This Halloween, environmental scientists delivered a frightening warning in the journal Nature: Earth’s wilderness areas are in immediate danger. According to their analysis, 77% of the planet’s terrestrial area (excluding Antarctica) has been impacted by human development, and we must do whatever we can to protect the remaining 23% from our destructive influence.

What makes this even scarier is that just five countries—Russia, Canada, Australia, the United States, and Brazil—hold more than 70% of the wild land that’s left. The scientists are hopeful that national and United Nations political action can preserve the remaining wild, but I do not share their optimism. Current leaders in Russia and the United States have decidedly poor track records in environmental protection, and Brazil—which holds 60% of the Amazon Rainforest—just elected their own far-right President. One of his big-ticket campaign promises was to merge Brazil’s agriculture and environment departments.

Global policy agreement (like the kind that would cordon off 23% of the world) is notoriously difficult to achieve, and even harder to enforce. In light of the world political climate, it just doesn’t seem practical to pin our hopes on blanket protection of the remaining wilderness, as the scientists suggest. Instead, let’s broaden the scope and consider that other 77% of the Earth: impacted ecosystems. Just because it’s been touched by people doesn’t mean it’s beyond saving.

In the rugged ranchland of northern Montana, one organization is already working to repair such altered ecosystems. Called the American Prairie Reserve (APR), their mission is “to create the largest nature reserve in the continental United States, a refuge for people and wildlife preserved forever as part of America’s heritage.” And they’re creating this reserve in a happily Frankenstein fashion: stitching together existing protected reserves and “degraded” ranchland. They do this by buying nearby ranches from willing sellers, and fixing it up for wildlife to use. Since their start in 2004, they’ve already made 26 acquisitions, totaling more than 90,000 acres of land.

It’s ingenious when you think about it. One reason why big, intact terrestrial ecosystems are seen as better than small, fragmented ones is connectivity. Generally, big animals like bison and bears need a large range to thrive, so a huge swath of habitat can support more animals than many small patches. But connecting the patches allows animals to safely travel between them. That explains APR’s strategy: they buy up land to fill in gaps in connectivity.

Of course, agriculture is the primary livelihood in this lonely section of Montana, and not every nearby rancher is a willing seller. That’s why APR started a business arm called Wild Sky Beef. Wild Sky employs local ranchers who are willing to make their farms more wildlife-friendly—for example, by letting predators pass through their property instead of keeping them out with electric fences. That way, farmers’ livelihoods and the Reserve don’t just coexist: they benefit each other.

APR has also worked with Native tribes in the area, especially in a joint effort to reestablish bison. Bison are a vital part of both the prairie ecosystem and Native culture in Montana; says Mark Azure of the nearby Fort Belknap Reservation, “For us, as all Plains tribes, we look at the buffalo as part of who we are.” Another member of the Fort Belknap Reservation, George Horse Capture Jr. of the Gros Ventre/White Clay People, sits on APR’s National Board. It’s common sense that local indigenous people should be involved in the species’ restoration to their homeland, but unfortunately, Native voices are often ignored. By forging a partnership, APR gets it right.

All this sounds very optimistic so far—how does APR fix up that terrible, degraded old farmland, anyway? The process involves improving the soil, planting native vegetation, and some prescribed burns. Sure, it’s not easy, but it’s not impossible either. The American Prairie Reserve may be a local solution, but this kind of large-scale restoration technique has the potential to improve ecosystems anywhere else in the world.

Those scientists with Nature alarmingly state “the erosion of the wilderness is essentially irreversible… And once it has been eroded, an intact ecosystem and its many values can never be fully restored.” Still, I think we should give it a shot. It is too late to take back human expansion and perfectly preserve that 77% of Earth. But just because we’ve used it doesn’t mean it’s without value. I certainly hope that the global community decides to protect the remaining wilds, but I won’t hold my breath—I’ll be busy fixing up the other three quarters.