Each conservation authority…

Each conservation authority that people come to interact with, recieve information from, or foster a close connection to will be severely impacted by the amalgamation of the authorities, as well as the local residents who have become familiar with their local authority.

Each conservation authority is small and centralized around a particular region to focus on that region's unique and individualized needs. For example, this could be restoring habitat for a specific target species at risk, which primarily needs habitat maintained around a watershed that a conservation authority owns. If conservation authorities are reduced and cover broader areas of land, then the focus of the authorities also become a lot more generalized because there's a lot more objectives that need addressing.

Consequently, there's a lot of room for conservation goals and priorities to go unaddressed as individualized needs cannot be acknowledged and met. For example, species at risk will become more at risk as less attention can be given due to a single conservation authority having to take on more land to manage, responsibilities, and other tasks to oversee.

We should stick to a system that works, and that is keeping conservation authorities as they are, where they belong.