Commentaire
It is important that legislation is updated in order to continuously improve it, but the proposed changes to Ontario’s Endangered Species Act are concerning for several reasons. Provinces hold a considerable amount of jurisdiction over species protection and as such should have legislation that genuinely protects those that are endangered.
The proposed registration-first approach means that damaging projects begin before they have received proper assessment. It also means that projects may have to be scrapped mid-construction, thus wasting resources and doing little to accelerate development.
Recovery strategies and management plans no longer being mandatory absolves developers of responsibility for their encroachment on resources and benefits of biodiversity that belong equally to all Ontarians. We cannot count on developers to voluntarily pay for recovery.
Giving the government discretion to remove species from the protected list reduces the strength of COSSARO and means that decisions are not guaranteed to be based on scientific facts.
The updated definition of "habitat" is ignorant of what the vast majority of ecologists, biologists, and other experts know to be true: defending the direct vicinity around a den or root system is not enough to ensure survival. The surrounding system as a whole is in constant motion to enable life. Poorly placed development projects have an impact on "habitats" which may be beyond clearly visible distance from the project. This is crucial because loss of habitat is the major driver of biodiversity loss in Canada.
Removal of the term "harassment" means that species may not be protected even within their own habitat, further endangering their survival.
Soumis le 15 mai 2025 8:22 PM
Commentaire sur
Modifications provisoires proposées à la Loi de 2007 sur les espèces en voie de disparition et proposition de Loi de 2025 sur la conservation des espèces
Numéro du REO
025-0380
Identifiant (ID) du commentaire
144374
Commentaire fait au nom
Statut du commentaire