Comments

View the comments this notice received through the registry. You can either download them all or search and sort below.

Some comments will not be posted online. Learn more about the comment status and our comment and privacy policies.

Download comments

Search comments

Comment ID

170511

Commenting on behalf of

Legal Advocates for Nature's Defence

Comment status

Comment approved More about comment statuses
Legal Advocates for Nature’s Defence and the Friends of the Attawapiskat River jointly provide these comments (see attached) to the Ministry of the Environment, Conservation and Parks in response to the following proposals, posted to the Environmental Registry of Ontario on September 26, 2025: Read more

Comment ID

170519

Commenting on behalf of

Individual

Comment status

Comment approved More about comment statuses
I support the proposed changes and hope that the promised streamlining and clarity will be a reality. Presently, the process is inconsistent, unclear, and in the end I do not think it actually helps species or their habitat. Read more

Comment ID

170523

Commenting on behalf of

Individual

Comment status

Comment approved More about comment statuses
Our cowardly government officials only care about money and it's disgusting. They are trying to take over a world that is not theirs. The government is supposed to work for our benefit, not their own bank accounts. Read more

Comment ID

170524

Commenting on behalf of

Individual

Comment status

Comment approved More about comment statuses
These amendments threaten the foundation of Canada’s conservation framework by prioritizing politics over protection. Species designation should remain in the hands of independent scientific bodies, not government actors with economic incentives. Read more

Comment ID

170525

Commenting on behalf of

Individual

Comment status

Comment approved More about comment statuses
The proposal to centralize endangered species decisions within the government is a blatant conflict of interest. We cannot trust the same entity that approves extractive projects, highways, and deforestation to also determine which species deserve protection. Read more

Comment ID

170526

Commenting on behalf of

Individual

Comment status

Comment approved More about comment statuses
I do not support this proposal. Rather than significantly weakening protections for species at risk, this government should be safeguarding biodiversity, respecting Indigenous rights and ensuring local communities benefit from the ecosystem services that nature freely provides. Read more

Comment ID

170527

Commenting on behalf of

Individual

Comment status

Comment approved More about comment statuses
These amendments represent a quiet coup against environmental accountability. If passed, they will weaken oversight, dilute transparency, and gut the legal protections that ecosystems depend on. The removal of 106 species is not administrative efficiency—it’s an extinction event by legislation. Read more

Comment ID

170528

Commenting on behalf of

Individual

Comment status

Comment approved More about comment statuses
Every species proposed for removal from the endangered list deserves individualized review, not a mass erasure. This regulatory amendment treats biodiversity like a bureaucratic inconvenience. Once a species disappears, it cannot be restored. Read more

Comment ID

170529

Commenting on behalf of

Individual

Comment status

Comment approved More about comment statuses
The long-term cost of removing species protections cannot be measured in dollars—it will be paid in ecological collapse. Pollinators, keystone species, culturally significant animals—once gone, their absence will ripple through food webs, water cycles, and communities. Read more

Comment ID

170530

Commenting on behalf of

Individual

Comment status

Comment approved More about comment statuses
This proposal directly undermines Canada’s commitment to biodiversity protection. Delegating control of endangered species classifications to the government removes the objectivity and scientific rigor that this process demands. Read more

Comment ID

170531

Commenting on behalf of

Individual

Comment status

Comment approved More about comment statuses
Removing 106 species from the endangered list is not a neutral act—it’s an environmental massacre dressed in legal language. Every species lost under this amendment is a rupture in the balance of life. Biodiversity is not a luxury, it’s a life-support system. Read more

Comment ID

170532

Commenting on behalf of

Individual

Comment status

Comment approved More about comment statuses
Public trust in environmental legislation depends on transparency, scientific independence, and the recognition that ecological collapse is a present danger—not a distant hypothetical. These amendments threaten all three. Read more

Comment ID

170533

Commenting on behalf of

Individual

Comment status

Comment approved More about comment statuses
Canada is already failing to meet biodiversity targets. Instead of doubling down on protection, this proposal invites disaster. Rolling back species protections en masse is a fast track to collapse. We are witnessing a mass extinction event in real time—this amendment would pour fuel on that fire. Read more

Comment ID

170534

Commenting on behalf of

Individual

Comment status

Comment approved More about comment statuses
Species don’t have lobbyists. That’s why the law must speak for them. This amendment silences that voice by removing independent science from the process and allowing government interests to decide who lives and who disappears. Read more