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

50408

Commenting on behalf of

Individual

Comment status

Comment approved More about comment statuses
This ‘pay to slay’ legislation wrongly incentivizes habitat destruction. Proponents of harmful activities will now have clearance as soon as they pay into the fund. This is absolutely the wrong direction for the province and will create further loss of species at risk. Read more

Comment ID

50414

Commenting on behalf of

Individual

Comment status

Comment approved More about comment statuses
This is incredibly wrong, and is going to have detrimental impacts on species at risk. This gives an incentive for habitat destruction, thus resulting in a loss of habitat for species. Read more

Comment ID

50416

Commenting on behalf of

Individual

Comment status

Comment approved More about comment statuses
This is one of the worst proposals. Species at risk need to be protected, this is why they are considered at risk. Allowing anyone to pay into a fund does nothing to protect the species. At this rate we will lose everything. Read more

Comment ID

50417

Commenting on behalf of

Individual

Comment status

Comment approved More about comment statuses
As a certified arborist and BHA, I do not agree with canning the BHA certification course. It is a valuable resource and one would not be qualified to assess butternut canker without it. Read more

Comment ID

50418

Commenting on behalf of

Individual

Comment status

Comment approved More about comment statuses
The fund and agency proposed in the regulation are reasonable on their own, but what seems questionable is offering the choice between beneficial actions to protect species, and paying into the fund, because these are not equivalent actions when it comes to species protection. Read more

Comment ID

50420

Commenting on behalf of

Individual

Comment status

Comment approved More about comment statuses
I am a citizen of Toronto, Ontario, and I am very concerned about the proposed species at risk conservation fund. Offsetting damages by paying into a fund does not protect biodiversity, nor does it reverse the harms done to the critical members of our ecosystems. Read more

Comment ID

50421

Commenting on behalf of

Quinte Field Naturalist Association

Comment status

Comment approved More about comment statuses
We, are group consisting of 99 members, are strongly opposed to the Government’s proposal of new regulations to enable use of the Species at Risk Conservation Fund and to establish a provincial agency to administer the Fund. Read more

Comment ID

50422

Commenting on behalf of

Individual

Comment status

Comment approved More about comment statuses
The stated objectives of this proposal are • “to enable use of the Species at Risk Conservation Fund (the Fund) and to establish a provincial agency to administer the Fund” and Read more

Comment ID

50424

Commenting on behalf of

Individual

Comment status

Comment approved More about comment statuses
These changes will make it easier for developers to destroy species at risk, as it rolls back the authority of the SARA act. Read more

Comment ID

50425

Commenting on behalf of

Individual

Comment status

Comment approved More about comment statuses
How is allow people to pay to destroy habits going to help habitats? This allows for zero consequences to corporations and individuals who destroy a habit. As long as those who offend pay into the fund they get to walk away scot free. Read more

Comment ID

50426

Commenting on behalf of

Individual

Comment status

Comment approved More about comment statuses
Disagree with the concept. Just found out about this today. With changes to conservation authorities terms of reference this is another attack against nature. Sounds like we may have a one term ruling party here.

Comment ID

50431

Commenting on behalf of

Individual

Comment status

Comment approved More about comment statuses
I am extremely concerned about this government continually attack to weaken protections through changes to Ontario's Environmental Legislation. Read more

Comment ID

50436

Commenting on behalf of

Individual

Comment status

Comment approved More about comment statuses
This government is so short sighted it is ridiculous. Attacking the measures that would help the environment, attacking wildlife, attacking the habitats of wildlife, and for what? The almighty dollar. It makes me sick that these people are ruining the Ontario I know. Read more

Comment ID

50437

Commenting on behalf of

Wilderness Committee--Ontario

Comment status

Comment approved More about comment statuses
December 19 ,2020 Environmental Registry of Ontario ESAReg@ontario.ca RE: Comments on ERO 019-2636 Read more

Comment ID

50438

Commenting on behalf of

Individual

Comment status

Comment approved More about comment statuses
This is disgusting. We need to be protecting our planet and province and instead Ford is trying to destroy it. We cannot let this happen

Comment ID

50440

Commenting on behalf of

Individual

Comment status

Comment approved More about comment statuses
ERO 019-2636 Let’s call this what it truly IS: The slush-fund for ill-gotten gains of a grotesquely inhumane pay-to-slay scheme —enabling developers to fast-track projects that should never be allowed. Read more