DOCSLIB.ORG

June 21, 2021 Liz Mikel Senior Policy & Program Advisor

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
June 21, 2021 Liz Mikel Senior Policy & Program Advisor June 21, 2021 Liz Mikel Senior Policy & Program Advisor Conservation & Source Protection Branch Ministry of the Environment, Conservation & Parks 40 St. Clair Avenue West 14th Floor Toronto, Ontario M4V 1M2 Subject: ERO #019-2986 – “Regulatory Proposals (Phase 1) under the Conservation Authorities Act” Thank you for the opportunity to comment on the Phase 1 Regulatory Proposals under the Conservation Authorities Act and for providing a sufficient amount of time to make a submission. The comments below are provided on behalf of the Board of Directors of the Otonabee Region Conservation Authority. The Board endorsed these comments by resolution at their June 17, 2021, regular meeting and directed me to submit them on behalf of the Authority. Scope of Conservation Authority Mandate These comments relate to our observations on how well the proposed mandatory programs and services regulation aligns with the mandate of Conservation Authorities. The purpose of the Conservation Authorities Act is, “to provide for the organization and delivery of programs and services that further the conservation, restoration, development and management of natural resources in watersheds in Ontario.” The yet-to-be proclaimed Board Report #: 2021-050 Appendix A Page: 3 Subsection 20 (1) provides for the objects of an authority, which are to provide, in the area over which it has jurisdiction, mandatory, municipal, and other programs and services. The Made-in-Ontario Environment Plan sets out a commitment to, “work in collaboration with municipalities and other stakeholders to ensure that Conservation Authorities focus and deliver on their core mandate of protecting people and property from flooding and other natural hazards and conserving natural resources.” In our view, the proposed mandatory programs and services regulation is the mechanism to align the purpose of the Act and the government’s environmental commitments with the implementing mechanism of regulatory requirements and standards. The regulatory proposals dealing with the Risk to Natural Hazards are fairly complete and robust and will enable an authority to deliver on the mandate of protecting, “people and property from flooding and other natural hazards.” This comment is based on the assumption that the proposed Section 28 regulation remains substantively unchanged. We do however believe that the proposed mandatory program and service regulations falls short of addressing the government’s commitment of, “conserving natural resources.” The requirements and standards for achieving this commitment appear to be rather limited and focused only on the management of Conservation Authority owned lands that are currently in a natural state. We feel that the proposed regulations should be enhanced to better address this commitment. Some suggestions include broadening the purpose of the watershed-based resource management strategy to, at the very least, include natural resource conservation requirements for all Conservation Authority owned lands and perhaps for lands where the Section 28 regulations apply. An additional enhancement could be the requirement to deliver a monitoring program to measure the effectiveness of the watershed-based resource management strategy. We also have observed that the mandatory program and services regulatory proposal is silent on any, “standards or requirements to mitigate the impacts of climate change and provide for the adaption to a changing climate, through increasing resiliency.” These requirements are contemplated in the yet-to-be proclaimed Subsection 40 (2) of the Act. Recommendations: That the mandatory program and service regulation include additional requirements and standards to address the government’s commitment for conserving natural resources. That the mandatory program and service regulation include standards and requirements to mitigate the impacts of climate change and provide for the adaption to a changing climate, through increasing resiliency. Board Report #: 2021-050 Appendix A Page: 4 Risk to Natural Hazards As discussed above, the proposed requirements and standards for the Risk to Natural Hazards mandatory program and service are generally robust and complete. This comment is however based on the assumption that the proposed Section 28 regulation remains substantively unchanged. The proposed Section 28 regulations should have been available for comment concurrent with the posting of the Phase 1 regulatory proposals. There may be a need to adjust these proposals in consideration of any potential changes to the Section 28 regulations. Recommendation: That the province delay releasing the Phase 1 regulations until an opportunity has been provided to review and comment on the proposed Section 28 regulations. Virtually all the water control structures built or acquired by a Conservation Authority were funded in part by the province. Grants were provided under various granting program criteria. The portfolio of water control structures owned by Otonabee Conservation is the legacy of the historic provincial granting programs going back to the early 1960’s. The regulatory proposal identifies eligible water control structures as those that, “mitigate risk to life and property damage from flooding or supports low water augmentation.” It is possible that such a narrow eligibility criterion will result in only some water control structures being considered as mandatory while others will be classified as non-mandatory. Should member municipalities choose not to accept a levy to operate, maintain, repair, or even decommission the non-mandatory structures, they would effectively