Dear Public Input…

Dear Public Input Coordinator:
I have reviewed the proposed interim changes to the Endangered Species Act, 2007 and the proposal for the Species Conservation Act, 2025 under ERO#25-0380. While I am supportive of efforts to improve the species at risk program and increase funding for species at risk conservation, I have some concerns with the proposed amendments.

• While I appreciate the need for sustainable economic growth in Ontario, protecting biological diversity has ecological, cultural, social and economic value. The revised legislation should be balanced and science-based while working towards the recovery of species at risk.

• The Committee on the Status of Species at Risk in Ontario (COSSARO) consists of experts in scientific disciplines, community knowledge or Aboriginal Traditional Knowledge. These experts are the most informed group to assess, review and classify species. They report to the government but are an independent body that makes decisions based on science and expert experience. Species should not be removed from or added to the species at risk list unless assessed by this Committee.

• As an ecologist I am supportive of the government’s commitment to increase investment in species conservation. However, shifting investments from species at risk to other species would divert resources from those species most critically in need of conservation and recovery. Projects proposed under a wider breadth of supportable conservation activities should still demonstrate benefit for species at risk.

• Under the current system, many proponents have opted to pay a fee instead of completing on-the-ground beneficial actions for the specific species at risk being impacted by their projects. Transfer of these funds to more general conservation actions means that there will have been no overall benefit to the species at risk already impacted, resulting in an overall loss.

• The proposed changes to the definition of habitat do not reflect an ecological approach to species conservation. For example, the proposed change to requiring protection of only the critical root zone of a vascular plant would allow the surrounding habitat to be removed, the outcome of which for many species would be extirpation of the species from the site.

• I suggest that rather than reducing protections, uncertainty around the current definition of “habitat” is better addressed by clearly defining habitat based on the best available knowledge about a species. Funds in the Species at Risk Conservation Fund that have not been spent could be invested in research to reduce uncertainty and support decision making. Such research falls under the criteria that currently applies to activities that are eligible for funding from the Species at Risk Conservation Fund.

• The Federal and Provincial Acts provide a double layer of protection for species at risk and their habitats. A one window approach where one agency reviews projects under both pieces of legislation would be a more effective and efficient way to administer the species at risk protections, without losing Provincial protection.

• Recovery strategies provide “the best available scientific knowledge on what is required to achieve recovery of a species” and describe the area that should be considered in developing regulated habitat for a species. These documents provide important information that is reflective of local populations and threats, which is crucial for the protection, conservation and recovery of species at risk and their habitat in Ontario. The strategies are used in species at risk conservation and restoration projects to, for example:

• Search suitable habitat to locate extant occurrences of the species according to detailed information on habitat, behaviour and life cycle information
• understand threats to the species and the severity and spatial scale of these threats
• make decisions about the important habitat locations, features and conditions that are critical to the species
• ensure recovery projects are focused on impactful efforts

• The proposed changes allow for works to proceed once a project has been registered. This does not allow sufficient time for the project to be reviewed for impacts to species at risk prior to commencement. Projects should be reviewed by qualified professionals to ensure threats to species at risk have been sufficiently identified and to determine if additional mitigation measures are required.

Thank you for the opportunity to comment on the proposed interim changes to the Endangered Species Act, 2007 and the proposal for a Species Conservation Act, 2025. I am happy to discuss our concerns and recommendations further to ensure the conservation and recovery of species at risk in Ontario.