I’m writing as a concerned…

I’m writing as a concerned Ontario resident to strongly oppose the proposed changes to the Endangered Species Act and the plan to replace it with the Species Conservation Act, 2025. These changes seriously weaken how we protect wildlife in this province and shift too much power away from science and toward politics.
Here’s what worries me:

1. Decisions should be based on science, not politics.
Right now, expert scientists (COSSARO) decide which species are at risk. Under the new plan, the government could ignore their advice and pick and choose which species to protect. That’s a huge red flag—wildlife protection needs to be based on facts, not what’s politically convenient.

2. Habitat protections are being watered down.
The new definition of habitat is way too narrow. It leaves out large areas that species depend on to survive. Also, removing “harass” from the law could allow activities that disrupt wildlife without consequences.

3. Letting people start projects without permits is risky.
Allowing people to just “register” an activity and get started right away—without any review—is like saying “we’ll trust everyone to do the right thing.” That’s not how protection should work. There should be checks in place before damage is done, not just after.

4. Recovery plans are being scrapped.
Getting rid of the requirement to make recovery strategies and track progress is a huge step backwards. These plans are essential to actually helping species recover, not just keeping them from disappearing completely.

5. Public and Indigenous voices are being sidelined.
Taking away advisory committees and formal consultation makes it harder for communities, scientists, and Indigenous peoples to have a say in decisions that affect the land and species they care about.

Bottom line:

These changes might make things faster for developers, but they’ll make things a lot worse for species already struggling to survive. Ontario should be leading the way on conservation—not rolling it back.

Please keep species protections strong, keep science at the centre of decisions, and don’t rush changes that put our natural heritage at risk.