As Conservation Director I…

As Conservation Director I would like to share concerns on behalf of members of Waterloo Region Nature regarding the ESA Review (ERO #013-4143). This is the Endangered Species Act, not the Endangered Business Act. The priority must be on protecting and recovering species at risk.
• The law should not be changed to allow landscape approaches “instead of” species-specific approaches. The fine scale of species-specific status assessments, listings and protections is needed.
• There should be no alternative to automatic species and habitat protections (e.g., through ministerial discretion to remove or delay protections).
• The ESA already allows the Minister to delay the development of a habitat regulation (sec. 56 (1)b) or to not proceed with a habitat regulation (sec. 56 (1)c). No change to the law is needed.
• There are already sufficient authorization tools. No new tools are needed. Challenges should be addressed through improved implementation.
• Proponents of harmful activities should NOT be allowed to simply pay into a conservation fund - an easy way out that reduces accountability and facilitates harm to species at risk and their habitats. Retain the current requirements to provide an on-the-ground, overall benefit to species harmed.
• Do not simplify requirements for sec. 17(2)d permits. These are intended to be available only for projects that “result in a significant social or economic benefit to Ontario” and that will not “jeopardize the survival or recovery of the species in Ontario.” These are appropriate requirements and ensure that such permits are issued only an exceptional basis.
• Do not simplify requirements for exemptions through regulation. On the contrary, make the requirements more stringent by amending the law (sec. 57) to ensure that exemptions are premised on providing an overall benefit to species at risk and cannot jeopardize their survival or recovery.
• Strengthen protections for species at risk by repealing the sweeping exemptions for industry and development (forestry, hydro, mining, aggregate extraction, and more) approved by Cabinet in 2013. The 2013 exemptions have become the primary means for allowing harmful activities to proceed. As of October 11, 2017, there had been 2,065 registrations for exemptions and about 85 percent of these were for activities that violate ESA protections for species at risk and their habitats.
• Enforcement officers have no authority to routinely inspect exempted activities to ensure compliance with legal requirements, and consequently no inspection takes place. Implement the recommendation of the Environmental Commissioner of Ontario to amend the ESA to give enforcement officers the power to conduct compliance inspections.
• Enhance transparency and accountability by amending the exemption regulation (242/08) to require all proponents of harmful activities to automatically submit their mitigation plans and annual reports to the government and to ensure that these are publicly available.
• The ESA (sec. 18) already provides a means to harmonize its requirements with other legislative or regulatory frameworks. No legislative change is needed. This is an implementation issue.
Please consider our comments carefully. The survival of Ontario’s endangered species depend on it!