I disagree entirely with…

I disagree entirely with this proposal to repeal the Endangered Species Act and replace it with the Species Conservation Act. As a citizen of Ontario, I request that the Ontario Government does not go forward with this proposal for the following reasons:

1. The proposal and Bill 5 will result in removing key safeguards for Species at Risk that are currently part of the Ontario Species at Risk Act. The proposal blatantly disregards the current science-based commitments to protect the HABITAT of Ontario species at risk, in reducing the definition of habitat to dens, nests, etc. ("dwelling places"). This narrow, ill-informed definition ignores the range of features and conditions at-risk species need to survive, in accordance with existing Government Statements and Species Recovery Plans. For example, Blanding's turtles rely on terrestrial corridors of up to several kilometres spanning summer nesting habitat and overwintering areas in wetlands. The proposed definition would put this sensitive species (and key indicator of wetland health and ecosystem services) at gross risk of extinction.

2. The new legislation would also eliminate provincial protection for federally listed migratory birds and aquatic species — many of which are not adequately protected under Federal legislation, leaving significant gaps.

3. The Act would replace the science-based listing and permitting process, and give the government broad discretion to refuse to protect species and their habitats. This reflects a gross failure of government leadership to disregard expert opinions in making responsible decisions around public lands and resources.

4. The Ontario government is using the trade war as cover for its war on species. The only thing that has been ‘unleashed’ with this bill is an irrational vendetta against vulnerable ecosystems, plants, and animals. This is extremely disappointing, especially vis-a-vis recent reports from the Auditor General of Ontario indicating the value of endangered species in serving as indicators of robust, sustainable economies:
- as an informed citizen, it is hard to comprehend how endangered species are serving as barriers to "unleashing Ontario's economy" when the Auditor General reported that annual approvals to harm species at risk increased by 6,262 percent between 2008 to 2020, with 96 percent of approvals granted through exemptions (2021).

5. This legislation would also erode the consultation rights of Indigenous people, by eliminating permits over a wide range of destructive activities. It also risks setting a dangerous precedent for bypassing meaningful Indigenous consultation, contravening constitutional obligations and the principles of reconciliation.
- this is extremely disappointing and, once again, displays a strong bias for developers and lack of commitment to UNDRIP, Truth and Reconciliation, and Free Prior Informed Consent. I am embarrassed that the Ontario Government refuses to acknowledge and act within these basic principles of human rights.

6. The proposal adopts a “register-first, ask-questions-later” model for species-at-risk permits, allowing developers to proceed before environmental implications are fully known. Furthermore, the proposed establishment of "development zones" is extremely disappointing. It seems like Ontario is truly for sale.
- this, once again, reveals poor leadership and gross lack of respect for citizens of the province, both Indigenous and non-Indigenous, who deserve greater oversight and participation in the management of public lands in Ontario

As an Ontario citizen I demand that the above concerns be addressed before a decision is made regarding this ER Proposal.

Furthermore, I would encourage the Ontario Government to consider the ways investing in nature can bolster a strong and sustainable economy. Jurisdictions around the world are currently creating new protected areas to combat the global climate and extinction crisis. As we speak, there are multiple proposals for Indigenous-led Protected and Conserved areas across Northern Ontario. Why are these great ideas for sustainable economic growth being ignored in favour of promoting short-term mineral development -- often from non-Canadian companies (i.e., Wyloo/Australia)?

In proposing Bill 5, the Ontario Government reveals that it is out of touch with the general public. I am extremely disappointed that the government is ignoring basic commitments to environmental quality and sustainable economic development in order to support primarily non-Canadian mining interests. This comes at the wrong time -- and shows a disconnect with the reality that the majority of Canadians, across all political stripes support conservation (in fact, they see nature as central to Canada's identity) -- https://www.ekospolitics.com/index.php/2025/04/nature-tops-list-of-most…

I encourage the government to dismiss this proposal. Responsible leadership requires considers endangered species as assets, not barriers; respects Indigenous communities' right to legitimate consultation; and seeks out truly sustainable ways to "unleash" the economy based on public values.