Environmental Restoration for Future Generations
Environmental Ethics

       Most, if not all, of the land on Earth, has been affected by human influence and human touch. When it comes to environmental restoration, oftentimes humans enter areas that have been destroyed or harmed by natural or human-caused forces, but does that mean that the restorative efforts are outweighed by the loss of intrinsic value? If future generations only lived to experience the already restored spaces of land that seem as though humans were never there, does this make them any less valuable? 

       Would future generations say that the land has lost value because at one point the land was harmed, but now it has been restored? I think that the idea that nature cannot be restored is not completely accurate, and I do think it is possible for the natural world to regain the full capacity of intrinsic value as it once had, even if the intrinsic value is different than what it once was. Humans have the tendency to be relatively destructive, but I believe that this should exemplify the good that comes about from restorative efforts. This piece further explains my hypothesis that environmental restoration plays an important role in making sure that ecosystems are in existence for future generations and should be protected through current and future initiatives. 

       For humans to be co-members with nature, I believe that restoration is imperative, even if people would argue that the intrinsic value is lost as the natural world is destroyed and rebuilt. In my opinion, the act of restoring an ecosystem to a state similar to how it originally was shows acts of care and compassion for the environment. For humans and the natural world to cohabitate legitimately and effectively, humans must start acting in a way that limits the amount of harm done to biotic communities in ways that are only for the fulfillment of human satisfaction.