Comment
I am writing to express my deep concern regarding the proposed changes to the Species Conservation Act, particularly the new, narrow definition of “habitat.” The revised definition—limiting protection to the immediate area around a den, nest, or similar dwelling—fails to reflect the real ecological needs of wildlife.
Animals require more than just a place to rest or breed; they need access to food, water, safe passage, and a broad range of natural habitat to survive and thrive. Shrinking the legal definition of habitat to such a minimal standard threatens to eliminate essential protections for Ontario's species, putting many at risk of decline or extinction.
Equally concerning is the emphasis on economic and development priorities within a framework that should be focused on conservation. While I recognize the importance of addressing housing needs and supporting economic growth, these goals must not come at the cost of irreversible environmental damage. We do not have a shortage of buildings—we have a shortage of affordable housing. Expanding into critical natural areas will not solve this crisis, and it risks long-term harm to our province’s biodiversity and environmental health.
Ontario’s natural spaces are not just important for wildlife; they are vital for people, tourism, water protection, climate resilience, and the wellbeing of future generations. The value of nature is intrinsic and irreplaceable.
I respectfully urge you to reject the proposed changes in their current form and to work toward legislation that reflects scientific understanding of habitat, prioritizes the long-term health of ecosystems, and safeguards the species that depend on them.
Submitted April 28, 2025 4:26 PM
Comment on
Proposed interim changes to the Endangered Species Act, 2007 and a proposal for the Species Conservation Act, 2025
ERO number
025-0380
Comment ID
127374
Commenting on behalf of
Comment status