![\"minus](\"https:\/\/thenarwhal.ca\/wp-content\/themes\/thenarwhal\/assets\/icons\/remove-circle.svg\"\/)
![\"plus](\"https:\/\/thenarwhal.ca\/wp-content\/themes\/thenarwhal\/assets\/icons\/add-circle.svg\"\/)
<\/p>\n <\/p>\n
Summary<\/p>\n
In March 2026, the Doug Ford government formally replaced Ontario\u2019s Endangered Species Act with weaker legislation that removes protections for some species and narrows protections for others.<\/p>\n
Documents obtained by The Narwhal reveal the dissent and concern raised by provincial staff, municipalities and Indigenous groups during consultations on the change.<\/p>\n
A major concern raised about the legislation is that many project proposals will no longer be posted for public comment, limiting public participation.<\/p>\n
As the Doug Ford government prepared to replace the Endangered Species Act with new legislation, the province\u2019s natural resources staff warned of weakened habitat protections, reduced oversight and new gaps in enforcement, according to documents obtained by The Narwhal.\u00a0\u00a0<\/p>\n
In March 2026, the Endangered Species Act was officially replaced with the Species Conservation Act, which removes or limits provincial protection from many threatened plants and animals.<\/p>\n
Now, 275 pages of records, some publicly available and others only accessed through freedom of information legislation, show provincial bureaucrats worrying about the implications of the changes, as well as municipalities and Indigenous groups voicing dissent \u2014 before the government passed the law anyway.<\/p>\n
The new act allows most projects, whether related to housing, mining or other industries, to begin as soon as proponents register online, in place of an expert review of permit applications. This approach \u201cmay weaken oversight and accountability, as self-regulation can be variable and potentially unreliable,\u201d reads November 2025 feedback from the fish and wildlife policy branch of Ontario\u2019s Ministry of Natural Resources to the provincial Ministry of the Environment, which is primarily responsible for species at risk. \u201cProponents may also misinterpret or manipulate rules and regulations.\u201d<\/p>\n
\u201cI truly believe you have very dedicated individuals with expertise in this field \u2026 but their expertise and their knowledge is not being respected.\u201d\u00a0<\/p>\n
Kerrie Blaise, lawyer with Legal Advocates for Nature\u2019s Defence<\/p>\n
The natural resources ministry also raised concerns that the Species Conservation Act<\/a> exempted a number of development actions from the second section of the Environmental Bill of Rights, which requires applications to do work that could potentially harm wildlife to be publicly posted on the provincial environmental registry. Without this, the chance for public review and comment is eliminated.<\/p>\n \u201cThe [Environmental Bill of Rights] was created to ensure that the people of Ontario have the ability to participate in decision-making processes,\u201d reads the same feedback sent via email from the Ministry of Natural Resources. \u201cSuggest being cautious if exempting [Species Conservation Act] permits and orders \u2026 as this may be seen as a way to avoid transparency, accountability and undermine public trust.\u201d<\/p>\n Neither the Ministry of Natural Resources nor the Ministry of the Environment responded to The Narwhal\u2019s detailed questions about this feedback by publication time.<\/p>\n In April, in response to questions from The Narwhal at a press conference, Premier Doug Ford said such changes are needed to clear the way for industry and development in the province.\u00a0<\/p>\n \u201cAs I\u2019ve said, we aren\u2019t going to hold up Highway 413, the Bradford Bypass, over a grasshopper \u2014 not happening,\u201d Ford said of two highway projects<\/a> set to cut through the protected Greenbelt and farmland. \u201cWe have a mandate to build. We\u2019re going to build, and we\u2019re going to respect the environment at all costs.\u201d<\/p>\n Thousands of public comments about endangered species protections were also ignored: lawyer<\/p>\n Kerrie Blaise, a lawyer with the northern Ontario environmental non-profit Legal Advocates for Nature\u2019s Defence, said these issues remained as the final legislation was passed, despite concerns being raised ahead of time.<\/p>\n That includes dropping the requirement for some permits for projects that could harm species being publicly posted.<\/p>\n \u201cIt\u2019s a very sweeping exemption,\u201d Blaise said. \u201cIt means we won\u2019t know the name of the companies. We won\u2019t know where it\u2019s happening \u2026 the basic details: when, where, how much, what\u2019s the harm? All of those details will be lacking.\u201d<\/p>\n Blaise also registered her dissent before the new act passed. She told The Narwhal that Legal Advocates for Nature\u2019s Defence sent more than 6,500 signed form letters asking the province to reconsider \u2014 even repeal \u2014 Bill 5<\/a>, which proposed killing the old act and passing the new one. The organization is now representing two Indigenous interveners challenging the constitutionality<\/a> of the bill in court.