Our planet is currently in the midst of a mass extinction event. Plants and animals are dying off at a rate undocumented since the dinosaurs went extinct 65 million years ago. Unlike earlier extinction events, however, the current ecological crisis is primarily being driven by a single species – homo sapiens. Although a seemingly overwhelming issue, environmental non-governmental organizations (ENGOs) have dedicated themselves to ensuring strong species protection. In Canada, these interest groups launched and sustained a successful national campaign for federal endangered species legislation that culminated in the enactment of the Species at Risk Act (SARA). While ENGOs‟ campaign for protective legislation has been well-documented by scholars, there is a dearth of research regarding ENGOs‟ strategies following the passage of SARA. In order to address this knowledge gap, this thesis examines and compares the strategies employed by interest groups in both the pre- and post-passage stages of the Act. After conducting qualitative interviews with seven representatives of Canadian-based ENGOs, this study finds that following the passage of SARA interest groups, dissatisfied with the government‟s weak implementation of the Act, decided to overhaul their strategic approach and shifted the species at risk issue to three new institutional venues: the boardrooms of private corporations, the Commission for Environmental Cooperation (CEC), and the domestic judicial arena. The thesis concludes that, despite inherent challenges, shifting institutional venues can be a successful strategy for ENGOs faced with a government reluctant to implement the hard-won legislative commitments. This work may prove to be particularly pertinent for other non-governmental organizations facing similar obstacles. / Graduate