Comment
A healthy natural ecosystem is good for humans and animals. We gain the benefits of access to a natural world (great for mental health), potentials for new medications from organisms yet discovered, environmental buffer zones to protect farms and human residences from bad weather, etc. A healthy ecosystem needs RESILIENCY (i.e. the ability to withstand disruptions) which comes from size of the ecosystem as well as the biological diversity within that ecosystem. Making critical habitats smaller and smaller and threatening endangered species is an attack on this resiliency.
We need to protect this dwindling "resource" that is natural healthy ecosystems. Full stop. There is no second planet, no cheap and easy replacement for all the services that nature can provide. This proposal is asking for short term gains, at the expense of long-term ecological damage. It will come back to bite us and the future generations will look back at this in disgust as we sell off their future because it's easy and quick, rather than putting in the work to make a place where everyone and everything can prosper into the long-term.
Submitted April 20, 2025 11:11 AM
Comment on
Proposed interim changes to the Endangered Species Act, 2007 and a proposal for the Species Conservation Act, 2025
ERO number
025-0380
Comment ID
126407
Commenting on behalf of
Comment status