"Restoration" - Institutionalized Nature-tinkering

The trend is to diversify. Whereas the grassland “restoration” fad began with “bunchgrasses” only, it is now starting to add more forbs, to make a more “natural” mix. But, since none of it is “natural,” such increased diversity only exacerbates the problems. 

This is so insidious. Diversity in nature is good, simplicity dangerous. Therefore diversity in tinkering must be good too. 

My attitude is not to diversify but rather to simplify, simply for the sake of damage control. The rationale being: 

The fewer monkey wrenches thrown into the system by those who would play God with nature, the better. 

So many misguided souls thinking they are doing God’s work, tapping the endless flow of money from rich people who are duped and guilt-ridden, flooding the academic system with endless cockamamy “studies” about al lthe intricacies of refining a “science” that is based on an idiotic notion.

Being every bit as arrogant as our predecessors, only less honest, disguising a whole new insidious kind of wreckage under a cloak of righteousness; the devil gone underground. 

How many environmental studies projects and graduate work is done on various aspects of “restoration.” 

How many of those students--and their teachers--got their “education” from the real world?