The intent of streamlining…

The intent of streamlining/coordinating the process for greater efficiency is understood. The updated approach to species protection includes new systems and structures but beneath the surface, several changes weaken the province’s ability to prevent species decline and extinction. While some conservation elements are maintained, it introduces gaps that place vulnerable wildlife and habitats at greater risk.

If species are already listed under federal laws, they will not receive full protection under Ontario’s legislation. Some at-risk species may be monitored without meaningful provincial intervention — leaving them in danger despite their known vulnerability.

The legislation prohibits actions that would cause a species to become extinct in Ontario however, it does not prevent significant declines in population or habitat loss that fall short of extinction. This shifts the standard of protection dangerously low — effectively allowing harm to continue until a species is on the brink.

While permits are required for activities that may affect species or their habitats, the authority to issue, amend, or revoke these permits rests solely with the Minister. Industrial or development projects may be approved even if they compromise species survival.
A new digital registry does not ensure these decisions will be grounded in conservation science or subject to independent oversight.

The Minister may issue codes, standards, or best practices for species protection but these remain optional and are not binding undermining enforceable rules for habitat preservation and recovery.

As the province transitions from the previous Endangered Species Act to this new framework, there is potential for disruption in existing protections, funding programs, and recovery efforts. Any pause in these activities, may have lasting consequences for species already under stress from climate change, habitat loss, and human activity.

In conclusion, this Bill dismantles Ontario’s science-based species protections, narrowing what counts as habitat and giving the government sweeping discretion. By putting hasty development first, it abandons ecological responsibility, vastly undermines Indigenous rights, and erodes democratic oversight — leaving at-risk species with few to no safeguards, no path to recovery, and communities with no legal recourse.