Comment
I oppose these interim changes.
- Proposing to remove "harass" from species protections, is the opposite of protection. This would open the doors to intimidating any given species out of any desired land acquisitions.
- Allowing the government to have discretion to remove protected species from the list, seems corruptible and self serving.
- Proponents being able to begin an activity immediately after registering, would be enabling irreversible damage to all encountered species. It is irresponsible to begin activity without waiting for the ministry to evaluate and approve permits. This says a lot about the current gov and its lack of care for how we share this space. Also, this would destroy archeological prospects, potentially further erasing indigenous history.
It does not seem that indigenous people were included in drafting this, as they are mentioned only twice as after thoughts to appear being not exclusive if this passes, and it's obvious this government has been trying to disguise its pursuit of individual profit as care and growth. But we see it for what it is, greed. I oppose shortcuts around environmental protections that would allow bad faith and unethical actors to profit, which is what this interim proposal is trying to do.
I'll continue to use my vote against this gov to make sure we have a one that supports all its constituents, not just the ones who are frustrated with having to wait on their million dollar investments to make a profit.
Submitted May 8, 2025 10:33 AM
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
133793
Commenting on behalf of
Comment status