The proposal brought forth…

The proposal brought forth is short-sighted, a slap in the face to the conservation forefathers, and ultimately irresponsible. I would imagine those persons sitting around a table and coming together to solve the conservation problems of the past, and truly the same ones we haven't yet solved today, would be disappointed in the lack of foresight that this proposal displays.

In general, I cannot fathom how anyone would think how amalgamating and enlarging Conservation Authorities to be more like 'mini-Ministries' or Provincial Agencies would make them more efficient. I have never once in my life heard someone say 'Oh I just had a great experience getting my health card' or 'Oh I just got a Species at Risk permit approved in 6 days and the staff member was very helpful!" or "Oh my license plate expired, I cant wait to go to Service Ontario to get that taken care of". This proposal will ruin the locally governed and efficient CA Model that has evolved over 80 years of time. While there are efficiencies that could be found in other ways, this proposal as is, is embarrassing.

Below are my main issues with the proposal:

- Amalgamation and take-over by the Province eliminates local decision-making authority from agencies that were established, funded, and governed by municipal governments. It has been widely reported that less than 3% of a Conservation Authorities budget comes from dedicated and consistent Provincial funding. It is for this reason alone that the Province needs to stay out of local decision making. If the Province wants to make decisions impacting the local level, they need to pay for it.

- There is a significant risk of losing local expertise and on-the-ground staff with in-depth knowledge of watershed conditions. Staff that work at Conservation Authorities live in the watershed that they work in. Oftentimes they have grown up there and have an intimate knowledge of the landscape and watershed characteristics. They are passionate about their work and where they work. This will be lost if jobs are moved out of local watersheds to more of a Provincial model. There are already issues with trying to get a MNRF work permit or MECP Species at Risk Permit or the Federal DFO fish permit from a staff member who has no idea what the conditions on-the-ground are like at a project or construction site. These Federal and Provincial staff sit in offices in large cities like Peterborough, Ottawa, or Burlington and have little opportunity to interact with people on the ground and understand what real-world development is like. Conservation Authorities don't have this problem. These staff are boots on the ground and these people know the people they are working with. This is local governance and local decision making and is much more efficient than the larger amalgamated proposed Conservation Authorities could ever hope to be.

- The proposal jeopardizes watershed-based scientific approaches that are critical to effectively managing floods, droughts, erosion, and water quality. Like above, decisions on local watershed management need to be made by people who are local. Each of Ontario's larger watersheds and rivers are physically different - No two are the same! Therefore, they cannot be managed the same. The watershed model of resource management is unique and powerful and to enlarge watersheds is a step in the wrong direction. 80 years of Conservation Authority work has led to the current model and scope and scale of management for a reason - it works!

- The proposed structure weakens rural representation by concentrating decision-making power in larger urban centres. This is especially true for the more rural Conservation Authorities. Local councilors and mayors sitting on Conservation Authority Boards ensures local taxpayer money is used wisely, responsibly, and transparently. It ensures a level of evenness and shared use of resources across municipalities, such as specialty staff and equipment. Decisions for the local level should not be made by Boards with representatives from the larger urban centres and upper tier municipalities only.

- Donated conservation lands would be at risk by transferring stewardship and control to centralized Provincial authorities. Many lands that were entrusted by local people to Conservation Authorities were donated with a sense of understanding that their legacy may live on through their conserved forests, wetlands, and grasslands. They are managed with respect by local land managers who have a land ethic and respect for the land that cannot be held by anyone other than someone who is on the ground and builds a relationship with the donor. If the Province were to have control over these lands, trust would dissolve and management of the lands would falter at such a large scale of management.

- This proposal suggests to proceed without transparent cost estimates, defined transition plans, or clear evidence that consolidation would lead to improved outcomes. The proposal is largely void of any details that would show how it would be undertaken and shows very little effort was put in to actually consulting with the people of Ontario. Quite frankly, this is undemocratic.

Trust this comment to age well: There is no way this happens in a one year time frame. Once the Province really digs down and tries to figure out how to make this amalgamation happen, they are in for a long year of headaches and disappointment!

I am vehemently opposed to the proposal as provided by the Province of Ontario.