I support the proposed…

I support the proposed changes to the Endangered Species Act, 2007 under the proposed Species Conservation Act, 2025. Ontario’s current endangered species framework has become overly restrictive and disconnected from the realities facing countless communities, particularly in rural and cottage regions where many of these species thrive. Overly broad habitat definitions and regulatory red tape have created conditions where landowners cannot even build permanent dwellings on their own properties or anywhere near environmentally protected zones. This only serves to worsen the housing crisis in regions already facing severe shortages.

The move to a registration-first system, along with narrowing and clarifying the definition of habitat, is a step toward restoring balance between species protection and human needs. These changes reflect the importance of considering social and economic realities, not just environmental ideals. No one is out to destroy the very spaces we need to thrive and live, but people looking to build or develop are too often framed that way.

However, it is also time to take a hard look at who is really benefiting from the current system. You will no doubt see strong opposition from people affiliated with conservation groups and land trusts—many of which rely on taxpayer funding to evaluate wetlands and promote restrictive land use designations. While taxpayers are being priced out of housing, they are also footing the bill for land trusts and environmental organizations that pursue conservation agendas largely unaccountable to the public. If these groups are committed to their private vision of conservation, particularly proposals to permanently designate Crown land as conservation reserves, then they should fund it with their own resources, not public dollars.

Taxpayers should not be paying just to be locked out of lands they have helped protect for generations—especially when those designations restrict local economic development and worsen housing and land access issues. Conservation must be inclusive, transparent, and balanced, not outsourced to well-funded private organizations with narrow mandates.

This is the right time to re-evaluate not only how we protect species, but who we are protecting them for, and who is paying for it.