In general, I believe the…

In general, I believe the Endangered Species Act should provide reliable protection to vulnerable species. It makes no sense to allow irreversible damage to the earth's ecosystem by allowing species to go extinct, just so that one, or a few people of one or two generations can make some money. People don't really know if their plans of playing around with allowing destruction here and enhancement there will work, human actions quite often have unintended consequences, so it seems prudent not to take actions that could have permanent consequences.

Area of Focus 2

There should be automatic species and habitat protections for threatened and endangered species.

The process of listing a species as extirpated, endangered, threatened or special concern should be based on the best available scientific information. Listings are not automatic, they are (and should be) a result of review by the COSSARO of the best available scientific information.
In order to make the process transparent, COSSARO should prepare a scientifically referenced report outlining the decision process and reasons for the listing. I believe these reports are currently written for each listed species. Listings should be regularly reviewed, as new studies and information becomes available.

There is no need for a longer public notification, species do not suddenly become threatened or endangered, it is usually a process over several years. Proponents of projects which will alter and impact on any kind of natural area (ie part of the earth) should be expected to be aware of natural environment concerns in their local area, and be aware of any species in trouble. A basic ecological literacy should be expected of developers

Area of Focus 4
No permits or authorizations should be issued to allow the harm, harassment or killing of endangered or threatened species, or damage to their habitat. This would simplify the permitting process, there would be no need to file numerous authorization requests. The rule would be simple...No harming threatened or endangered species or the habitat on which they depend.

Ontario Nature
I agree with Ontario Nature’s position regarding Endangered Species Act amendments. Any amendments to the ESA must support its purpose of protecting and recovering at-risk species. I ask that the following points be included in the ESA:
1. Maintain mandatory habitat protection for endangered and threatened species.
2. MECP should repeal the 2013 exemptions for the forestry, hydro, mining and commercial development industries;
3. Amend section 57(1)1 of the ESA so that any future exemptions cannot jeopardize the recovery of endangered and threatened species;
4. Maintain COSSARO’s current species listing process, “based on the best available scientific information, including information obtained from community knowledge and aboriginal traditional knowledge” (ESA, section 5 (3)); and
5. Require compensation that results in a direct overall benefit to affected species where harmful activities are permitted. (Do not allow proponents of harmful activities to bypass protections by simply paying into a fund.)