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

83323

Commenting on behalf of

Individual

Comment status

Comment approved More about comment statuses
As someone who lives on lakefront property on Lake of the Woods, floating accommodations have increased immensely over the past 5 years. As rising property costs continue to increase more and more people are choosing a floating home to replace a cottage and 'life on the lake' access. Read more

Comment ID

83329

Commenting on behalf of

Individual

Comment status

Comment approved More about comment statuses
These floating “cottages” are a danger to our environment and any approval that would allow them to exist on our lakes gives the individual promoting them a way to circumvent the systems we have in place to protect our land, our people and the wildlife in the area. Read more

Comment ID

83330

Commenting on behalf of

Individual

Comment status

Comment approved More about comment statuses
As a cottage owner on the Trent Severn Waterway, I object to these floating accommodations concurring with all of the concerns delineated. I support the legislative changes that address these concerns.

Comment ID

83332

Commenting on behalf of

Individual

Comment status

Comment approved More about comment statuses
I have been an annual visitor to Lake Temagami for over 50 years, and I am the fourth generation in my family to consider the lake a home away from home. The near wilderness-type experience that I have at Lake Temagami has shaped who I am as a person. Read more

Comment ID

83341

Commenting on behalf of

Individual

Comment status

Comment approved More about comment statuses
The cost of buying a cottage or house on the lake has made it unaffordable for most. Why should this just be limited to the wealthy to enjoy our lakes. I think they should be allowed with perhaps some restrictions

Comment ID

83356

Commenting on behalf of

Individual

Comment status

Comment approved More about comment statuses
As a property owner and full time resident living on Sturgeon Lake, I fully support the proposal to add a new condition to prohibit camping on water within 300 meters of a developed shoreline, provided that the OPP and other agencies are able to enforce the limit when required. Read more

Comment ID

83377

Commenting on behalf of

Individual

Comment status

Comment approved More about comment statuses
I was VERY DISTURBED to read that you are removing the real value in the previous version of your proposed changes. The following SHOULD BE INCLUDED in the changes: reducing the number of days that a person can camp on water at one location in each calendar year from 21 days to 7 days, Read more

Comment ID

83378

Commenting on behalf of

Individual

Comment status

Comment approved More about comment statuses
In B.C. Transport Canada has designated them as float homes thereby, allowing municipalities to utilize by-laws to regulate. Transport Canada has developed standards for float homes in B.C. Read more

Comment ID

83380

Commenting on behalf of

Individual

Comment status

Comment approved More about comment statuses
I completely supported the initial changes as proposed by MNRF but this process has become very confusing. The comment period for the original proposal expired April 11, but it appears you have already significantly modified the original proposal before the commenting period is over. Read more

Comment ID

83457

Commenting on behalf of

Individual

Comment status

Comment approved More about comment statuses
I am strongly opposed to floating container homes on environmental, equity, and aesthetic grounds. If they were to proliferate on Ontario's lakes and rivers, they would inevitably worsen the environment. Water quality would suffer due to untreated waste water. Read more

Comment ID

83459

Commenting on behalf of

Individual

Comment status

Comment approved More about comment statuses
I'm in support of the proposed exclusions, whereby floating accommodations or float homes are not considered as “camping units” and thusly cannot be placed and used for overnight accommodation on water over public land. Read more

Comment ID

83464

Commenting on behalf of

Individual

Comment status

Comment approved More about comment statuses
in support of the proposed exclusions, whereby floating accommodations or float homes are not considered as “camping units” and thusly cannot be placed and used for overnight accommodation on water over public land. Read more

Comment ID

83488

Commenting on behalf of

Individual

Comment status

Comment approved More about comment statuses
I am in support of FOCA's response which encourages the proposed exclusions, whereby floating accommodations or float homes are not considered as “camping units” and thus, cannot be placed and used for overnight accommodation on water over public land. Read more

Comment ID

83491

Commenting on behalf of

Individual

Comment status

Comment approved More about comment statuses
I am in support of FOCA's response which encourages the proposed exclusions, whereby floating accommodations or float homes are not considered as “camping units” and thus, cannot be placed and used for overnight accommodation on water over public land. Read more