scholarly journals Recent amendments to the Endangered Species Act and an uncertain future for species at risk: a case study of Ontario’s Niagara Region

FACETS ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 6 ◽  
pp. 1168-1183
Author(s):  
Allegra Bethlenfalvy ◽  
Andrea Olive

The biodiversity crisis is a pressing global issue. In Ontario, Canada, species at risk are protected under the Endangered Species Act (2007) . The current government amended that legislation through the More Homes, More Choice Act (2019), leaving species at risk with an uncertain future. This paper uses the Niagara Region as a case study and relies on interviews and data collection about listed species to illuminate the possible implications for the new amendments. The results indicate a total of 71 species at risk that exist in the Region, with as many as 37 species that could be delisted and stripped of protection under the recent changes. There is also concern around the prioritization of the economics over science in the amendments. While uncertainty surrounding the implementation of the amendments to the Ontario Endangered Species Act exists, there is agreement that species at risk should be protected.

2007 ◽  
Vol 40 (2) ◽  
pp. 367-394 ◽  
Author(s):  
Mary Illical ◽  
Kathryn Harrison

Abstract. Although the US and Canada share ecosystems, with many species ranging freely across the border, the two countries have taken very different approaches to protecting endangered species. The US Endangered Species Act, adopted in 1973, relies primarily on regulation, thus imposing the costs of protecting biodiversity on the private sector. In contrast, Canada's Species at Risk Act, adopted in 2002, relies primarily on public expenditures to support stewardship programs. We argue that this difference is best explained by negative lesson drawing from the US experience. In particular, awareness of the costs of species protection in the US led Canadian business to present stronger opposition to regulation than had their American counterparts decades earlier. We use the case of the Canadian Species at Risk Act to theorize about conditions under which negative lesson drawing is likely to be most influential.Résumé. Bien que les États-Unis et le Canada partagent les mêmes écosystèmes, les deux pays ont adopté des approches très différentes en matière de protection des espèces en péril. La Loi américaine sur les espèces en péril (US Endangered Species Act), adoptée en 1973, porte essentiellement sur la régulation, et de ce fait impose les coûts de la protection de la biodiversité au secteur privé. En revanche, la Loi canadienne sur les espèces en péril, adoptée en 2002, fait principalement retomber les coûts des programmes de gestion au secteur public. Nous démontrons que cette différence s'explique principalement par le rôle des leçons négatives apprises de l'expérience des États-Unis. La prise de conscience des coûts liés à la protection des espèces en péril aux États-Unis a notamment amené les milieux d'affaires canadiens à présenter une plus forte opposition à la régulation que leurs homologues américains l'avaient fait des années plus tôt. En s'appuyant sur le cas de la Loi canadienne sur les espèces en péril, nous visons à théoriser les conditions selon lesquelles l'acquisition de connaissance par leçons négatives (“ negative lesson drawing ”) est susceptible d'être le plus concluant.


Oryx ◽  
2014 ◽  
Vol 48 (3) ◽  
pp. 430-435
Author(s):  
Elysabeth Théberge ◽  
Joseph J. Nocera

AbstractRecovery strategies for species at risk have been criticized for a lack of specificity (i.e. measurable and quantifiable criteria) as well as for taxonomic biases, both of which may ultimately affect species’ recovery. However, it is unknown whether the clarity and specificity of written statements within recovery strategies can also influence recovery efforts for certain species at risk. To assess this we examined the variation in semantic uncertainty in the target statements of recovery strategies for Canadian species at risk at the federal and provincial levels. We quantified the lexical density and readability of recovery target statements and examined them for differences according to taxonomic grouping, jurisdiction and degree of endangerment. Recovery statements for the category threatened species had greater semantic uncertainty than those for higher (endangered) and lower (special concern) categories, which is likely to be a function of the fact that threatened species are less abundant than special concern species but are subject to greater errors in population estimates than endangered species. We also found that recovery statements for non-charismatic species (e.g. plants and invertebrates) had greater semantic uncertainty than those for other taxa, which may be related to the resources available for studying and conserving them. Our results suggest a need for greater specificity in recovery targets for threatened and non-charismatic species, and that more focused data collection on these species’ populations is warranted.


FACETS ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 4 (1) ◽  
pp. 136-160 ◽  
Author(s):  
Alana R. Westwood ◽  
Sarah P. Otto ◽  
Arne Mooers ◽  
Chris Darimont ◽  
Karen E. Hodges ◽  
...  

British Columbia has the greatest biological diversity of any province or territory in Canada. Yet increasing numbers of species in British Columbia are threatened with extinction. The current patchwork of provincial laws and regulations has not effectively prevented species declines. Recently, the Provincial Government has committed to enacting an endangered species law. Drawing upon our scientific and legal expertise, we offer recommendations for key features of endangered species legislation that build upon strengths and avoid weaknesses observed elsewhere. We recommend striking an independent Oversight Committee to provide recommendations about listing species, organize Recovery Teams, and monitor the efficacy of actions taken. Recovery Teams would evaluate and prioritize potential actions for individual species or groups of species that face common threats or live in a common area, based on best available evidence (including natural and social science and Indigenous Knowledge). Our recommendations focus on implementing an adaptive approach, with ongoing and transparent monitoring and reporting, to reduce delays between determining when a species is at risk and taking effective actions to save it. We urge lawmakers to include this strong evidentiary basis for species recovery as they tackle the scientific and socioeconomic challenges of building an effective species at risk Act.


Blue Jay ◽  
2017 ◽  
Vol 75 (3) ◽  
pp. 9-16
Author(s):  
J. Paul Goossen ◽  
Ken Porteous

Many endangered species have a spotty distribution where local and even entire provincial populations can blink in and out depending on varying habitat and climatic conditions. a challenge for wildlife managers is to decide how long to continue protecting an area for a species at risk when it no longer uses the area. Such could be the case in manitoba for habitat no longer used by the beach-nesting Piping Plover (Charadrius melodus), listed as endangered both provincially and nationally


2009 ◽  
Vol 66 (6) ◽  
pp. 959-971 ◽  
Author(s):  
James R. Lukey ◽  
Stephen S. Crawford

The Committee on the Status of Endangered Wildlife in Canada (COSEWIC) is responsible for the assessment of Canadian wildlife at risk. The COSEWIC assessment process is primarily based on five quantitative criteria developed by the International Union for the Conservation of Nature, but allows for further modification of designations under certain conditions. This study investigated the consistency of designations predicted using the quantitative COSEWIC criteria compared with observed designations reported by COSEWIC. A total of 49 COSEWIC designations for freshwater fishes from 2000 to 2007 were compared for consistency in decision-making. Overall, there was a 57.1% agreement between predicted and observed designations. A substantial number (35.1%) of COSEWIC designations were downlisted from “Endangered” or “Threatened” without sufficient explanation to justify the modifications. For the cases of uplisting, these differences were associated with qualitative criteria not effectively represented in our algorithm. Recommendations are offered to improve the transparency and accountability of COSEWIC decision-making, including enhancements to reporting and the explicit incorporation of uncertainty in the COSEWIC risk assessment protocol.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document