%0 Journal Article
%T Dispatches
%J Frontiers in Ecology and the Environment - Wiley Online Library
%D 2019
%R https://doi.org/10.1002/fee.2051
%X Lesley Evans Ogden On April 18, the Conservative©\led majority government of Ontario, Canada's most populous province, proposed major revisions to its ¡°species at risk¡± legislation. Changes include eliminating automatic protections for species listed as endangered or threatened; phasing out protection of Ontario©\threatened species doing better elsewhere; opening the scientific committee to non©\scientists; giving the Minister of Environment, Conservation and Parks greater discretionary powers in listing; and establishing a pay©\to©\proceed system for development on endangered species¡¯ habitat. Home to over 30,000 species, Ontario has 243 species listed provincially at©\risk, including the American chestnut, barn owl, and American badger (endangered) and little brown bat (threatened). Conservation scientists and NGOs fear the proposed changes will weaken current protections. When reached over email for comment, Ontario's Ministry of Environment, Conservation and Parks (MECP), staffed by more than 20 species©\at©\risk experts, wrote: ¡°At this time we have no one available for an interview¡±. When asked to clarify if experts either were unavailable or were not allowed to speak to the media, MECP spokesperson Lindsay Davidson (Toronto) replied that, ¡°Our practice is to respond to questions in writing¡±. As to the apparent discrepancy between paying a fee that permits destruction of endangered species¡¯ habitat and protecting imperiled biota under the Ministry's mandate, Davidson explained that the pay©\to©\proceed system is more complicated than just paying a fee. ¡°Under the option to pay a charge in lieu, clients (including developers and industry) would still seek a permit and need to fulfill on©\the©\ground requirements, including considering reasonable alternatives¡­and taking steps to minimize the adverse effects on the species at risk¡±. A new board©\governed provincial agency will decide how to disburse the fees. ¡°This option will mean more certainty and streamline processes, while also supporting positive outcomes for species at risk¡±, she added. ¡°The government is trying to spin this as a gain for conservation¡±, says Anne Bell, director of conservation and education at Ontario Nature (Toronto), a conservation NGO. But paying into a trust fund to proceed with harmful activities, she says, ¡°is premised on destruction¡±. Exchanging money to overlook damage to endangered species¡¯ habitat sometimes takes place unofficially. But putting this practice into policy is unprecedented, according to Andrea Olive, conservation policy expert at the University of Toronto
%U https://esajournals.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1002/fee.2051