendon Press: Oxford

Nielsen, L., and Brown, R. D. (1988): Translocation of wild animals. Wisconsin Human Society; Milwaukee.

Piechocki, R. (1994): Who’s afraid of the wandering wolf. New Scientist, 142; 19-21.

Rees, P. A. (2001a, p221, b, p219): Is there a legal obligation to reintroduce animal species into their former habitats? Oryx, Vol 35, 3, 216-223.

Ripple, W.J. et al. (2001) Trophic cascades among wolves, elk and aspen on Yellowstone National Park’s northern range. Biological Conservation, 102(3); 227-234

Scottish Natural Heritage (2002):

www.snh.org Accessed 29 April 2002.

Spinney, L. (1995): Return to the wild. New Scientist, 145; 35-38.

Stanley Price, M. R., Falcon, F., & Soorae, P. S. (1996): Scientific Aspects: why and how? Naturopa, 82, p4-5. Council of Europe.

The Highland Wolf Fund (2002):

www.myinternet.co.uk/wsgb/education/articles/reintorduction.htm

Accessed 29 April 2002.

The Wolf Society of Britain, (2002): Wolf Re-introduction to Scotland? http://www.myinternet.co.uk/wsgb/education/articles/reintroduction.htm

Accessed 27 April 2002.

Trees for Life (2002):

www.treesforlife.org.uk

Accessed 29 April 2002.

Viggers, K.L. et al. (1993) Importance of disease in re-introduction programmes. Wilderness Resources, 20; 687-698

Wolf Help (2002): The Wolf in Scotland.

http://www.wolfhelp.co.uk/

Accessed 27 April 2002.

Wilcove, D. S. (1987): Recall to the Wild: Wolf Reintroduction in Europe and North America. Trends in Ecology and Evolution, 2; 146-147.

Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981

US Wilderness Act 1964