become orphaned. In this case, an Authority would be in an untenable position, owning dams for which there is no access to funding to fulfill the regulatory requirements under the Lakes and Rivers Improvement Act, to maintain them in a safe working order or to properly decommission them. Recommendation: An Authority’s entire portfolio of water control structures should be included in the mandatory program and service regulation. This would provide an Authority with the ability to levy member municipalities for funding to deal with public safety and dam safety issues or to decommission structures no longer required. Management of Conservation Lands Similar to water control structures, much of a Conservation Authority’s lands portfolio was acquired with substantial funding from the province. Approximately 90% of Otonabee Conservation’s land holdings were acquired in the 1960’s and 1970’s and almost every property was acquired in part with significant provincial funding that was provided to achieve a variety of provincial program objectives at the time, including conservation, flood management, Board Report #: 2021-050 Appendix A Page: 5 recreation, and forest management. The portfolio of lands owned by Otonabee Conservation is the legacy of the historic provincial granting programs. Land ownership comes with ownership responsibilities that include maintaining title integrity, responding to unauthorized activities and mitigating hazards that affect public safety. These responsibilities are the minimal obligations all landowners have under the Occupiers Liability Act. These responsibilities represent the base cost of ownership and there needs to be a reliable source of funding to pay for these costs. These costs however are quite different from the costs associated with developing, operating and maintaining recreational amenities, infrastructure and services. The consultation guide implies a rather arbitrary delineation between mandatory and non- mandatory lands. In essence, if nothing occurs on the lands, it is classified as mandatory. If something occurs, even if it is as insignificant as passive walking on a trail, the land is classified as non-mandatory. We believe there needs to be an alternate approach to dealing with this. An approach that recognizes the cost of ownership and distinguishing that from the cost of providing recreational amenities, infrastructure and services. Recommendation: That basic ownership activities associated with managing and maintaining all the lands owned by a conservation authority be considered a mandatory program and service. The requirements to prepare a strategy for the portfolio of Conservation Authority owned lands, an acquisition and disposition policy, and management plans for all properties will take some time to complete. These activities will also require incremental resourcing. The impact of the new costs can be mitigated in part by scheduling the work over a period of time. The proposed regulation is silent on when these requirements must be met. We suggest that a phase-in approach be adopted. Perhaps a 1-year period for preparing the portfolio strategy and acquisition and disposition policy, and perhaps up to 5 years to complete the management plans. Recommendation: That the mandatory program and service regulations include a phase-in schedule for the preparation of the lands portfolio strategy, the acquisition and disposition policy and property management plans. Source Protection Authority Responsibilities under the Clean Water Act The proposed program and service appears to be consistent with what is currently being undertaken and which is currently being provincially supported through transfer payments. Board Report #: 2021-050 Appendix A Page: 6 Should provincial funding change, the requirements and standards for this mandatory program should be revisited. Mandatory Programs and Services Prescribed in Regulations As discussed
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Dodging the 'Perfect Storm'
    Dodging the ‘Perfect Storm’ Conservation Ontario’s Business Case for Strategic Reinvestment in Ontario’s Flood Management Programs, Services, and Structures September 2013 Introduction Flooding in Calgary, Alberta and more recently in Toronto, Ontario reminds us just how vulnerable we are when it comes to extreme weather events. The loss of life, devastation, long term social and economic disruption and the staggering cleanup costs in the aftermath of these floods clearly demonstrates how essential it is to have actionable guidelines, policies and programs in place to manage these events. Flooding in downtown Calgary (2013). Source: CTV News Flooding on the Don Valley Parkway, Toronto (2013). Source: CTV News 1 Dodging the ‘Perfect Storm’ – Conservation Ontario’s Business Case for Strategic Reinvestment in Ontario’s Flood Management Programs and Services, and Structures (2013) In Ontario, flooding is the leading cause of public emergency.1 To date, Ontario’s programs to manage floods and regulate floodplains have proven extremely effective and, indeed, the Ontario government has been a leading jurisdiction in Canada for flood planning and management. While much has been accomplished, several factors, if not addressed directly and quickly, will significantly jeopardize the ability of Conservation Authorities and all levels of governments to maintain and improve on this level of management and protection. Flood management is a shared responsibility in Ontario and Conservation Authorities are on the front lines of the Provincial Flood Forecasting and Warning program. In addition, Conservation Authorities bring added protection and benefits through watershed planning, watershed stewardship/natural heritage system management, monitoring and many other programs they deliver.
