The proposed changes…

The proposed changes outlined in Bill 23 to OWES would be a complete overhaul of the system and would be jeopardizing a considerable portion of wetlands that have been classified as significant. Many of these wetlands have developed over decades if not centuries (if not millennia) to become what they are today. Removing protections and making it easier to develop over wetlands will not solve the housing crisis. Wetlands are vital, crucially important ecosystems that are not only the most diverse types of ecosystems we have, but are so invaluable for flood attenuation, groundwater recharge, buffering from storms, and generally helping to protect our infrastructure in the long run.

Making these changes means opening up enormous areas for development. While there seems to be an idea that we can just pave over wetlands and easily offset by "building" another wetland somewhere else, and that is somehow equivalent or even close to net-zero is completely misguided and entirely incorrect. How can something we build over a couple years compare to ecosystems that have developed over 10s/100s/1000s of years themselves? Research has shown time again that offsetting in this capacity never really works.

As someone who just completed the OWES course earlier this year, I learned about how we come to classify wetlands as provincially significant. It takes a lot of work, research, and time to evaluate a wetland, and it takes a considerable amount of work for a wetland to be considered significant. The justifications behind what makes a wetland significant, whether biological, hydrological, social or special features, are all based on science, and are not just considered without purpose. Already, we have seen a drastic decrease in wetland cover compared to what was present historically. With climate change, we know that the worst is yet to come, which means we should be preparing however we can for increased flooding and storm events. Going through with these proposed changes means that we are putting ourselves and our homes at risk, valuing short-term benefit (by mainly developers) versus looking at the long-term health of families, this land, and our infrastructure and homes.

Please, please understand that everything we do is connected. Taking away the ability for wetlands to be considered significant in a complex is so detrimental - we know and understand that diversity even within systems is so important, and protecting swaths of that variety is just as important as protecting one larger system. Removing the ability to evaluate wetland complexes as significant is a highly damaging move to these habitats, to at-risk species, to connectivity and watershed health overall. Something like 80% of wetlands in Niagara would lose their protections as they have been evaluated as wetland complexes and been classified as significant as a result.

Removing consideration for species-at-risk is also highly problematic- they are disappearing for a reason, largely due to habitat loss, and these moves are just pushing them closer to extinction as we destroy more and more of their habitat. What kind of world do we want to leave behind for our children? I want to know more than anything that if I choose to have kids, I can show them the beauty of this province and the biodiversity that I feel so lucky to have in Ontario. The thought that my children or grandchildren won't be able to see some of this same biodiversity and experience these precious wetlands is devastating. If the provincial government goes through with these proposed changes, that means destroying invaluable ecosystems that can never be brought back or recreated. Wetlands are highly complex systems that benefit us more than we may ever know - please don't make it easier for us to lose them. Please do not move forward with these proposed changes.