ABSTRACT
Palaeoecology, Management, and Restoration in the Highlands It is impossible not to form opinions about a landscape or habitat from viewing or working in it. These preconceptions come to the fore in the fi eld of ecological restoration, particularly the concept that a target habitat is damaged or somehow inadequate, and that these faults will be repaired, as there is some “better” or “more correct” state to which it ought to be returned or transformed. While some measures of degradation, such as soil erosion or biodiversity loss, and the practical implementation of restoration are based on ecological science, defi ning “degradation” and establishing restoration goals may be affected by value judgments, which are fi rmly based in current social, political, and economic values. Furthermore, there is a lack of ecological evidence to support decision-making in many instances, including the long-term impacts of reduced grazing pressures, while most of the ecological benefi ts of ‘rewilding’ are, by their very nature, uncertain and thus incompatible with current target-driven management strategies. Regardless of how it is defi ned, restoration calls explicitly for certain aspects of a landscape to be valued above others. In this context, history can be used to demonstrate degradation and so justify conservation and reparation, particularly in restoration schemes that seek to establish more natural systems which limit human pressures. While a long-term perspective can provide an opportunity for critical debate about management and restoration perceptions, baselines and goals, history is also at times used selectively to justify preconceptions or predetermined goals.1
