I would like to comment on…

I would like to comment on ERO 25-1077, the Species Conservation Act.
The language of the act is too vague. Terms such as "economically significant" and "strategically important" need definitions. The phrase "no larger than necessary" must be defined. The contribution of the proposed project to the wider community must be identified with specific critieria.

It is also mandatory that Ontario uphold UNDRIP, the United Nations Declaration of the Rights of Indigenous People. This mandates that Indigenous people gibe their free, prior and informed consent. A 'consultation is nor enough.

Too much is left to the "opinion of the Minister" who has no training or education to make such an opinion. Scientific specialists must be consulted regarding destruction of species and/or habitats.

In the proposed legislation, "habitat" refers only to a den or nest. This needs to be expanded. For example, a bird's habitat includes hunting and foraging area for food for nestlings, for instance, that encompass a much wider area.

Definitions of endangered species must conform to federal legislation, the Accord for the Protection of Species at Risk.

Finally, there must be clear requirements for remediation on the part of the company, with strict time guidelines for completion.