The Conservation Authority…

The Conservation Authority model has stood the test of time for over 70 years. They are flexible and responsive to environmental needs within the watershed and create a local presence that no other environmental agency can achieve. Conservation Authorities provide invaluable services that make residents safer, communities more desirable, and the environment more resilient. Given the current threats to our environments, it is more important now than ever to support local conservation authorities. The updated act should help provide the tools and support conservation authorities need to create resilient environments, not to constrain their actions.

A watershed approach to conservation is essential for effective management. Floodplains cannot be managed without looking at what is happening upstream, both in the stream and in the floodplains. We can watch flood plains get bigger, especially as extreme weather becomes more common, or we can actively manage floodplains by supporting conservation authorities to take action. Similarly, the quality and quantity of drinking water cannot be managed if conservation authorities are not looking at the entire watershed and ensuring the water that supports drinking water stays clean and gets where it needs to go.

The core mandate of conservation authorities has been debated for years. Since 1946, the core mandate has been the program and services that further the conservation, restoration, development and management of natural resources on a watershed scale. After Hurricane Hazel the mandate to control floods and pollution was added. Restoration activities (tree planting, wetland restoration, forest management) and monitoring of watershed health have been long standing activities that have ensured that the impacts of land use change on hazards have been minimized. These important services are currently lacking mention in the Act and should be included in the core mandate.

The province should include an additional mandatory program area of “conservation of natural resources” to capture some of the programs and services that have long been part of a CAs core work, including:
- inventory and monitoring,
- tree planting and forest management,
- natural heritage systems planning,
- habitat restoration and creation,
- invasive species management and
- stewardship/ outreach activities.

One specific change that I would like to see is that you change the terminology “programs and services related to the risk of natural hazards” to “programs and services for the protection and management of natural hazards.” The current wording is too vague to provide guidance on the intent.

Effective hazard management requires the following components:
- Operations, inspections, maintenance or reconstruction of dams, channels, and
erosion and ice control structures
- Flood forecasting and warning (hydrometric monitoring, data management, models,
communications)
- Drought forecasting and warning (low water response teams)
- Emergency operations with municipalities (data support, communications, media,
vulnerability assessments; post event assessments)
- Plan input and review for hazards, storm water management and feature protection
(planning, engineering; ecology)
- Regulation (permitting and enforcement)
- Watershed planning to input to hazard management and planning decisions;
determine effective mitigation measures including protection and expansion of
natural areas and wetlands
- Floodline/Hazard and Risk Mapping (hydraulic and hydrologic modelling; base
mapping; air photography, field assessment)
- Watercourse, shoreline and slope erosion control
- Hazard land securement
- Training/ Communications and Education

I support conservation authorities being charged with source protection but note that it is effectively downloading the program costs to the local taxpayer as the province is not expected to continue to pay for the program. I am also glad that the province recognizes the value of the land holdings of the Conservation Authorities to the people of Ontario. Conservation Authorities hold large tracts of natural lands and active park facilities. Many of these lands provide flood control, flow augmentation, and contain erosion and flood hazards as well as sensitive and provincially significant ecological areas. These parks are regional destinations like Ontario Parks. Visitations to the parks continue to rise with the increasing population, emphasis on the health benefits of nature and decreasing access to personal greenspace in housing choices. Conservation Authorities need to be able to invest in facilities and land to allow for more visitors and better experiences. The regulations must allow for a wide range of programs and services on these lands to ensure that they continue to provide the functions they were intended for (be it recreation or natural heritage protection).

- Some of the components of the Programs and services related to the conservation and management of lands include:
- Land planning (management plans)
- Land securement and acquisition
- Conservation area operations and management
- Property Management (maintenance, management agreements)
- Facilities maintenance and capital works
- Hazard assessments (hazard trees, weather, trail inspections)
- Inspection and Enforcement (risk and liability)