In Chapter Four I explored the connections between humans and nature and discovered that it makes perfect sense to talk about a relationship between nature and ourselves. Whilst there is clearly a sense in which humans are part of nature, nature must also be understood as standing apart from us, as something with which we interact, or have an impact upon. The idea that conservationists both could - and needed to - conserve nature was shown to be meaningful. However, not only do we interact with nature, we can choose how to interact, and in this way help to determine what impact we will have. Since conservationists are at the forefront of environmental policy-making, their position carries with it great responsibility. There is widespread agreement that the role of the conservationist is to safeguard nature as we know it (a nature that, though clearly altered by humans, still carries the hallmark, as it were, of 'raw' nature). However, we need to translate this into a goal towards which the conservationist can aim. In other words, we need to know how the conservationist can best safeguard nature. And since 'the continued opportunity for (natural) speciation' has already been identified as a key factor in the perpetuation of the nature we value (see Chapter One), the conservationist's overarching goal must embody this. With this point in mind, I propose that what the conservationist ought to be working towards protecting and perpetuating is wildness. Indeed, I would suggest that wildness is central to the meaning of nature conservation. There are, then, two tasks ahead. The first is to clarify what is meant by 'wildness', and the second is to justify my claim that conservation is best carried out by perpetuating wildness.