Comments

View the comments this notice received through the registry. You can either download them all or search and sort below.

Some comments will not be posted online. Learn more about the comment status and our comment and privacy policies.

Download comments

Search comments

Comment ID

26287

Commenting on behalf of

Individual

Comment status

Comment approved More about comment statuses
Well all of this sounds nice, but what it appears to be happening here is theft of private property. I am at a loss of how a government can express interest in something that it does not own nor has ever owned. Read more

Comment ID

26290

Commenting on behalf of

Individual

Comment status

Comment approved More about comment statuses
Reading this proposal and seeing words like "pollution" and "wetland" in quotation marks as if they could be redefined in looser terms to allow for development and habitat descruction is beyond concerning.

Comment ID

26352

Commenting on behalf of

Individual

Comment status

Comment approved More about comment statuses
Lands regulated by CAs have been mapped for decades, in fact closer to 50 years! So why do we still need to evaluate development applications based on the 100 year flood plain? Why do we need a level of additional planning control when floodplains, wetlands, hazard lands, etc, .... Read more

Comment ID

26357

Commenting on behalf of

Individual

Comment status

Comment approved More about comment statuses
It is difficult to assess the proposed revisions to the regulations pursuant to the Conservation Authorities Act because the posted rationale is vague. It would be preferable to specify the problems supposedly from the particular provisions in the existing regulations that are slated for revision. Read more

Comment ID

26377

Commenting on behalf of

Individual

Comment status

Comment approved More about comment statuses
Conservation Authorities need to maintain the ability to regulate development on waterways and floodplains. Developers are not concerned with water quality, sediment control or protecting riparian and wetland habitats. Read more

Comment ID

26378

Commenting on behalf of

Individual

Comment status

Comment approved More about comment statuses
It sounds like 'focusing' means reducing their ability to regulate development. Please ensure that they are still an important part of the environmental assessment and permitting process for new developments that will impact wetlands, waterways and flood plains. Read more

Comment ID

26380

Commenting on behalf of

Individual

Comment status

Comment approved More about comment statuses
Thank you for the opportunity to comment on EBR posting 013-4992. The proposal outlines some positive directives, notably the definitions for wetland, interference, conservation of lands, and pollution. Read more

Comment ID

26412

Commenting on behalf of

Individual

Comment status

Comment approved More about comment statuses
A new storm outfall ( SWM pond outlet , storm sewer outlet, roadside ditch outlet ) to a natural heritage feature ( watercourse, ravine, Lakes, wetland etc.) requires an ECA from MECP as per Ontario regulation 525/98 and Ontario Water Resource Act. Read more

Comment ID

26430

Commenting on behalf of

Individual

Comment status

Comment approved More about comment statuses
These proposals are not sufficiently detailed to know exactly what changes you want to make. The ability of conservation authorities to review and comment on proposed developments should not be diminished. Conservation authorities should continue to enforce the Fisheries Act. Read more

Comment ID

26465

Commenting on behalf of

Individual

Comment status

Comment approved More about comment statuses
I am writing in regards to the proposed changes to the Conservation Authorities Act and regulations. I was disappointed to not see the lack of detail in the proposed changes. Specifically: Read more

Comment ID

26827

Commenting on behalf of

Individual

Comment status

Comment approved More about comment statuses
This is a good start. Land that is essential to the function of conservation; however, should not be regulated but rather purchased (or at least an easement for the required purposes) by the authority at fair market value. Private property use should not be impaired without adequate compensation. Read more

Comment ID

26945

Commenting on behalf of

Individual

Comment status

Comment approved More about comment statuses
This appears to be a thinly veiled attempt to emasculate conservation authorities in order to further the interests of construction and natural resource extraction entities. I would council the minister to avoid further weakening of environmental protections.

Comment ID

27138

Commenting on behalf of

Individual

Comment status

Comment approved More about comment statuses
First of all, it is important to note that not all conservation authorities in Ontario operate uniformly in the carrying out of their duties or even how they interpret their responsibilities. Anything that can be achieved by the Government of Ontario in this regard will be considered helpful. Read more