Most restoration projects are designed to approximate the species composition and ecotypes ecologists and historians determine were present in an area at some point in the historical past. In most cases, although somewhat arbitrary, the specific time chosen is based on an understanding of historic species composition and anthropogenic disturbances.Although restoring an area to the estimated, historical vegetation types is widely accepted, the exclusory nature of the restoration process often actively eliminates not just invasive species, but also non-invasive, nonnative species (...) as well as displaced native species. These exclusory activities echo patterns of domination and degradation that led to a need for restoration in the first place. Although the domination present in restoration stems from an earnest desire to repair harms inflicted by human carelessness, it at the same time enforces a human conception of the ideal landscape. Attending to ecofeminist concepts such as inclusivism and pluralism, and embracing their rejection of dualistic thinking and the logic of domination demands an expanded tolerance within the practice of ecological restoration. An expanded ecofeminist conceptualization of restoration, a restorashyn, attempts to reduce the presence of overt human domination of the land. Doing so may ultimately mean that the species composition of an ecofeminist restorashyn will not be purely native, but may instead include a diverse mix of both native and non-invasive, nonnative species. (shrink)

Despite the successes, and the considerable and continuing ethical disputes regarding wolf reintroduction in the United States, no clear, cogent, theoretically based ethical examination of the wolf reintroductions has yet been completed. Ecological feminist thought, particularly as articulated by Karen J. Warren, presents one way to create such an ethical assessment. Applying ecological feminist theories to wolf reintroduction also generates an intriguing instance of theoretical application in the “real world” and sheds insight on the pragmatic value of ecological feminist thought. (...) While ecofeminism does not give a definitive and decisively defensible position concerning wolf reintroduction, it does offer a repeatable framework and set of conditions by which one can assess environmental practice and policy, evidencing yet another example of the relevance of environmental ethics for the assessment of environmental policy. (shrink)

Despite the successes, and the considerable and continuing ethical disputes regarding wolf reintroduction in the United States, no clear, cogent, theoretically based ethical examination of the wolf reintroductions has yet been completed. Ecological feminist thought, particularly as articulated by Karen J. Warren, presents one way to create such an ethical assessment. Applying ecological feminist theories to wolf reintroduction also generates an intriguing instance of theoretical application in the “real world” and sheds insight on the pragmatic value of ecological feminist thought. (...) While ecofeminism does not give a definitive and decisively defensible position concerning wolf reintroduction, it does offer a repeatable framework and set of conditions by which one can assess environmental practice and policy, evidencing yet another example of the relevance of environmental ethics for the assessment of environmental policy. (shrink)