I am submitting this comment…

I am submitting this comment as a resident of Ontario who is deeply concerned about the proposal to consolidate Ontario’s 36 conservation authorities into just seven large regional bodies. I am strongly opposed to this framework, as it risks weakening local environmental protections, disrupting long-standing partnerships, and compromising the safety and resilience of communities across the province.

Conservation authorities were created precisely because Ontario learned—through floods, droughts, erosion and rapid development—that watershed governance must be local, science-based, and rooted in on-the-ground expertise. This proposal moves sharply away from that approach.

1. Local knowledge will be weakened under large regional structures

Ontario’s watersheds vary dramatically from region to region, even within a single proposed consolidated boundary. Flood risk, erosion patterns, shoreline conditions, and development pressures differ significantly across municipalities. The work done by conservation authorities is highly site-specific, and their localized knowledge is essential for effective permitting decisions, flood forecasting, and hazard prevention.

Consolidation on this scale risks creating distant, overextended authorities that cannot meaningfully respond to the unique environmental and development realities of individual communities.

2. Municipal accountability will be reduced

Conservation authorities are funded largely by municipalities and governed by municipal representatives. Merging dozens of authorities into seven will drastically dilute local representation. For municipalities like Whitby, this means having less direct influence over decisions that affect local development, flood risk, and watershed health—even though local taxpayers will continue to fund the system.

Effective environmental decision-making requires local oversight, not distance. This is a distastrous way to pretend at 'efficiency' as these changes appear to only be proposed in an effort to undermine our environmental protections and make way for poorly-considered and nonstrategic development intended to benefit developers and politicians as opposed to supporting a sustainable environment for our communities and the nature that sustains us and keeps us safe (especially in respect to our critical watersheds).

3. This proposal risks slowing approvals and increasing confusion

While the government has framed consolidation as a way to “speed up” development permits, staff from multiple conservation authorities have expressed concerns that merging governance, operations, data systems, and technical teams across huge geographic regions will:

-create new administrative bottlenecks

-complicate coordination

-reduce responsiveness

-delay permitting, rather than speed it up

Past consolidation efforts in Ontario were initiated locally and tailored to specific watersheds—not imposed at a province-wide scale without a clear implementation plan.

4. Watershed boundaries do not match administrative realities

The proposed regions are based only on broad Great Lakes basin lines, not on the functional watershed boundaries that currently guide environmental protection work. Many proposed regions combine watersheds with little ecological connection, dramatically different geology, and incompatible flood-risk profiles. This undermines the foundational principle of watershed-based management.

5. Communities rely on conservation authorities for climate resilience

Ontario is already experiencing:

-low water levels across many watersheds

-increased flooding events

-more intense storms

-drought conditions in multiple regions

We need conservation authorities that are stronger, not stretched thinner. Their work is critical to community safety, emergency preparedness, and the long-term sustainability of our drinking water systems and natural infrastructure.

6. Centralizing authority undermines public trust

The creation of a new provincial agency to oversee consolidated authorities risks concentrating decision-making far from the communities most affected. Conservation authorities have always been grounded in local accountability; removing that connection reduces transparency and community trust at a time when environmental protection needs more of both.

7. There is no clear evidence that consolidation improves outcomes

The government has provided no data showing that reducing 36 authorities to seven will result in:

-faster approvals

-improved service

-better environmental protection

-cost savings

On the contrary, merging operations and governance at this scale is likely to be costly, disruptive, and less responsive to local needs.

What I urge the government to do instead:

--Pause this consolidation and engage in meaningful consultation with municipalities, Indigenous communities, conservation authority staff, and the public.

--Strengthen local capacity across conservation authorities instead of centralizing them.

--Improve digital permitting, data systems, and provincial guidance without dismantling the watershed-based structure that has served Ontario well for nearly 80 years.

--Protect municipal governance so local communities maintain clear oversight over environmental decisions affecting their safety, drinking water, and development.

Ontario is navigating increasing environmental pressures—flooding, drought, erosion, rapid urban expansion, climate-driven risks, and fragile watersheds. Local expertise and strong conservation authorities are essential to managing these challenges.

This proposal does not strengthen the system; it destabilizes it. I urge the province to halt consolidation and work collaboratively with the experts and communities who understand Ontario’s watersheds best.