\u00a0<\/p>\n Blaise said it was \u201creally great to hear\u201d that natural resources staff spoke up. \u201cI truly believe you have very dedicated individuals with expertise in this field \u2026 but their expertise and their knowledge is not being respected,\u201d she said.\u00a0<\/p>\n \u201cThere are those with knowledge who can actually guide the government in a good way, and it\u2019s really chilling when those individuals and departments within [the government] are themselves not being listened to.\u201d<\/p>\n Blaise added she sees nothing in the final legislation showing that the province addressed the concerns raised by staff or those contained in thousands of public comments.<\/p>\n \u201cIf the province was actually looking to respect \u2026 what the public was actually saying, we would have a very differently worded Species Conservation Act,\u201d Blaise said.<\/p>\n In the documents, Ministry of Natural Resources staff also warned that excluding federally protected species from provincial protections \u201ccould create regulatory gaps and inconsistencies.\u201d This, too, echoes concerns from environmental groups.\u00a0<\/p>\n The province has argued a number of species \u2014\u00a0 including the redside dace, a minnow that became central to concerns over Ontario\u2019s Highway 413<\/a> development \u2014 are already protected under federal laws.\u00a0<\/p>\n Dive deeper on this topic<\/p>\n Read more: Ontario ministry experts raised concerns about at-risk species law changes, emails show<\/a><\/p>\n The federal government can extend emergency protections to provincial lands, but rarely does so. And in many cases, federal protection only extends to individual species under the federal Species At Risk Act and their dwelling places on federal lands, such as national parks or First Nations reserves. These spaces make up less than five per cent of the range of most terrestrial at-risk species, whose wider habitat in Ontario is now vulnerable.\u00a0<\/p>\n The documents show this concern was voiced by Steve Ganesh, commissioner of planning, building and growth management for the City of Brampton. He wrote to the province that, \u201cBy limiting \u2018habitat\u2019 to a species\u2019 dwelling place and its immediate surrounding area, important areas may no longer be protected that are crucial for foraging, dispersal, migration and climate resilience.\u201d<\/p>\n \u201cThis change could leave locally significant and rare populations unprotected and reduce the scientific basis for municipal planning, restoration and mitigation efforts.\u201d<\/p>\n \u201cOur review of these proposed regulations reveals no credible or equivalent process that could substitute for meaningful engagement on measures that directly affect our Treaty Rights.\u201d<\/p>\n Aaron Detlor, delegate from the Haudenosaunee Development Institute<\/p>\n One species of particular concern is caribou, according to Allie Mayberry, a wildlife co-ordinator working with the sustainable development department of Biigtigong Nishnaabeg, a First Nation on the north shore of Lake Superior. Whittling protected species habitat down so severely provides little protection for an already threatened species that relies on large swaths of interconnected habitat to survive, she told The Narwhal.<\/p>\n \u201cThere\u2019s a lack of clarity around how caribou habitat is going to be protected moving forward,\u201d Mayberry said. \u201cWe\u2019re already working with a baseline of a very disturbed habitat, and now through the new [Species Conservation Act] there\u2019s much less of an imperative to protect what habitat there is left.\u201d<\/p>\n Docs show Treaty Rights and loss of protection for threatened species were a concern<\/p>\n Other municipalities and First Nations had concerns about the legislation change, the documents show.\u00a0<\/p>\n A letter from the City of London, sent before the new act\u2019s passage, argued the now-official Protected Species in Ontario List would remove protections for 106 species. \u201cThese changes undermine the municipality\u2019s capacity to protect species that are rare, threatened or endangered within the city,\u201d the letter reads, naming 20 species in London\u2019s boundaries that have been removed from protection, along with their habitats. They include the chimney swift, eastern musk turtle and wood thrush.\u00a0<\/p>\n Dive deeper on this topic<\/p>\n The documents show Indigenous groups also argued the new legislation disrespects not just the environment, but their Treaty Rights.<\/p>\n![\"A](\"https:\/\/www.newsbeep.com\/ca\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/05\/CK1_1792-scaled.jpg\"\/)
Woodland caribou are endangered in Ontario and changes brought in under Bill 5 replaced the Endangered Species Act, limiting how their habitat is protected. Photo: Christopher Katsarov Luna \/ The Narwhal<\/p>\n
![\"Lake](\"https:\/\/www.newsbeep.com\/ca\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/05\/ChrisLuna-LakeSuperior15.jpg\"\/)
In public comments, Biigtigong Nishnaabeg Chief Duncan Michano called Ontario\u2019s Bill 5 a \u201cdirect violation of the Government of Ontario\u2019s obligations to uphold the honour of the Crown.\u201d Photo: Christopher Katsarov Luna \/ The Narwhal<\/p>\n