The Conservation Authorities…

The Conservation Authorities Act was a wise and far-seeing measure, sound in its analysis of the need, and solid in its structure to address that need. Administered jointly by the Ministry of the Environment, Conservation and Parks and the Ministry of Natural Resources and Forestry, it established several separate Conservation Authorities (”CAs”) across the province to conserve, restore, and manage Ontario’s natural resources, and to protect Ontarians and property from disruptive natural hazards, such as erosion and flooding.

The number of individual CAs was accelerated in 1954, after the devastating floods from Hurricane Hazel, eventually growing to its current 36. This had the great advantage of giving each CA responsibility for an area of manageable size and similar geological and hydrological makeup, thus assuring familiarity and efficiency.

Initially, the CAs were given powers to regulate development in hazardous areas like floodplains and wetlands to protect against natural hazards, to study and monitor watersheds, manage conservation lands, and provide advice to municipalities. CAs also were given powers to acquire land, enter into agreements, and erect works to support their programs. These powers have been modified over time, but only in the past few years, under the previous Ford government, was there any substantial abridgement of what the CAs could do in carrying out their mandate.

Now, however, what is perhaps the most serious attempt ever to diminish the scope and powers of provincial CAs is being undertaken by the current Ford government: provisions in Schedule 3 of the pending Bill 68, the Plan to Protect Ontario Act, that will amalgamate the number of CAs from 36 into 7, establish a provincial agency to oversee their work (the Ontario Provincial Conservation Agency) and give the relevant Minister the power to overrule the new Agency, effectively giving the Minister power over all Ontario’s CAs. What kind of guarantees are there that the specific local knowledge obtained over time of each current CA will be retained and utilized in this much less manageable configuration. Some of these new proposed CA's cover 80 municipalities. How would it be possible to make decisions relevant to the whole CA. I urge you to rethink this approach. There are certainly going to be areas and systems to be streamlines to achieve some cost savings but this short-sighted approach opens many up to flooding among other risks where mitigation costs will far outweigh short term savings.