While many Ontarians are…

While many Ontarians are counting on economic development and it's long term sustainability within this religion, this amendment is not the way to go. The removal of the recovery plans from the proposed updated protections is extremely detrimental and removes the original Internet of the act to not only save, but unsure the future viability of endangered populations. Furthermore, the changes to the definitions for habitats intend to clear up issues and allow for better enforcement. Yet, they remain unclear- how will we account for the food sources required by these species outside if immediate dwellings? Similarly, how do we account for the habitats of birds, or frequently migrating specifies. This bill amendement is alarming- the concept of life does not exist within a bubble. Why should this bill not assume the same, especially for our most vulnerable. As a country built upon the goods of our beautiful natural environment, we cannot undermine it for growth- growth for the sake of growth, without the protection of what we are building as a wholistic, sustainable society- is a truly troubling mindset. How will we achieve our target to protect 25% of lands by 2025 to conserve biodiversity? As a voter, I elected this administration, but do not stand behind this development.