I do not agree with the…

I do not agree with the premise that the provincial government at its discretion can add or remove species at risk. Any such decision should not be discretionary but subject to peer review and science. It is extremely likely that a discretionary approach will simply remove species at risk or their habitat that are "inconvenient" to a developer or major project so a project can happen unimpeded. This is basically the reason why species become threatened in the first place! it is us humans that invade their space. I don't believe all developers and project managers are bad, many will happily accommodate certain things and even upsell them (a house with a wooded backdrop; a green space for staff to go in their lunchbreaks) but it seems some bad players are driving this change with specific lands in mind where more than likely the lands were acquired as conservation lands, cheap, so the potential profit margins may be enormous. Discretionary deletions are a very cynical ploy, people are not stupid, they see right through it. This part of the proposal is not worthy of the name of good governance in the 21st century.