Comment
I am alarmed and disappointed to see this government once again move to deregulate protections for nature to accelerate and open up previously protected lands to development. I am an ecologist working to conserve species at risk in Southern Ontario, I am also a lifelong resident of this great province and country and firmly believe that our biodiversity and natural heritage are our most valuable and attractive asset we have. Today we are facing a biodiversity crisis, already the Species at Risk Act is insufficient to prevent species extinctions, and there are many species that require assessment to determine their status, and will likely be found to be of special concern, threatened or endangered. The current legislation sets a minimum standard of protection, and does not allocate the necessary resources (funding, technicians, reassessments, land acquisition, etc.) that are required to actually recover these species to sustainable population targets.
Changes to the definition of habitat for animal and plant communities in the proposed amendment clearly degrade the level of protection for species and fail to address the reason that species are being designated at risk in the first place, that is, the alteration, degradation and development of their immediate habitats, and the fragmentation of the landscape at large. For migratory birds, this is particularly troubling, as their critical habitat is not restricted to just those areas in which they stage, they require intact, protected corridors of natural cover and intact ecosystems to support them in their journeys. Equally troubling is the changes to definition for the habitat of vascular plants. Skewing the definition of habitat to be the critical root zone surrounding that at risk plant is ridiculous and not grounded in any sound conservation or recovery strategy. The areas surrounding these endangered and threatened plants represent our best opportunity to expand their populations through natural recruitment, and reintroduction efforts. Again, these species are at risk because the mosaic of intact forests, wetlands, grasslands and other ecosystems has been so drastically altered in Southern Ontario, that few even have a concept of what a healthy functioning ecosystem looks like.
The consequences of choosing deregulation and development over conservation of species at risk are severe. Once a species has been extirpated from Ontario, a piece of our natural heritage has been lost indefinitely, for future generations, they continually inherit a less biodiverse landscape from their elders, the apparent lack of natural cover in many counties and urban centres around southern Ontario contributes to social issues including crime, illness and disease (increased incidence of cancer, asthma, mental illness, depression, anxiety, addiction issues in areas with low natural cover). Additionally, the provision that government bodies not related to conservation will gain the ability to list or delist species from the Species at Risk act is frankly disgusting, insulting and diminishes the work of the Committee on the status of Species at Risk in Ontario.
The creation of “special economic zones” will almost certainly overlap with high priority areas for species at risk, since it is those heavily developed areas of southwestern Ontario such as the GTHA, London and Windsor areas where many Species at Risk live, they are already threatened by the current state of affairs, and this short sighted and corrupt amendment by this government will be detrimental to some of Ontario’s most emblematic species at risk such as the Red Sided Dace, Jefferson Salamander, Bobolink and many more.
This government should realize by now, that Ontarians will never accept the weakening of environmental protections to line the pockets of developers, as we know that the solution to the affordable housing crisis does not come from deregulating conservation to create more bleak, cookie cutter sprawling automobile culture slums that don’t contribute anything of real value to Ontario’s heritage, and only detract from what makes this province so special.
This government has repeatedly shown that they would rather line the pockets of wealthy developers than listen to Ontarians wishes to protect nature and build truly affordable, low footprint, midrise housing within already existing development zones of municipalities. If you do not reverse course and reaffirm your obligation to protect these at risk species by enhancing rather than degrading the Species at Risk act, then you can count on a rise of resistance in the form of protest and civil disobedience from thousands of citizens who are fed up with this government’s thinly veiled corruption.
Submitted May 16, 2025 9:13 AM
Comment on
Proposed interim changes to the Endangered Species Act, 2007 and a proposal for the Species Conservation Act, 2025
ERO number
025-0380
Comment ID
144908
Commenting on behalf of
Comment status