Thank you for inviting…

Thank you for inviting commentary. I think the transition from the current structure to a much fewer number of conservation authorities is too simple a solution.. While consolidating around large watersheds offers one organizing principle, it ignores elements of growth, pressure on land use, special characteristics and local patterns of use and concern. Large bureaucracies at best, no real understanding at worse, or both. While I accept that 37 may be too many for integrated planning purposes, surely a more nuanced and less traumatic change should be possible, maintaining an alignment with most municipalities while maintaining the authorities independence from entities whose first priority is not conservation. Tension is not necessarily a bad thing. What would make more sense is to propose more than one model, demonstrating the impact of using different planning principles and goals, and putting those forward for consultation. While it might take a bit longer, and understanding complete consensus will not be achieved - hence a bit bumpy thru the process - a better outcome would be the result.