I would agree with the…

I would agree with the statement that the frontline role Conservation Authorities have in managing the natural resources of local communities is becoming increasingly important especially with today’s changing environment and more extreme weather. Conservation Authorities began as grassroots organizations that were centered around improving land management for the benefit of their local communities. Natural hazard protection and management was a natural alignment with this purpose as the source of many hazards are related to poor land and water management. The current proposal which identifies core mandatory programs and services fails to recognize that the foundation of the core services identified in this proposal is actually the management of natural resources on the landscape and that the watershed is the most scientific and effective way to do this given the interlinkages between land and water.
This management of lands cannot be focused solely on lands within the Conservation Authorities jurisdiction. The majority of land is privately owned and Conservation Authorities are service providers to these private landowners providing them with science-based information to make better land management decisions that are a benefit to everyone as a whole. These activities have ensured the land use activities have had a minimal impact on increasing hazards and the protection of source waters.
It is unclear with the current wording what is intended by programs and services related to the risk of natural hazards, whereas natural hazard protection and management is a more holistic term and has been a consistent role since the inception of Conservation Authorities. Particularly since the programs and services will be prescribed by regulation after the Act has passed. Will the ability for a Conservation Authority to undertake the activities that are necessary to manage natural hazards be so constrained as to be ineffective?
Land and water management is becoming more vital than ever before and yet this Act appears to limit the abilities of the organizations with the most experience to do this work rather than empowering them with the tools to do more for their local communities when it is most needed.