Travel Recovery Depends on Conservation Authorities, but They May Soon Be Gutted in Ontario
By: Christopher Morello
Tags: Eco Travel, Airports, Travel Industry, Ontario Politics, Conservation

The group is working on behalf of 12 developers building on both sides of the valley to ensure it's safe, free of invasive species, and ecologically and scenically enhanced. This is one of the thousands of projects across the province.

Magnets for out-of-towners

Across Ontario, these agencies attract 8 million visitors annually to conservation areas.

Day-trippers and tourists enjoying lunch at a Niagara vineyard. The Niagara Peninsula Conservation Authority manages 41 Conservation Areas within the Niagara Peninsula watershed. The agency works closely with tourism boards. (Picture: Shaw Festival)

Unlike provincial parks, these conservation areas are close to towns and cities, generating economic spillover effects for restaurants, hotels, museums, and other cultural amenities.

Chandra Sharma of the Niagara Peninsula Conservation Authority has been working alongside groups like the Twenty Valley Tourism Association as they transition into a destination marketing organization.

All to the benefit of vineyards, activity providers, and the broader regional tourism ecosystem.

Improving private land

Conservation Authorities use their development permitting role to help guide developers on best environmental practices taking floodplains and local ecology into account.

Many factors govern where and how an area is regulated. (Source: TRCA)

For instance, Conservation Halton supports developers in building sustainable golf courses. Native plantings and strategic tree removal minimize overall water takings for irrigation — creating bottom-line impact.

Many flood drainage systems have been upgraded to extensive trail networks, meadows, and parks, thanks to these agencies.

Keeping airports flood-free

Airports are especially prone to flooding — one of Ontario’s biggest climate change risks due to increased extreme precipitation events.

Map showing stormwater facilities, ponds, and streams at Toronto Pearson, courtesy of GTAA.

Only 29% of the land surrounding Toronto Pearson International Airport is permeable. Meaning 71% of stormwater cannot be absorbed into the ground.

The Toronto and Region Conservation Authority works closely with the Greater Toronto Airports Authority (GTAA) through their joint Partners in Project Green. Focused on building stormwater and broader climate resiliency.

Building of the GTAA Moore’s Creek Stormwater Facility. Image courtesy of Canadian Engineer Consulting.

This has led to world-class stormwater drainage infrastructure that cleanly removes deicing fluid, jet fuel, and other runoff pollutants from stormwater at high output.

Nearby development proposals that interfere with flood drainage capacity will be amended into compliance or refused altogether if a developer is unable to comply.

This ultimately minimizes flight delays and cancelations caused by extreme precipitation.

And keeps our house insurance premiums low.

How’re Conservation Authorities being gutted in Ontario?

While Ontario’s Bill 229 aims to “lay the groundwork for economic recovery,” items in Schedule 6 will diminish Ontario’s Conservation Authorities' ability to manage ecosystems and build climate resiliency.

Decentralizing Conservation Authorities from watersheds to municipalities

Water doesn’t adhere to municipal borders.

Imagine if all of these townships had to unanimously agree on environmental protection. And now our Conservation Authorities had to cover the cost of managing all 400+ negotiations, legal agreements, reviews, and yearly amendments. Wikimedia.

As such, Ontario’s 36 Conservation Authorities’ jurisdictional boundaries are divided into specific bodies of water and their respective ecosystems, known as “watersheds.”

Conservation Authority jurisdictions are organized by natural watershed boundaries, not by human-made municipal boundaries.

Schedule 6 revokes decision making from the collective good of a watershed towards the individual interests of a municipality—over 400 across the province.

Easier “opt-out” of environmental protection

Bill 229 lays the groundwork for municipalities to opt-out of necessary environmental programming.

Municipalities upstream who rollback water quality management will affect everyone downstream—a major impact for waterfront developments and tourist areas.

Another concern is the spread of invasive species. Seeds spread by air, stream, and animals. If one municipality defunds control of hyper-invasive species, uncontained hotspots will spread faster and farther.

Japanese Knotweed, a hyper-invasive weed threatening Ontario. (CBC)

The continued spread of Japanese Knotweed is just one concerning example. The hyper-invasive bamboo-like plant spreads through a network of rhizomes, snuffing biodiversity, causing soil erosion, and even punching through asphalt.

Adding significant overhead to Conservation Authority

Decentralization will increase administration costs by 40%, according to the Upper Thames River Conservation Authority.

Based in Southern Ontario, they’d move from one mandate to managing 17 municipal agreements. Each with its own legal agreements, reporting processes, and yearly amendments.

Municipalities and the federal government are not likely to cover this increase (and the province only covers 5% of Conservation Authority budgets).

Loosening an already generous permitting process

Conservation Authorities issue development permits based on watershed science along with complicated but accurate modeling. They’ll work with developers to restructure development plans around natural hazards and environmental features.

Added loopholes and red-tape introduced by Schedule 6, courtesy of Conservation Ontario

Last year, Ontario’s Conservation Authorities collectively approved 96% of permits — an arguably high number.

Two new loopholes allow developers to appeal permitting decisions—adding to a growing list methods to bypass environmental planning.

First, by appealing to a Local Planning Tribunal in which the Conservation Authorities are barred from participating.

Second, by special permission of the Minister of Forestry and Natural Resources — a position not grounded in environmental management despite the fancy title.