All of the changes being…

All of the changes being proposed here will offer less protection to ecosystems, not more. I don't want any of these changes to go through, and I am against dismantling the Endangered Species Act.

I want recovery and stewardship of threatened and at-risk species to remain explicit goals of any act related to endangered/at-risk/threatened species. The new Species Conservation Act doesn't explicitly state those goals, and instead only references “protection and conservation” while “taking into account social and economic considerations including the need for sustainable economic growth in Ontario.” Sustainable economic growth is possible without biodiversity or habitat loss. Sustainable economic growth will require recovery work, and stewardship. To believe otherwise is ecologically false.

There are proposed changes here that also don't go far enough to protect ecosystems to which healthy habitats and species depend. The new Species Conservation Act defines animal habitat as “a dwelling place or the area immediately around it, such as a den, nest or other similar place, that is occupied or habitually occupied by one or more members of a species for the purposes of breeding, rearing, staging, wintering or hibernating.” This is an absurd definition, as it does not account for a species needing to eat in a habitat. A healthy habitat requires supporting multiple plant and animal species, who are all interconnected, and rely on each other.

Projects should absolutely not be able to move forward until after a complete and thorough environmental assessment is complete. Seven generations thinking needs to be applied to any kind of development, and I do not agree that the process should be simplified or made faster.

I do not support Bill 5, or any of the proposed changes to the Endangered Species Act.