Comment
I want to state that I support the extension to the Section 55 ESA Regulation. However, a 2 year extension period is ‎too short. A period of 5 years is more reasonable for a panel to do its work effectively and work through the very complex issues associated with forestry operating under the Crown Forest Sustainability Act and protecting species under the ESA. The extension must be implemented as soon as possible after the 45 day review period in order to ensure it is in place well in advance of the July expiry of the current Section 55 Regulation.
I also support the formation of a multi-stakeholder panel to provide critical oversight and input on a workable solution for the Endangered Species Act (ESA)
The result of an inadequate solution to the ESA will be catastrophic wood supply reductions, mill closures, contractors out of business, stranded First Nation investments in the forestry economy, and severe socio-economic and community impacts due to the loss of sustainable employment.
As a long time worker in the forest products industry, I have seen first hand the devastation a mill closure can cause in a small town. You cannot underestimate the impact the failure to extend Section 55 will have on not only small towns, but major cities like Thunder Bay.
[Original Comment ID: 212737]
Submitted March 6, 2018 2:25 PM
Comment on
Amendments of Ontario Regulation 242/08 (General Regulation - Endangered Species Act, 2007) relating to forest operations in managed Crown forests, incorporating species recently listed to the Species at Risk in Ontario List, and safe harbour
ERO number
013-1669
Comment ID
3239
Commenting on behalf of
Comment status