The Government of Ontario…

The Government of Ontario argues that the current ESA is "complicated, takes too long to complete, and causes unnecessary delays and costs for housing, transit, and critical infrastructure". However, most Ontarians can see through this broad-reaching statement to see that the government is referring to its controversial highway projects.
On the whole, new infrastructure, housing, and transit in Ontario is developed in existing urban centres where few if any Species at Risk (SAR) are present. As an environmental consultant, I deal with the ESA on a daily basis. I'll walk through a typical development project: 1. A housing development is proposed in a farm field outside of an urban area. 2. At most, SAR occupying this land may include bats, grassland birds, and butternut trees. 3. The existing registration system is used for the removal of the meadow habitat occupied by SAR grassland birds; the existing registration system is used for the removal of butternut trees; any trees that may support SAR bats are removed during the leaf-off period when bats are not present. 4. The development proceeds on schedule.
During my career, I have yet to see a development delayed solely due to SAR in Ontario. Often times, the greatest delays are due to requirements led by municipalities and their Official Plan. Could the process be faster? Absolutely! But a conversation with any MECP staff will reveal an understaffed workplace. Adequate support for MECP employees would be an easy solution to accelerate project reviews.

On Species Classification and Listing:
Why retain the Committee on the Status of Species at Risk in Ontario (COSSARO) if the Government of Ontario can use its discretion to add or remove species to the list? COSSARO is a science-based expert-led committee, so why would the Government of Ontario believe it has greater authority in assessing the risk to species in Ontario? In combination with the removal of the Ontario, Species at Risk Program Advisory Committee its clear that this change is intended for the Government of Ontario to be able to remove protected species from the list that interfere with the government's economic goals.

On Reduced Duplication with Federal Legislation:
The federal government assesses species across all of Canada. A species can be assessed as Special Concern federally, but assessed as Threatened provincially. Under the proposed change to remove duplication, a species would then be defaulted to its lower federal status and lose protection.
In dealing with federal and provincial aquatic SAR, authorization is provided by Fisheries and Oceans Canada (DFO). The MECP must be engaged during the process, but duplication does not occur. At this time it is unlcear what the Government of Ontario means by "Duplication".

On Recovery Plans and Documents:
The government says that "We are committed to providing information and guidance on the conservation of species in Ontario" but proposes to stop producing recovery plans and documents. So how else would this commitment be upheld? It's argued that this would avoid duplication, but where federal recovery plans and documents have previously been produced for species specific to Ontario, the Government of Ontario has historically adopted those existing plans and documents. Again, it is unclear what "Duplication" is occurring.

On Registration-first Approach:
"registration approach is already in place and used by the ministry for 95 per cent of projects". Registration currently covers the most common activities including:
-working on structures in fish and mussel habitat
-removing habitat created or enhanced for species at risk
ecosystem conservation
-keeping a species at risk for science and education
-health and safety work
-accidentally trap a species at risk
-helping to protect or recover an endangered or threatened species
-ditch and drainage work
-development/infrastructure projects and newly protected species or habitats
-mineral exploration
-Operating hydro-electric generating stations including dams that do not produce electricity
-Operating wind farms
-pits or quarries
-incubating at-risk turtle eggs
-carrying out species at risk surveys
-altering a structure (habitat for Barn Swallow)
-Bobolink and Eastern Meadowlark habitats and land development
-Butternut trees on your property
-working on a chimney that will impact Chimney Swift or its habitat

There are over 150 Endangered and Threatened species in Ontario, however, species-specific registrations are available for just four species. And yet, 95% of ESA projects have been registered. This demonstrates that developments are proceeding easily, generally inhibited by the current ESA. The proposed changes would therefore help just 5% of projects. Opening Ontario to a registration-first system would cause irreversible harm to the Endangered and Threatened species that need greater case-by-case review and attention. Instead, lets use our resources to accelerate project reviews of the current registration system.