Start here
The shortest explanation of what a score means, and why a high score is only a prompt for further review.
National screening, not final site selection
Where could rewilding conversations begin?
This site shows a national map of places that may be worth considering for rewilding, based on a fixed set of public datasets. It narrows the search. It does not make the decision for you.
The model scans England, compares small areas, and produces a shortlist of places worth a closer look. It does not say "rewild here". It says "start here, then check it properly on the ground".
The idea
Show the workings, then let people make up their own minds.
Rewilding is not one neat land-use answer. A place can look stronger or weaker depending on whether you care more about habitat recovery, flood and peat, or lower conflict with farming.
What It Does
What the model does.
It compares small areas across England using national datasets.
It gives higher scores to places that look more suitable for rewilding and lower scores to places that look less suitable.
It then groups the stronger places into a shortlist people can inspect on a map.
The point is to narrow a very large map down to places worth discussing and checking properly on the ground.
1. Start with context
Start with the basics: what the model does, what it leaves out, and how to read a score.
2. Read the findingsSee the main pattern first: stable core cells, candidate zones, and how the shortlist shifts when priorities change.
3. Open the locationsMove from scores to real landscapes through the case studies for Cornwall, Somerset, and the northern borderland.
4. Explore the mapThen open the map to inspect cells, compare scenarios, and see what is driving each result.
Location case studies
These pages pair the scores with real landscapes, so the shortlist feels like places rather than coloured cells on a map.
Technical transparency
The methods and findings pages show the assumptions, the checks, and the limits.
What the platform says clearly
A screening tool should be open to challenge.
This site does not tell anyone where rewilding should happen. It shows where national datasets suggest there may be scope, what is driving that result, and what still needs checking locally.
- Habitat proximity
- Restoration headroom
- Bird and mammal records
- Agricultural tradeoff
- Flood opportunity
- Peat opportunity
The strongest public claim
Use the outputs as a national shortlist for follow-up, not as proof of outcome, land availability, deliverability, or local consent.
Literature fit
Grounded in rewilding ideas, built as a working map.
The project sits somewhere between rewilding theory, spatial prioritisation, and England's current nature recovery policy landscape.
- Rewilding as process-led restoration Perino et al. frame rewilding around restoring ecological processes and social-ecological assessment.
- Spatial conservation prioritisation The scoring workflow fits a decision-support tradition: compare places, objectives, and tradeoffs transparently.
- Nature Recovery Network and LNRS The platform can help explain how national opportunity screening relates to local nature recovery planning.