This bill has clearly been…

This bill has clearly been proposed without the consultation of any conservation scientists (with the expertise and direct consultation of whom the ESA was enacted in 2007), and without the proper consultation of the many Indigenous groups of Ontario whose lands would be affected by this bill. To say otherwise is easily refutable and a lie to the citizens of Ontario. This bill should not be carried forward under any circumstances.

Though there are a myriad of clauses within the bill whose implications are profoundly negative for the citizens of Ontario and our surroundings, let’s turn our focus to a key section of the bill: the repealing of the ESA’s definition of “habitat” and the new definition proposed. Bill 5 says, under its new definition:

“habitat” means, subject to subsection (3),
- (a) in respect of an animal species,
— (i) a dwelling-place, such as a den, nest or other similar place, that is occupied or habitually occupied by one or more members of a species for the purposes of breeding, rearing, staging, wintering or hibernating, and
— (ii) the area immediately around a dwelling place described in subclause (i) that is essential for the purposes set out in that subclause.
- (b) in respect of a vascular plant species, the critical root zone surrounding a member of the species, and
(c) in respect of all other species, an area on which any member of a species directly depends in order to carry on its life processes; (“habitat”)

We can infer from (c) that an animal’s dwelling-place and the area “immediately around” a dwelling-place, as well as a vascular plant’s critical root zone, are areas “on which any member of [these] species directly depends in order to carry on its life processes”. True! Animals and vascular plants do depend on these areas in order to carry on their life processes, and ensuring their protection for endangered species is vital. Yet these are NOT the ONLY areas plant species, and especially animal species, “directly depend” on to “carry on their life processes”. The prior definition of “habitat” was made for a reason — conservation scientists know that an animal depends on the entirety of its ecosystem for its survival, and that ecosystem is certainly not limited to their dwelling-place and the area “immediately around”. Animals must forage, hunt, and hide from predators (humans and their machinery included). So many species move quite far from the “immediate surroundings” of their dwelling-zones in order to do so. Also, many animals migrate (not just birds!) and require safe areas, rife with healthy nutrients, in order to survive and continue their migration.

Think of it this way: a golden eagle (one of Ontario’s most beautiful bird species, also endangered) nests in remote, undisturbed areas, far from human habitation or activity, and hunts sometimes many miles away in open fields, in which they can find prey moving through these open areas that have themselves been undisturbed. It also migrates. A bird’s life isn’t limited to its nest or the “immediate surroundings”!