Re: Bill 108, Schedule 5 …

Re: Bill 108, Schedule 5 (ERO 013-5033) Proposed Amendments to Ontario’s Endangered Species Act

I am writing to let you know that I strongly disagree with the proposed changes to the ESA. I work in the Environmental Industry as a Wildlife Biologist and I speak from experience when I say that the protections that are currently in place are critical to preserving the diversity and abundance of our most valuable plants and animals. In most development projects I work on, the developers are still able to accomplish their projects while adhering to the prohibitions of the ESA. If you are causing harm to Endangered or Threatened species or their habitat it is completely reasonable to complete an Overall Benefit Permit for the species. "Paying to Slay" is not the answer.

More specifically, I do not support changes which would introduce broad ministerial discretion to interfere with the science-based listing process, to suspend and limit protections, and to ignore legislated timelines for policies and reporting. Nor do I support the “pay-to-slay” scheme that would grease the wheels of destruction by allowing developers and other proponents of harmful activities to pay into a fund in lieu of fulfilling requirements for on-the-ground reparation for the damage they do to species and their habitats.

In addition, I believe that these changes would be very poor from an economic standpoint. Canadians value being in nature and having green spaces. Areas where Endangered or Threatened species reside are often strongholds for these valued habitats. They provide recreational and touristic value to residents and visitors of Ontario. Canadians do not want sprawling development, they want smart creative solutions to the environmental crisis that this planet is facing.

In the face of a changing environment, it becomes even more important to protect Species at Risk and their habitat. Many of these species are found in important habitats, such as wetlands, lakes, grasslands and forests. Wetlands are essential for Ontario as they act as the kidneys of our province. They filter our water and act as a sponge to protect us from dangerous flooding and weather events. They protect us from economic loss. Forests sequester carbon and keep our air clean. Grassland habitat provides a home to shockingly high diversity of rare plants and animals.

We will never be able to get back what we will lose if these changes to the ESA are permitted. It is extremely short sighted to make such selfish changes for short term economical gain when the long term impacts are devastatingly high. Please do better for the future of our children and our planet.

We should be the leaders in our country for our ability to find sustainable solutions for responsible development, instead I am ashamed to call myself an Ontarian.

I don't believe this is the answer, and I beg you to reconsider.

Sincerely,

An extremely concerned citizen