I'm writing to share my…

I'm writing to share my extreme concern for the proposed changes to the Endangered Species Act in Ontario. At a time when we are losing countless species (some estimates at the million species mark, or up to 60% of our plants and animals), we must take greater action to save them rather than fewer. I appreciate the need for businesses to succeed and grow and create the infrastructure or other items that Ontario relies on, but it must not be at the extent of our natural infrastructure, our natural environment, and all that lives within it. The proposed changes may sound good in sound bites, or in bullet point, but when you get into the details, you realize that all is not well.

I work in species conservation, and have done research that has shown a severe decrease in bumble bee populations, including the American bumble bee (which is only found in Ontario and a small part of Quebec for it's Canadian range) that my data shows is critically endangered in large part due to human efforts. I have also done research that shows how little we do know about our endangered plants and pollinators; even when we do have species listed as at-risk, we often don't know how to recover them, and what their interactions on the landscape involve.

Destroying a plot of land that is home to an endangered species in one area is not ok, even if another piece of land is created or designated elsewhere - this may be well outside the range of the animal, doesn't have the same connectedness on the landscape as the original spot, may result in 'death by a thousand cuts', and so on. Even 'transplanting' the species doesn't work - does it have it's pollinators/special fungal associations/specific host plants/specific food sources/mates, etc in the new area? So frequently we don't consider the true impact of our actions - lives and species are not simple abstracts.

Similarly, paying into a 'fund' for 'research' is not an acceptable alternative for killing or otherwise harming species. Yes, we need more research, but there's not point doing research on something that is dead and gone, or that is even more fragmented. The more individuals of a species that exist, the wider gene pool that exists, and the more areas that a species occurs in, the more chance of survival it has. Species are under so many threats these days - and with climate change in particular, it's just going to get worse. They need to have as much diversity and resilience as possible to survive.

We also need to focus on species in Ontario specifically and not brush off declines here as unimportant if the species exists elsewhere. Using the example of climate change again, species at the northern edges of their ranges often have genetic differences and/or adaptations that may allow them to survive coming changes. Perhaps a species is common in one area now, but that could change, especially if we don't value them; losing whole chunks of their range will not be a benefit. We need to protect and enhance these species, and not "write them off". As well, if everyone "passed the buck" to someone else, nothing would happen.

The committee that evaluates species to see what their conservation status is in Ontario (COSSARO) needs to remain independent of all external influences, and remain science based. After the science is evaluated, then the views of others, like businesses, can be accounted for. Allowing other views, such as those by foresters intent on cutting down a forest for profit, or engineers with aggregate companies, or developers looking to make a subdivision, on the committee will detract from this non-political goal.

The timelines can not be changed for listing. We have seen in the federal level that species assessed as at-risk of extinction languish for years before they get protection in many cases. Even at the provincial level this can be delayed. And while it sounds good to get more input, our species are disappearing. Inaction of even a few years could result in their loss. I have seen this first hand with bumble bees - in the time to do the research, publish the results, get the committee to assess the species, get the government to enact legislation, they have disappeared from Ontario. Status reports and their associated recovery strategies are key tools for conservation groups to take action with, and are often necessary for funding to be accessed as well for conservation activities. Without a formal assessment, there is also no legal protection. Again, we should be speeding this up, not slowing the process down.

Yes, we need to reduce red tape, but not in the way that is planned. Let's get rid of the loop holes in the current legislation and make it stronger and clearer: thou shalt not kill endangered species, thou shalt not delay the process of listing species, thou shalt not let short-term business interests overrule our precious ecosystems; let's have a clear and easy process to follow and not lots of hoops to jump through.

Extinction is forever. It's not just a phrase or a meme to be passed off as a motherhood statement. It is a cold hard fact. We have a social and moral obligation to try to prevent the extinction of species, as well as any other decrease in populations, especially when we as a species have been causing it. This era is not considered the "Anthropocene" and the sixth mass species extinction event for all the great work humans have been doing for the environment! We need to take action now and increase the strength of the ESA for our future planet's inhabitants.