Suggestions of developing the fringes of country parks for housing purposes have recently come to the fore again. There is a need to dismiss the idea and urge focusing of efforts on reclaiming brownfields instead. First, there is no such concept as “fringes of country parks”. Under the Country Parks Ordinance (Cap. 208), their boundaries are clearly defined and one cannot divide their areas into “core” and “fringe”. Tai Lam and Shui Chuen O , which some consider as suitable areas for development, lie within such unambiguous boundaries. Developing these “fringe” areas will set a bad precedent encouraging future invasion into country parks, as well as defeat the purpose of the ordinance while bringing irreversible damage to the environment. Preserving country parks is a consensus position in society. As seen from the outcomes of the 2018 “ big debate ” on land supply alongside a Greenpeace poll in the same year, developing country parks goes against public opinion. Half of the respondents in the poll found the idea “unacceptable” or “worrying”. The Development Bureau subsequently stated that such land use would not be furthered and that it had terminated the related land study. Unnecessarily emphasising the potential economic value of a piece of untouched land is unwise, as such lands can provide “ecological services” to city dwellers. The cause of our land supply shortage is not insufficient land but rather the lack of comprehensive planning. Creating an exclusive binary between preserving country parks and satisfying housing needs is absolutely unnecessary and unfounded. In reality, 1,500 hectares of available brownfields have never been utilised properly, with a mere 47 hectares explored in two feasibility studies. Greenpeace published a report last month uncovering the suspicious omission of at least 26 hectares of “high development potential sites” (which could provide more than 10,000 flats) by the Planning Department. The ongoing pandemic has proven how crucial outdoor leisure space is. Greenpeace urges the government to prioritise brownfields as housing land supply, rather than cause further irreversible destruction in country parks or the sea. Compromising our natural reserves is not the way out when there are existing land resources that are not utilised. Country parks should be preserved without exceptions made for inadequate land policies. Any precedent will only rationalise further eroding of precious natural resources. Chan Hall-sion, campaigner, Greenpeace East Asia