Should we write appeals against environmental issues if we receive systematic responses in return?

Should we write appeals to government authorities? Is there any point in sending letters if we receive systematic responses in return?

Let's figure this out together. I want to start with a few facts.

In October 2026, 106 leading scientists and conservationists appealed to the State Duma deputies in defense of Russia's nature reserves. Among the signatories were 9 academicians of the Russian Academy of Sciences and 12 corresponding members, as well as Hero of Russia, pilot-cosmonaut Fyodor Yurchikhin, and writer Mikhail Tarkovsky.

They requested changes to bill No. 1096223-8, which allows for the withdrawal of lands from protected areas. Experts proposed specific legislative restrictions. The chair of the relevant State Duma committee, Elena Panova, confirmed receipt of the appeal and promised to discuss the proposals.

In April 2026, more than 120 scientists and public figures wrote to the President of Russia due to threats to the reserve system. The letter was signed by 11 academicians and 17 corresponding members of the Russian Academy of Sciences, along with 27 honored ecologists of Russia.

On September 9, 2025, 87 renowned scientists and ecologists directly appealed to Vladimir Putin in defense of Lake Baikal. Among the signatories were 11 academicians and 18 corresponding members of the Russian Academy of Sciences, as well as other leading scientists of Russia. They requested the exclusion of provisions from bill No. 387575-8 that create conditions for clear sanitary logging in the central ecological zone of Baikal, expansion of construction, and fragmentation of wildlife.

On September 19, 2024, 73 leading figures in science and nature conservation demanded a halt to dangerous amendments to the Baikal law. Among them were 12 academicians of the Russian Academy of Sciences, four of whom were part of the Presidium of the Academy, 18 corresponding members, and 16 honored ecologists of Russia. The signatories represented institutes of geography, oceanology, water problems, forest ecology, zoology, and other major scientific institutions.

On July 16, 2025, the head of the Presidential Council for Human Rights, Valery Fadeev, personally appealed to the leadership of the State Duma in defense of Baikal. Fadeev expressed concern about the consequences of the proposed amendments regarding logging in Baikal and urged not to adopt them in their dangerous form. Simultaneously, scientists from the Russian Academy of Sciences sent a similar appeal.

On July 15, 2025, the heads of the scientific councils of the Russian Academy of Sciences sent a separate letter to the Chairman of the State Duma in defense of Baikal.

On September 20, 2025, Deputy Oleg Mikhailov appealed to the Prosecutor General's Office to protect the Teberda National Park.

On May 15, 2026, the leader of the 'Fair Russia' faction in the State Duma, Sergey Mironov, sent an official letter demanding revisions to government bill No. 1096223-8. In his assessment, the proposed changes create conditions for the commercial development of reserves and national parks. He stated, "The initiative threatens the entire protected area system of the country, and I highlight these risks in my appeal to the President of Russia."

On February 9, 2025, ten municipal deputies from Moscow collectively appealed to the Prosecutor General's Office against the liquidation of specially protected natural areas (SPNA). The deputies demanded to contest the decisions of the Moscow authorities to reclassify territories with SPNA status into the category of specially protected green areas (SPGA).

This is just a part of the events that have occurred over the past two years. Prominent scientists, experts, and even people within the management system are sending letters to agencies and law enforcement in defense of wildlife.

Note that on the list, for example, is Viktor Ivanovich Danilov-Danilyan—former Minister of Ecology and Natural Resources of Russia, who headed the department from 1991 to 1996. After that, he was the chairman of the State Committee for Ecology from 1996 to 2000, a deputy of the State Duma, and the scientific director of the Institute of Water Problems of the Russian Academy of Sciences.

Or Valery Alexandrovich Fadeev—the chairman of the Council under the President of the Russian Federation for the Development of Civil Society and Human Rights.

Vyacheslav Alexandrovich Fetisov—former Minister of Sports of Russia, chairman of the All-Russian Society for Nature Conservation, and a UN Goodwill Ambassador.

And other remarkable people, I would even say, the smartest in our country! Just consider the words of Vyacheslav Vladimirovich Rozhnov—an academician of the Russian Academy of Sciences, Doctor of Biological Sciences, and chairman of the Scientific Council of the Russian Academy of Sciences on the Ecology of Biological Systems. Or Yuri Yulianovich Dgebuadze—an academician of the Russian Academy of Sciences, chairman of the Russian National Committee of the UNESCO program 'Man and the Biosphere,' and head of scientific and expert structures of the Russian Academy of Sciences. An outstanding person is also Alexander Alexandrovich Chibilev—an academician of the Russian Academy of Sciences, vice-president of the Russian Geographical Society, scientific director of the Orenburg Federal Research Center of the Ural Branch of the Russian Academy of Sciences, and organizer of the Institute of Steppe of the Russian Academy of Sciences.

And other outstanding experts.

Who would say that they are foolish and that sending appeals to the government, to state authorities, is a pointless endeavor that yields no results? Many of these people not only know 'something about the system,' but have also held key positions in management, possessing the necessary extensive knowledge, experience, and contacts.

These people know exactly what they are doing, why they sign petitions, and what they are appealing for. But while their names as prominent individuals carry constant weight within the system, we, as civil society, provide the crucial 'support from the ground'—without a demand from society, without resonance, even people with loud names cannot achieve change.

We have many contacts within the system, many allies, and believe me—there are a huge number of people who see the problems, understand the scale of pressure on the country's wildlife, and sincerely want change! But they cannot change anything without 'ground support,' if a demand for the protection of wildlife and the resolution of environmental issues is not formed within society, if the appropriate demands are not put forward.

Systemic dismissals within departments are a side effect of an outdated bureaucratic system that simply cannot operate differently today. Naturally, no one will ever respond to you in an official letter: 'Yes, sorry, we made wrong decisions, we deeply apologize and will try not to do so again.' And one department will not criticize another, as this would mean a conflict of interdepartmental interests, which could lead to the loss of key positions in power.

Simple things, really.

But sending statements, petitions, and appealing collectively is extremely important. It is precisely through this that our allies gain a real mechanism to influence problem-solving! They can, by promoting necessary changes, rely on a real societal demand—not just 'I am an academic and see the problems,' but 'behind me are thousands of people, society demands change, and I support this with my expert opinion—it is unacceptable to destroy the remnants of living biological systems.'

The system of government is heterogeneous, with many worthy, intelligent, and outstanding people. Change is possible if we act as one living organism—together, like an immune response. It is precisely through this that we have managed to achieve deep systemic changes over the years.

I want all comrades to understand: the destruction of nature is a global process, an absolutely universal human trait that manifests where governance systems have been built around the capitalist model for years. At some point, movement in the right direction will begin, changes will start from somewhere, and I sincerely hope it will be our country! That one day the entire course will be changed and directed towards forming a pristine Russia, and then the whole world will take example from a completely new understanding of the world at the state level, where the preservation and protection of nature are the main course and guarantee for future generations.

No, the scientists and brilliant people within the system are not fools! They make statements and appeals not because they are bored and have nothing to do, but because they understand how important this is.

And your voice, joining with thousands of voices of comrades from all corners of great Russia, becomes the driving force of future changes.

Continue to fight for Life!

You are doing everything right.

© PAVEL PASHKOV