The following is an op-ed on the Rights of Nature, written by Imogen Prince, a young Legacy Fund supporter and our official photographer for the October fundraiser. It was written for an ethics class at Dawson College, and presents a bold vision for the legal protection of nature. 

During the enlightenment, Rene Descartes, the father of modern philosophy, declared that animals do not feel pain; as quoted in iapwa.org: “[w]e have no duties to animals; we have no need for conscience. Whatever intelligence, whatever pain we may seem to see cannot exist in creatures bereft of understanding and feeling”. To any modern reader this comment comes off as preposterous, however, the debate whether or not an animal can feel pain was once a current issue similar to our modern day debate over the rights of ecosystems. 

Scientists and environmental activists have been in a fierce debate with governments and companies over how to protect the environment for years, but in this political climate it’s getting progressively harder to find a way to go about doing this. In order to truly make a difference in the way that we protect the environment, a change must be made in how we view it. Trees, through their deep connections to their ecosystems, must be valued as living beings and be given legal rights to reflect this. 

As humans, it can be hard to understand non-human life because the ways that they interact with each other are so different from us. This is especially true when it comes to trees: a part of the environment that is easily ignored, and used to make so much of the products we use in our everyday lives. However, trees aren’t just sticks of wood coming out of the ground, they are complex organisms. They have a fascinating way of connecting with one another through fungal networks beneath their tall trunks. According to the Smithsonian Magazine: “Forest trees have evolved to live in cooperative, interdependent relationships, maintained by communication and a collective intelligence similar to an insect colony”. 

This sounds pretty cool, however, scientists are conflicted on the matter. Some scientists hold onto the belief that trees can sense each other’s pain and hold deep relationships, and others debate that the fungal relationships between trees are not effective enough to allow them to communicate in such ways. Either way, ecosystems are made up of interdependent species that rely on each other to survive in their natural habitat. This includes insects, animals, plants, humans and especially trees. When an effort is made to deforest an area, the rest of the ecosystem suffers; According to Rights of Nature: What are they?: “These beings are in relationships of interdependence with one another. They all have agency, life force, rights and responsibilities, in their own ways”. 

Therefore, when a forest is removed from its place of growth, the ground becomes less fertile, reducing the nutrients that the vegetation needs, which affects the food sources of the animals that live in the area, and everything goes downhill from there. Humans, as mentioned earlier, are also affected by this change in ecosystem, because as much as we like to pretend we’re not, we are part of the earth’s natural world. 

The earth is a highly codependent ecosystem, with every step we affect it and it affects us. Humans are a product of millions and millions of years of environmental shifts in the natural world, without nature, we would not exist. Despite this, humanity’s current view of the natural world has been one of exploitation, as if we own it and it owes us the fruits of its labour. 

According to Martin Buber, one who relates to others through the I-It relation “only knows the feverish world out there and his feverish desire to use it. When he says you, he means: you my ability to use!”(1). The capitalist view of nature only relies on this relationship, and refuses to see the truth: we are also a part of nature. In the current age of the climate crisis, this way of thinking must change if humans are to survive on this earth. We must learn how to see the tree as another being living through the same things as us. The tree experiences the crisis just as we do; walking down the street on a particularly hot day, it’s undeniable that the trees too, are thirsty. The Rights of Nature movement uses this view of nature as the foundation for its environmental protection actions. 

Throughout the world, efforts are being made to give nature its own rights. This legal recognition protects an area of land, an ecosystem, or even a river as if it’s a human. Just as we, as humans, have rights such as the right to life, education, and freedom; nature is granted the “inalienable right to exist and flourish” (International Joint Commission). Granting legal rights to nature has been successful in numerous countries. Two of many examples of this successfully taking place are: Ecuador granting nature rights for the first time in 2008, and the granting of personhood to a river by an Indigenous Quebec nation. In 2008, Ecuador became the first country to recognize nature as having its own rights. Its constitution states that : “Nature or Pachamama, where life is reproduced and exists, has the right to exist, persist, maintain and regenerate its vital cycles, structure, functions and its processes in evolution”(Art.71). 

This legal framework fell under some controversy as some argued it was merely symbolic, and didn’t actually do much to protect nature. However, recently the Ecuadorian government was able to block a mining company from exploiting the natural resources in a forest protected under the Rights of Nature. This is a historical win for environmental rights and is able to set a precedent for future cases. Canadian efforts have also been made to protect nature in such ways. In 2021, Quebec’s Magpie River was granted legal personhood by the Innu Council of Ekuanitshit and the regional council of Minganie. In order to ensure that the river is properly taken care of, it will be represented in court by its guardians, similar to a child. 

