"Should there be a different…

"Should there be a different approach or alternative to automatic species and habitat protections?" - If anything there should be a greater amount of species and habitat protections and there should not be longer transition periods or ministerial discretion whether to remove or temporarily delay protections. This solely benefits businesses and is in no benefit to the public or the health of our environment.

"The development of a habitat regulation is not needed for each species that is endangered and threatened since general habitat protection applies and can be clarified through the use of general habitat descriptions." - Endangered/threatened species require specific habitats, creating general habitat protection is not enough to ensure the species current habitat is protected and does not help in the rebounding of the species.

"Significant social or economic benefit permit" - who determines what classifies as 'significant social or economic benefit'? This seems to contradict the entire act.

As a whole, this discussion paper is disappointing. The challenges highlighted are purely for economic benefit and not for the benefit of the environment and the species which we must protect. As the paper states, there needs to be more discussion on how to better recover SAR and less focus on the economic development barriers.