I appreciate the need to…

I appreciate the need to review documents such as this, but as someone in the environmental field I am wary of any changes that will make it easier for development to occur in natural areas that are key to maintaining all biodiversity, especially species at risk. It is already common for developers to "take the easy way out" such as providing "compensation" for areas they are developing, with minimal rules and regulations regarding effective this replacement habitat is, the maintenance of buildings such as nesting structures, or the overall quality of these compensations. If compensation does not occur, developers are used to receiving allowances such as reduced buffer zones around Provincially Significant Wetlands or Woodlands. If this is the standard and everyone is cutting corners, can we really say we are doing our best to protect the habitats these species rely on? As a proud Canadian and Ontarian, I am more concerned than ever about the protection of these species in the wake of Climate Change. I know I stand with 1000's of others that feel the same. Yes, these regulations should be reviewed and be based in science, but SAR are not just "red tape" for developers, they are what make our country great.