Changes to Streamline Natural Resource Permits: Fish and Wildlife Modernization

As part of its plan to protect Ontario and build the most competitive economy in the G7, the Ontario government is proposing changes to modernize and streamline natural resource permits, allowing mining and infrastructure projects to move forward faster and with greater certainty. These proposals, focused on low-risk and routine activities, would reduce administrative requirements for hundreds of natural resource permits annually and shorten approval timelines, all while continuing to safeguard public health and safety and sustainably manage natural resources.

We are proposing changes to some approvals issued under the Fish and Wildlife Conservation Act, 1997 (FWCA), to better support economic development, burden reduction and service delivery. Some low-risk activities are proposed to follow a more streamlined or alternative processes, while more rigorous oversight would be maintained for higher risk activities.

We are proposing changes to the following seven activities:

1. Collecting fish for scientific and educational purposes

• We are proposing to amend O. Reg. 664/98 (Fish Licensing) to streamline approval requirements for low-risk, non-lethal collections of fish when they will be held for short periods of time and released at the site of capture (for example, for inventory and monitoring work).
• Persons would be required to register their activity and follow rules in regulation which would help mitigate risks associated with collecting, possessing and releasing fish.
• The registration document would be deemed to be a licence under O. Reg. 664/98 (Fish Licensing), and persons would be required to carry this document on their person while conducting activities.
• In addition, it is proposed that projects subject to approval processed under the Species Conservation Act, 2025, Invasive Species Act, 2015 or the Aquatic Invasive Species Regulations (made under the federal Fisheries Act) would be allowed to proceed with registration provided they have obtained the appropriate regulatory requirements (e.g. registration, licence, authorization), which would be deemed to be a licence to collect that species under the FWCA, and would be required to be carried while conducting activities. 
• All other persons seeking to collect fish for science and educational purposes would continue to apply for a licence to collect fish for scientific purposes.

2. Collecting wildlife for scientific and educational purposes

• We are proposing to streamline approval requirements for low-risk non-lethal collection of reptiles and amphibians to move them out of harms way where there is an immediate threat in a specific area as a result of stormwater management pond maintenance, and the construction and maintenance of infrastructure.
• Persons would be required to register their activity in advance of undertaking work, carry a copy of their registration while carrying out work, and follow rules in regulation which would help mitigate risks associated with collecting, possessing and releasing reptiles and amphibians.
• All other persons seeking to collect wildlife for science and educational purposes would continue to apply for a wildlife scientific collectors authorization.
• To implement the proposal, the ministry would propose amendments to the FWCA and, if the enabling legislation is passed, make associated amendments to O. Reg. 665/98 (Hunting) and/or O. Reg. 668/98 (Wildlife in Captivity) to implement the proposal.

3. Keeping game birds in captivity

• We are proposing to amend O. Reg. 666/98 (Possession, Buying and Selling of Wildlife) and/or O. Reg. 668/98 (Wildlife in Captivity) to eliminate the licence to keep game birds in captivity and instead require persons to register annually to keep wild turkey, ring-necked pheasant, northern bobwhite, and/or gray (Hungarian) partridge in captivity. Persons could not register to keep other game birds in captivity.
• Persons who register would be required to follow rules in regulation consistent with the current licensing and regulatory requirements, including keeping birds at the registered location, record keeping, appropriate fencing, and not taking birds from the wild. 
• There would be no fee for registration.

4. Authorizing agents to protect property from wildlife

• The FWCA allows property owners to use agents on their behalf to harass, capture or kill wildlife in protection of property on their own land. Agents must be authorized by the ministry unless they belong to a class of agents prescribed in O. Reg. 665/98 (Hunting).  
• We are proposing to eliminate authorizations for additional agents (beyond the prescribed class agents) for protection of property activities. 
• Where a property owner wishes to hire an agent to protect their property on their own land, the agent must be one of the existing class agents prescribed in section 132 of O. Reg. 665/98 (Hunting), which are:
• licensed trappers, 
• a landowner’s immediate family members, 
• nuisance wildlife removal businesses, 
• municipal animal control, and 
• persons with valid hunting accreditation.
• The proposal would streamline the approach to having class agents act in protection of property.
• To implement the proposal, the ministry would propose amendments to the FWCA and, if the enabling legislation is passed, make associated amendments to O. Reg. 665/98 (Hunting) to implement the proposal.

      5. Protecting property from deer and elk

• The FWCA prohibits property owners or their agents from harassing, capturing or killing white-tailed deer or American elk in protection of property without authorization from the ministry (except in limited circumstances set out in regulation). 
• For the purpose of protecting property, we are proposing to allow the harassment of white-tailed deer and American elk by any property owner without authorization from the ministry, consistent with the current approach taken for harassing most other wildlife in protection of property, subject to compliance with additional rules prescribed in regulation (e.g. cannot harass deer or elk using a firearm or dogs).
• Persons would continue to require ministry authorization to kill deer or elk in protection of property. 
• To implement the proposal, the ministry would propose amendments to the FWCA and, if the enabling legislation is passed, make associated amendments to O. Reg. 665/98 (Hunting) to implement the proposal.

6. Protecting infrastructure from beaver dams

• We are proposing to allow low risk beaver dam removal activities to occur without authorization from the ministry to support construction or maintenance of infrastructure where a person registers the activity and follows certain rules in regulation. 
• As part of the registration process, a person who needs to remove a beaver dam would provide the ministry with information on the location, rationale, time of year, proposed tools and methods of removal. 
• Beaver dam removal activities that do not meet low-risk criteria would continue to require authorization from the ministry.
• To implement the proposal, the ministry would propose amendments to the FWCA and, if the enabling legislation is passed, make associated amendments to O. Reg. 665/98 (Hunting) and/or 667/98 (Trapping) to implement the proposal.

7. Removal of nests and eggs

• We are proposing to amend O. Reg. 665/98 (Hunting) to allow the removal of nests and eggs of bird species that are wild by nature without ministry authorization where the nest is posing an immediate fire hazard. This would not apply where there are young birds present in the nest.
• We are also proposing to clarify the scope of existing exemptions in O. Reg. 665/98 (Hunting) that allow removal of nests and eggs for renewable energy projects and for activities required to maintain the function of an electricity transmission or distribution line within the transmission or distribution corridor or to maintain the function of a telecommunications line or a broadcast tower.

More detailed information on these proposals can be found below in the “Fish and Wildlife Approvals Modernization Proposal Details” document available under Supporting Materials.

Regulatory impact analysis

The socioeconomic impacts of the proposals are expected to be positive. The changes are intended to support responsible economic development and protection of property and infrastructure, improve public safety, clarify requirements, streamline services, and reduce costs associated with time spent waiting for approvals for low-risk activities. There will be some minor administrative costs associated with learning about the proposed changes and associated rules.  While it is anticipated that there would be a time cost for clients associated with the proposed registration activities, these time costs would ultimately be reduced compared to the status quo review and approval process. The ministry would appreciate feedback from businesses on any potential costs and benefits associated with the proposals.

The environmental impacts of the proposals are anticipated to be low. Proposed changes are intended to enable lower-risk activities, or activities where public safety is the primary interest, to proceed without a ministry approval, while maintaining environmental stewardship through supporting rules and requirements to minimize any potential impacts and support compliance.