Giles: Ontario must not dismantle protection for endangered wildlife
On the Thursday before the Easter long weekend, the Ford government introduced a bill that, if passed, would have devastating consequences for species at risk, all in the name of fast-tracking economic development.
Article content
Article content
Bill 5, the 'Protect Ontario by Unleashing our Economy' act, would strip away essential protections for wildlife — including scrapping the province's landmark Endangered Species Act — at a time when many conservationists, myself included, are increasingly concerned about the state of our natural world.
Article content
Article content
In October, the World Wildlife Fund released new global data that showed catastrophic population declines in wildlife — an average decrease of 73 per cent — since 1970. In Canada, populations of at-risk species of global concern have declined by an average 42 per cent over the same time.
Article content
A glaring rejection of science
Article content
The Ford government isn't just making a policy change. It is sending wildlife that is already on the brink over the edge and is a glaring rejection of the science that tells us what's needed to stop the slide toward extinction.
Article content
We've done the research and know what it will take to recover Ontario's rich biodiversity. And importantly, we have a good idea how much it will cost.
Article content
A recent study led by WWF-Canada and the University of British Columbia, conducted before Bill 5 was introduced and currently under peer review, looked at the state of biodiversity in the Lake Simcoe-Rideau ecoregion of Southern Ontario, a hotspot for species at risk.
Article content
Article content
The region, home to big cities such as Ottawa and Kingston, has been heavily impacted by dense development, habitat degradation and nature loss. Species like the piping plover, gray fox and Blanding's turtle face multiple threats and are all at risk of extinction. They are also currently protected under the Endangered Species Act.
Article content
Article content
Article content
In fact, Ontario has more than 270 species at risk of extinction. Our research focused on 133 of them, whose declining populations or conservation status make them priorities for local and national environmentalists. Using a tool called priority threat management, we predicted the likely outcomes for these species under different conservation strategies, policies and funding scenarios through to 2050.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
CTV News
10 minutes ago
- CTV News
CTV National News: Byelection declared in Alberta riding Pierre Poilievre plans to run in
Watch PM Mark Carney has declared a byelection in August for a rural Alberta riding vacated to allow Pierre Poilievre to run for a seat. Colton Praill has the details.
Globe and Mail
26 minutes ago
- Globe and Mail
Would you die for Canada? Polling suggests Canadians are more willing to fight for their country
Thomas Homer-Dixon is the executive director of the Cascade Institute at Royal Roads University. Toby Shannan is a technology entrepreneur. Is Canada a real country? One might have doubts if the key metric of nationhood is a well-formed national identity. More than 60 years ago, media guru Marshall McLuhan declared that 'Canada is the only country in the world that knows how to live without an identity.' And in 2015, prime minister Justin Trudeau famously agreed. Our country was the 'first postnational state,' he told The New York Times Magazine, because 'there is no core identity, no mainstream in Canada.' But maybe that's not the right metric. Instead, maybe what matters is not what Canadians think Canada is, but whether they're prepared to defend whatever they believe the country to be. If so, we can now put the doubts to rest. According to recent polling, a large proportion of Canadians say they're willing to fight to protect our country. A guide to The Globe's Canada Day coverage The Cascade Institute commissioned Environics, a firm with deep experienced surveying people's values, to conduct an online poll of more than 2,000 Canadians to gauge their willingness to defend Canada against military attack. The poll was fielded in April and respondents were sampled and weighted to represent Canada's regional, linguistic, demographic and socio-economic diversity. We asked, first, 'What actions would you take, if any, to fight to defend Canada against a military attack and invasion or occupation by a hostile foreign power?' More than 72 per cent of respondents said they'd take at least some action given a list of alternatives, with about 26 per cent willing to volunteer for civil defence and 13 per cent willing to volunteer for military service. Opinion: A new nationalism is emerging in Canada If Canada were defeated and occupied by another country, more than half of those polled said they'd undertake some kind of resistance, including nearly 39 per cent who'd participate in non-violent protests, economic disruption and civil disobedience. And almost 15 per cent would 'engage in violent resistance.' In a total population of 41.5 million, that latter percentage represents nearly five million adults. If we assume only half of these adults would follow through and, of that portion, only half would be sufficiently able-bodied, we're still left with an insurgency of 1.2 million people. To put this figure in perspective, at its peak, Afghanistan's Taliban insurgency consisted of only 100,000 fighters. A particularly striking poll result was that 16 per cent of Canadians were 'absolutely' prepared to die defending Canada, and an additional 22 per cent were prepared to die 'depending on the circumstances.' This total of 38 per cent represents more than 12 million people. Members of any Canadian insurgency fighting a military occupation would therefore have a vast supporting