Commentaire
Assessing the potential environmental impacts of a project on the environment and at risk species is necessarily slow and complex. Nature does not speed up to fit your timeline. The only way you can come to the conclusion that these delays are unnecessary is if you do not value our environment and the other creatures we share the planet with. It is incredibly shortsighted to weaken environmental protections to allow for more development, especially since we live in a world where many environmental systems we rely on are at risk of collapse.
The new definition of habitat is a laughably transparent way to void all protection of endangered species without the bad press of doing so explicitly. How long would you last if all of the resources you relied upon were dug up or made inaccessible, leaving you with nothing but your house and yard?
This entire proposal appears to be a shortsighted attempt to sell out our environment to the highest bidder. Needless to say, I do not think the interim changes to the ESA or the Species Conservation Act should be enacted.
Soumis le 12 mai 2025 10:06 AM
Commentaire sur
Modifications provisoires proposées à la Loi de 2007 sur les espèces en voie de disparition et proposition de Loi de 2025 sur la conservation des espèces
Numéro du REO
025-0380
Identifiant (ID) du commentaire
140383
Commentaire fait au nom
Statut du commentaire