As the International Criminal Court has been asked to recognize ecocide as a new international crime, this article urges deeper engagement with the definitional complexities involved. It critiques the prevalent demand for an “impact-only” definition—one that criminalizes all severe environmental harm—arguing that such an approach overlooks essential scientific, logistical, and legal constraints. Instead, it defends the inclusion of a “wrongfulness” element, as proposed by the Independent Expert Panel, to distinguish between irresponsible and potentially justified high-impact activities. The article highlights the risks of over-criminalization, disruption to human well-being, and even counterproductive environmental outcomes, emphasizing that criminal law must remain a targeted tool of last resort.