population into which they could vanish to sustain their fight. Importantly, we were careful not to identify a potential aggressor until the poll's conclusion, when we asked about the perceived likelihood of military attack on Canada – in the next five years – by Russia, China and the United States. By substantial margins, respondents perceived the U.S. as the most likely aggressor. Forty-three per cent said such an attack was at least somewhat likely, with 10 per cent judging it to be highly likely or certain. What made this result astonishing was that nearly 60 per cent of respondents also reported having friends or relatives in the United States. Indeed, rather than producing a moderating effect, having these links was associated in our poll with a greater willingness to defend Canada. Opinion: Canadians want to be able to defend Canada. Our government should provide a way In the weeks before we conducted the poll, U.S. President Donald Trump had repeatedly said he wanted to make Canada the '51st state.' As Mr. Trump has talked less about annexation since then, Canadians' fears have likely subsided, so a lower percentage would answer the same way today. Still, we can reasonably surmise that just a year ago only a per cent or two of Canadians would have said a U.S. military attack was somewhat likely within five years. Mr. Trump has clearly caused an enormous swing in Canadian views on this matter in a very short period. But there's a silver lining because, as Prime Minister Mark Carney has recently acknowledged, the President is correct in saying that Canada has been free-riding on U.S. security guarantees. Our newfound patriotism can be a corrective. If we now recognize we're a real country worth defending, the implication is that we want to be good allies again – and dangerous enemies to bad actors.
CBC
30 minutes ago
- CBC
Edmonton city councillor's infill moratorium attempt fails for legal reasons
Edmonton city council won't be putting a moratorium on infill, after the city's legal team advised that doing so would contravene provincial legislation. Ward pihêsiwin Coun. Tim Cartmell, who's also a mayoral candidate in the upcoming election, put forward a motion Monday evening to pause development approvals for mid-block properties, in the small scale residential zone, until the city re-examines plans for groups of neighbourhoods. "There's a reasonable opportunity to pause this work while we get better clarity on some of the adjustments that we might make," Cartmell said during the meeting. Councillors learned — first in a memo and again during the meeting — that such a move would go against the Municipal Government Act, since city councils can't override bylaws with motions and moratoriums. Mayor Amarjeet Sohi ruled the second part of Cartmell's motion, which included the moratorium, was out of order and a majority of council members supported his ruling. Cartmell said he still wanted to see more engagement and analysis on the city's district plans, but withdrew the motion after hearing similar work was underway and could not be sped up. In a news release Monday evening, he said the city's legal department shut him down, but he remains "committed to fighting for a planning system that puts Edmontonians first." Though the moratorium won't be proceeding, multiple speakers at Monday's public hearing spoke in favour of the idea, urging city council to rethink city-wide zoning changes that came into effect last year. Council spent most of the day listening to commentary on proposed changes to the small-medium scale transition zone, but many speakers didn't reference those changes. Instead, they talked about changes proposed for the small-scale residential zone and their thoughts on the zoning bylaw in general. "When we talk about zoning, it can be a fairly complex conversation, so people are speaking broadly to the concerns or opportunities that they see in front of us," Ward Métis Coun. Ashley Salvador told reporters Monday afternoon. Speakers raised concerns during the meeting about the pace of development, parking, tree loss and architecture. Some said a proposed change to limit the number of allowable units in a midblock rowhouse, from eight to six, doesn't go far enough. "Mature neighbourhoods and their tree-lined streets and historic charm, nurtured over decades, are at risk," said Crestwood resident Beth Allard Clough, who urged council to pause the zoning bylaw renewal. Some speakers, however, urged councillors not to do too much revising. Jeff Booth, a planner with Situate Inc., who spoke on behalf of the Infill Development in Edmonton Association, said the industry could live with some of the proposed changes — but not if all of them were approved. "We're kind of getting into death-by-a-thousand-cuts territory," Booth said. The bylaw's proponents have said it's helping increase density in older neighbourhoods, leading to more housing supply in areas that already have roads, libraries and other amenities. After hours of commentary, council voted to prohibit some upzoning applications outside major roads and central areas. Ward papastew Coun. Michael Janz said that will give residents clarity on where bigger developments will take place. Councillors voted to extend the meeting later this week and punt some agenda items to public hearings in August. According to the Office of the City Clerk, nearly 200 people registered to speak at Monday's public hearing. Many of those speakers will have to attend a future meeting to comment on proposed changes to the small-scale residential zone and other items on the agenda. Steven Lakey, who lives in the west end and attended the public hearing in person, said he felt frustrated with council over the timing of the hearing. There is limited time left for meetings because council breaks for the summer at the end of next week, and there's a fall election looming.
