Rewilding Europe’s 10th project ‘has potential to benefit both nature and people’ in one of the continent’s least populated areas....

https://www.theguardian.com/environm...tern-spain-aoe

I think this was shared before, great idea if it wasn't for this:

The Iberian Highlands Rewilding Landscape project – located about two hours’ drive from Madrid and two and a half hours from Valencia – is the 10th to be undertaken by Rewilding Europe, and its first in Spain. “These cities have a lot of people who are looking for special places to see nature, so the tourist potential of this area is huge,” said Schapira.

It would be better to keep people away to reduce fire risk and why do we have to go everywhere.

Err. To see nature. I haven’t started any fires!

lovely area. Great project.

15 years ago very few people in our area had ever seen Hispanic Cabra. Hunting of them was banned and now they are making a comeback and are more visible. I wonder how long it will be before wolves come back?

To see various parts of our chosen country.

Rosemary

El Pais also has an article (in English)

https://english.elpais.com/spain/202...-of-spain.html

You might not think you are starting the fire, you contribute. Fact is that the dumbing down is real and the whole idea was to give back a piece of land for the animals, not make it a tourist attraction.
There are already enough parks for us people to visit.

Curious about that - "You might not think you are starting the fire, you contribute." - so the fact of me going somewhere is contributory to starting a fire......
What part of my visit personally contributes?
So the longer I'm somewhere the more likelihood there is a fire?
Don't know the ins and outs of it but with certain types of countryside, (controlled) fire is not always a bad thing.
Getting away from the fact that a certain amount of this is just a money making scheme for someone, unless a specific environment is particularly fragile, it'd need a very good logical and comprehensible reason why I wouldn't go look/experience it. Saying I personally would be a fire risk doesn't cut it.

There was a letter in the UK press yesterday from someone explaining the problems with new housing estates in the Severn valley. The new residents take their dogs for walks in the nearby countryside but let them off the leash which is very bad news for ground-nesting birds. I'm sure this happens alot in the Spanish campo.

I can see that people are easily offended and probably no point discussing further. Everybody thinks they aren't personally responsible, but we all contribute in one way or another. It starts with one person who visits and tells others to visit and then we know the outcome. More people, more roads, more paths, more buildings, more bbqs, more campfires, more disturbance. Keep wildlife, wild.

Not offended at all. Being 'offended' is touted around far too much. Some are far too sensitive and see offense where there is none.
As I said, "curious".
If you want to extend your thought further, consider parks and National parks in Africa. It's well known that leaving the countryside and wild life to its own devices leads to its demise. The way to protect that environment and the animals/wildlife within is to declare an area protected but open to visitors. A man called Norman Carr realised this in the 1950's and preserved millions of acres of land and animals by setting up National Parks in southern Africa.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Norman_Carr

All depends how people behave I guess - some are just irresponsible inconsiderate idiots who leave litter etc whilst others know how to behave in this sort of environment.

It is a huge area so I would have thought enough for wildlife and responsible visitors to co-exist....

Europe isn't Africa though and while the thought is good, Europe needs a different thinking. Just like plastic seemed like a good idea, look at the problems now. So while the concept seemed great back then, we are not in the 50's.

The way to protect that environment and the animals/wildlife within is to declare an area protected but not open to visitors.

Spain and the rest of Europe already have enough National Parks that are open to visitors and generate revenue.
What we need is more wilderness and not invite more people to the little we have left.

People are people wherever they live. And I mention the 1950's to illustrate the success over the years that has brought and is still relevant today.