Protecting the Places Species at Risk Need to Survive

Canada’s species at risk cannot recover without protecting the places they depend on.

Earthroots recently joined other conservation organizations in responding to the federal government’s proposed Critical Habitat Protection Regulations (CHPR) under Canada’s Species at Risk Act. The proposed regulations are intended to address a long-standing gap in Canada’s species-at-risk framework: critical habitat may be identified in a recovery strategy or action plan, but protecting that habitat can require additional regulatory steps.

We support the proposed move toward automatic protection of critical habitat on federal lands once a recovery strategy or action plan has been finalized and published. This could help address a significant backlog. According to the federal government’s discussion paper, more than 100 terrestrial species currently have outstanding requirements for critical habitat protection on federal lands.

Under the proposed approach, species with recovery strategies or action plans already in place when the regulations come into force would receive protection relatively quickly. For newly identified critical habitat, protection would take effect 180 days after the relevant recovery strategy or action plan is published.

This is progress but it does not address the larger implementation problems that have left species and their habitats vulnerable for years.

A system that moves too slowly

The proposed regulations can only protect critical habitat once that habitat has actually been identified. And this is where one of the biggest problems lies.

A 2025 audit by the Auditor General of Canada found that only 32% of species at risk had their critical habitat fully identified in their recovery strategy or action plan. Of the studies required to identify critical habitat, more than half were completed late or remain overdue.

There are also significant delays earlier in the process. Some species assessed by the Committee on the Status of Endangered Wildlife in Canada (COSEWIC) have waited years to be formally listed under the federal Species at Risk Act, despite a legislated timeline of 270 days. Recovery strategies and action plans can also take many years beyond their intended timelines.

For a species facing habitat loss, development, climate change or other pressures, a protection system that takes a decade to act can be the difference between recovery and continued decline.

Earthroots is therefore calling on the federal government to address the entire species-at-risk framework not simply the final step of protecting habitat once it has been identified.

We are also concerned that the proposed regulations would not apply to the critical habitat of aquatic species because these species are subject to a different regulatory framework involving the Department of Fisheries and Oceans.

Different regulatory mechanisms should not mean different levels of protection.

The federal government needs to explain how it will ensure that critical habitat already identified for aquatic species is protected without further delay. Environment and Climate Change Canada and Fisheries and Oceans Canada should work together to develop an approach that provides aquatic species with protection comparable to what is being proposed for terrestrial species.

Protection cannot stop at federal boundaries.

Another major concern is what happens to species whose critical habitat occurs on non-federal lands.

This issue is particularly important in Ontario. Recent changes to Ontario’s species-at-risk legislation have weakened or removed protections for some species and habitats. Ontario has argued that federal protections make provincial protections unnecessary for certain aquatic species and migratory birds.

But federal species-at-risk protections are themselves limited in scope, and the proposed CHPR applies specifically to federal lands.

That leaves an important question:

Who protects critical habitat when it is located on provincial, municipal or privately held lands and equivalent provincial protections do not exist?

Species do not recognize political boundaries. A wolf, turtle, bird or fish does not stop using its habitat because it crosses from federal to provincial land.

Canada’s federal, provincial and territorial governments agreed decades ago to pursue complementary approaches to protecting species at risk. Earthroots believes that commitment is more important than ever.

Turning commitments into action

Canada has made significant commitments to nature through A Force of Nature: Canada’s Strategy to Protect Nature, including funding intended to strengthen the protection and recovery of species at risk and substantial ongoing investments in protecting fish and fish habitat.

The proposed Critical Habitat Protection Regulations could be an important part of delivering on those commitments.

But strong conservation commitments must be matched by timely implementation.

Earthroots is urging the federal government to:

• move forward with effective automatic protection for critical habitat on federal lands;

• address the backlog of species listings, recovery strategies, action plans and critical-habitat studies;

• establish an effective approach to protecting aquatic species’ critical habitat;

• clarify how federally listed species will be protected on non-federal lands where provincial protections are inadequate; and

• ensure that federal, provincial and territorial approaches work together to provide meaningful protection across species’ full ranges.

  
  

Identifying critical habitat without protecting it leaves species vulnerable. Protecting only some habitat, or protecting it years after it has been identified, is not enough.

Canada’s most vulnerable species need a species-at-risk system that works when it matters not years after the threats have intensified.

Earthroots will continue to advocate for strong, timely and effective protections for Ontario’s wildlife and the habitats they depend on.