Elizabeth Benner, writing for CBC explains: “According to the sister resolutions, “guardians” will be appointed by the Innu council of Ekuanitshit and the regional municipal council of Minganie to advocate for the river and represent it in court. The guardians will also have to consult both councils when performing their duties to protect the Magpie”. This will help the Indigenous communities living near the river protect it from being polluted by corporations that don’t have their best interests at heart. In addition, this kind of guardianship gives Indigenous communities more political power in Canada. 

As someone who is interested in entering the field of environmental sciences and nature preservation, having a legal framework that protects nature from developers will give me a lot more to work with, literally. In addition, through a deeper examination of the way that nature connects all beings I will be able to develop a better understanding of what steps to take to protect it. According to “Active Listening” by Carl R. Rogers and Richard E. Farson: “truly sensitive listening requires that we become aware of several kinds of communication besides verbal”(3). At first, the concept of active listening may not sound like it works for human- non-human communication, however, I beg to differ. In order to truly understand another, we must pay attention to everything, not just words. So when we cannot listen to words, all we have is the being’s non verbal-communication to work off of, which is when the concepts of active listening are most important.

When we actually listen to the trees and the nature that surrounds us, the world becomes a lot more connected. Understanding this connection can lead us to improving our legal frameworks in order to maximize our ability to truly protect it. Through giving legal rights to nature we can finally accept that nature is a thou, and should not be exploited for humans’ benefit.  The tree, although easily overlooked, has existed long before us and will continue to exist after humans are gone. Shouldn’t we listen to our elders?

Works Cited:  

Buber, Martin. “Martin Buber- Select Quotations, mostly from “I & Thou “”. Accessed 6 Dec. 2024.

Ecotrust. “Rights of Nature Module.” Ecotrust Canada, 23 Jan. 2023, ecotrust.ca/toolkit/homelands/rights-of-nature-module/ . 

Holewinski, Britt. “Underground Networking: The Amazing Connections beneath Your Feet.” National Forest Foundation, www.nationalforests.org/blog/underground-mycorrhizal-network . Accessed 6 Dec. 2024. 

“Human Rights.” United Nations, United Nations,  www.un.org/en/global-issues/human-rights#:~:text=Human%20rights%20include%20the%20right,to%20these%20rights%2C%20without%20discrimination . Accessed 6 Dec. 2024. 

Magazine, Smithsonian. “Do Trees Talk to Each Other?” Smithsonian.Com, Smithsonian Institution, 1 Mar. 2018, www.smithsonianmag.com/science-nature/the-whispering-trees-180968084/ . 

Pappas, Stephanie. “Do Trees Really Support Each Other through a Network of Fungi?” Scientific American, Scientific American, 2 May 2024, www.scientificamerican.com/article/do-trees-support-each-other-through-a-network-of-fungi/ . 

“Rights of Nature Articles in Ecuador’s Constitution.” Garn.Org, www.garn.org/wp-content/uploads/2021/09/Rights-for-Nature-Articles-in-Ecuadors-Constitution.pdf . Accessed 6 Dec. 2024. 

Rogers, Carl R. et al. “Active Listening.” Communicating in Business Today, 1987. Accessed 6 Dec. 2024.

Rutledge, Kim, et al. “Ecosystem.” Education, National Geographic Society, 8 Nov. 2024, education.nationalgeographic.org/resource/ecosystem/ . 

Sandler, Vivian. “The Animal Sentience Debate: From BCE to the 21st Century.” IAPWA, 17 May 2022, iapwa.org/the-animal-sentience-debate/ . 

Toomey, Diane. “Exploring How and Why Trees ‘talk’ to Each Other.” Yale E360, 1 Sept. 2016, e360.yale.edu/features/exploring_how_and_why_trees_talk_to_each_other . 

Wood, Stepan. “Rights of Nature: What Are They?” Centre for Law and the Environment,   

University of British Columbia, September 2023, https://allard.ubc.ca/sites/default/files/2023-10/RON%20Guide%20%20No%202.pdf . Accessed 6 Dec. 2024. 

Zimmermann, Antonia. “Right to ‘Exist’: The Campaign to Give Nature a Legal Status.” POLITICO, POLITICO, 4 June 2023, www.politico.eu/article/right-to-exist-conservationist-campaign-give-nature-legal-status/. Accessed 6 Dec. 2024.