One must consider the 10th…

One must consider the 10th year review of the ESA with today’s knowledge and research in mind. For instance the World Wildlife Fund’s Living Planet Report documents extensive, and catastrophic declines in the numbers of wildlife world wide. Lest it be thought that Canada is exempt, the WWF Canada has produced a similar report for Canada, with broadly similar conclusions. Everywhere, including Ontario, wildlife is undergoing an apocalypse; obviously species are going to need more help and assistance in the future if biodiversity is to be maintained rather than decimated.

Thus, it is appropriate to substantially strengthen the protection that the ESA gives to the endangered wildlife in Ontario, and the government of Ontario should do so following this review.

However, the ESA 10th year review seems to be designed to make things easier for people in general and businesses in particular. Instead, the focus should be on how to improve the chances of success in rehabilitating endangered species (most of which, I'd wager, got to be endangered by the very actions the government wants to make easier).

I more or less support a landscape approach, especially if it incorporates the half-Earth concept; that is half the Earth fully protected for the preservation of wild things and biodiversity.

In various places in the document there is whining about ‘not enough notice’, ‘uncertainty’, ‘costly’, ‘administrative burdens’ and ‘barriers’. It must be remembered that the goal is to protect and rehabilitate species at risk, and not to make things cushy for business. Business should suck it up and realize that endangered species come first, stop complaining and get with the protection program.