I strongly oppose the…

I strongly oppose the proposed consolidation of Ontario’s Conservation Authorities (CAs) and the creation of a new Ontario Provincial Conservation Agency.

This proposal weakens watershed-based management, reduces local governance and accountability, and increases risk to public safety. Opposition is widespread among Conservation Authorities, municipalities, and professionals across Ontario. Conservation Authorities including the Ganaraska Region, Upper Thames River, and Hamilton Conservation Authorities have publicly raised serious concerns about consolidation. Municipal councils within these and other watershed jurisdictions have likewise expressed opposition or significant concern regarding loss of local oversight, increased costs, and service disruption.

As an environmental scientist, taxpayer, and community member, I view this proposal as a direct threat to the effectiveness and integrity of Ontario’s conservation authority system.

Why consolidation fails

1. Watershed management cannot be centralized
Watersheds — not administrative regions — govern flooding, erosion, groundwater recharge, and ecosystem health. Each Conservation Authority operates within a distinct physical and social context shaped by local geology, soils, land use, infrastructure, and development pressures. Decades of locally collected data and expertise cannot be scaled up without being diluted.

2. The current system works
Since 1946, Conservation Authorities have successfully protected Ontarians from flooding and soil loss, prevented billions of dollars in damage, protected drinking water, restored ecosystems, and managed over 150,000 hectares of public conservation lands. This success is the result of local presence, rapid response, and trusted relationships with municipalities and landowners.

3. Larger regions reduce effectiveness, not costs
CA staff conduct frequent site visits, respond rapidly to flood events, work directly with landowners, and review development proposals in real time. Expanding jurisdictions across vast geographic areas will increase travel time, slow response, strain staff capacity, and reduce service quality. Claims of increased efficiency are not supported by how Conservation Authorities actually operate.

4. Local governance will be weakened
Amalgamation risks marginalizing smaller and rural municipalities within large regional bodies dominated by major urban centres. This reduces accountability and disconnects decisions from local flood risk, land-use planning, and community needs — concerns repeatedly raised by both Conservation Authorities and municipalities.

5. Unnecessary duplication and confusion
The proposed Ontario Provincial Conservation Agency duplicates the existing role of Conservation Ontario without demonstrated benefit. Proposed name changes — such as renaming the Toronto and Region Conservation Authority to the “Central Lake Ontario Regional Conservation Authority” — are costly, unnecessary, and confusing (for example the existing Central Lake Ontario Conservation Authority has a very similar name to the above proposed new CA name).

6. High risk of service disruption and loss of expertise
Merging governance systems, data platforms, and permitting processes would disrupt services relied upon by municipalities, developers, landowners, and emergency managers. Experienced staff and institutional knowledge would be at risk of being lost. Conservation Authorities also hold sensitive personal and property data, and the proposal does not adequately address privacy or data security concerns arising from amalgamation.

Conclusion

This proposal disregards decades of demonstrated success and professional expertise. It prioritizes administrative restructuring over public safety, environmental protection, and fiscal responsibility. Any claimed administrative efficiencies are likely to be negated by increased response times, reduced site-specific oversight, and higher long-term costs associated with flood damage, infrastructure impacts, and emergency response borne by municipalities and taxpayers.

For these reasons — and in alignment with the concerns raised by Conservation Authorities and municipalities across Ontario — this proposal should be rejected.