Dear Mr. Ford, The changes…

Dear Mr. Ford,

The changes you are proposing to the Endangered Species Act and the laws you are proposing under the new Species Conservation Act will be devastating to wildlife and their habitats, especially for species at risk.

-Developers should continue to apply for permits, and permits should continue to be scrutinized to ensure that what developers are proposing will not be detrimental to wildlife or their habitat. A registration-based approach will make it far too easy for developers to demolish and pave over critical wildlife habitat.

-The provincial government must abide by the science-based assessments made by COSSARO and must not have the ability to remove species from the list of species at risk when under pressure from developpers or for political reasons - this should only be done when COSSARO and other experts deem the species stable.

-The term "harass" must absolutely continue to be included in the list of prohibitions, as I know full well that people of questionable morals and intelligence may take pleasure in purposely harassing or even killing animals. These people should be prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law.

-Restricting the definition of habitat to an animal's dwelling and immediate surroundings of the dwelling completely ignores the fundamentals of ecology and the true definition of habitat (e.g. Merriam-Webster: "the place or environment where a plant or animal naturally or normally lives and grows"). Animals require space and resources outside of their dwelling to carry out their lives - some need far more than others. It goes without saying, but if a fox is restricted to a 5-m radius of its burrow, that fox will starve to death as it will not be able to procure enough food and will be unlikely to find a mate. This is basic ecology. Animals must be able to move freely through space in order to forage, browse, graze and hunt, as well as find mates. Therefore, the entire area which supports these functions must be protected to ensure the survival of the species.

-The government must continue to actively assist in the recovery of species at risk, and must therefore continue to develop recovery products to ensure their longterm survival. Without any plans to boost their populations, species at risk will surely become extirpated or extinct.

-The Species at Risk Conservation Fund must continue to exist and accept funds to be used in putting recovery strategies into action. Species conservation charges need to be mandatory or else they will not be taken seriously and will be unlikely to be paid. Moreover, these charges must be commensurate with the damage being done so that the affected nearby species populations are effectively unharmed from the development activity.

The province's current attitude toward species at risk and the environment as a whole is shameful. As a wildlife professional, I was appalled with these proposed changes and additions to legislation. How easy the province forgets the critical ecological functions served by species and their habitats, such as the pollination of crops and vegetation by insects, the filtration of pollutants by wetlands, and the pest control employed by bats and other predators, not to mention the millions of dollars saved by these existing ecological services. I strongly urge you to think about the ecological and economic implications of these proposed changes, to think beyond votes and short-term profits, and to reconsider these changes.

Thank you