    [Show full text]
  • Lake Ontario Biodiversity Conservation Strategy, Workshop 1
    LAKE ONTARIO • ~ )> "' ~ Implementing a Lake Ontario LaMP • Ill -" ~ Biodiversity Conservation Strategy v Ill~ ; April 2011 ): z Lake Ontario 002987_IE10_03-B3278 Implementing a Lake Ontario LaMP Biodiversity Conservation Strategy April 2011 April 2011 To our biodiversity conservation partners: The attached Lake Ontario Lakewide Management Plan (LaMP) report, Implementing a Lake Ontario LaMP Biodiversity Conservation Strategy, April 2011, is the result of years of stakeholder consultation, solicitation of expert opinions, and consideration of existing biodiversity conservation program goals and objectives. The results of this broad stakeholder consultation process were summarized in the report The Beautiful Lake, A Binational Biodiversity Strategy for Lake Ontario, April 2009, which identifies twenty-six shorelines and watersheds of greatest value to Lake Ontario’s biodiversity. The attached LaMP implementation strategy lists the key recommendations provided in The Beautiful Lake report to be formally adopted by the LaMP. The LaMP will work to promote these actions, report on progress, identify resource needs and recommend additional actions as necessary to conserve Lake Ontario's biodiversity. The key elements of the Lake Ontario LaMP’s Binational Biodiversity Conservation Strategy are: 1) the integration of action priorities into existing programs and “place-based” planning activities especially within key watersheds, an activity best done by local governments and organizations and; 2) regional coordination of lakewide scale biodiversity monitoring and restoration activities. Given the enormous amount of work needed to restore and protect Lake Ontario’s biodiversity, the LaMP recognizes that the key to success lies in our ability to build and foster cooperative partnerships throughout the Lake Ontario basin. To that end, we ask that you consider the strategies and key steps outlined in this report as you plan and undertake activities to restore and protect Lake Ontario’s biodiversity.
    [Show full text]
  • Good Practices for WINTER MAINTENANCE in SALT VULNERABLE AREAS
    Good Practices for WINTER MAINTENANCE IN SALT VULNERABLE AREAS Good Practices for Winter Maintenance in Salt Vulnerable Areas June 2018 Table of Contents EXECUTIVE SUMMARY .................................................................................................................................. 4 FORWARD ..................................................................................................................................................... 5 1. THE LEGAL CONTEXT ............................................................................................................................. 6 1.1 The Municipal Act, 2001 ..................................................................................................................... 6 1.2 The Environmental Protection Act ...................................................................................................... 6 1.3 Code of Practice for the Environmental Management of Road Salt (2004) ....................................... 6 1.4 The Clean Water Act, 2006 ................................................................................................................. 8 2. FINDING THE BALANCE: LEGAL FRAMEWORK, GUIDANCE, AND SALT VULNERABLE AREAS ............. 13 2.1 Finding the Balance ........................................................................................................................... 13 2.2 Prioritization of Salt Vulnerable Areas .............................................................................................. 14 3. ROAD
    [Show full text]
  • Natural Environment Report Environmental Project Report – August 8, 2017 in Association With
    Barrie Rail Corridor Expansion Project Transit Project Assessment Process APPENDIX A Natural Environment Report Environmental Project Report – August 8, 2017 In Association With 0HWUROLQ[%DUULH5DLO&RUULGRU([SDQVLRQ3URMHFW 1DWXUDO(QYLURQPHQW5HSRUW±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
    [Show full text]
  • Conservation Ontario Acknowledges the PPS Policies As a Valuable Tool in the Comprehensive Programming Delivered by Ontario’S 38 Conservation Authorities
    Conservation Ontario Box 11, 120 Bayview Parkway Newmarket, Ontario, L3Y 4W3 Phone: 905-895-0716 October 12, 2001 Provincial Policy Statement Review Project Ms. Audrey Bennett, Director Provincial Planning and Environmental Services Branch Ministry of Municipal Affairs and Housing 777 Bay Street, 14th Floor Toronto, Ontario M5G 2E5 Dear Ms. Bennett: Further to your recent consultation process and efforts to involve key stakeholders in the review of the Provincial Policy Statement (PPS), attached are responses to the Stakeholder Questionnaire and the One Window Questionnaire endorsed by resolution #40/01 at the Conservation Ontario Council meeting on September 24, 2001. Conservation Ontario acknowledges the PPS policies as a valuable tool in the comprehensive programming delivered by Ontario’s 38 Conservation Authorities. The attached recommendations represent a consolidation of comments from the 38 Conservation Authorities and are offered in proactive response to your review of the PPS. The various roles that Conservation Authorities play in the land use planning system are outlined in the attached Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) on Procedures to Address Conservation Authority Delegated Responsibility under “Further CA Roles in Plan Input, Plan Review and Appeals”. The breadth of Conservation Authority involvement in the land use planning system provides the expertise and context for the attached comments. For your information, as per the MOU, the One Window Questionnaire has been previously (August 2001) submitted to MNR and is being submitted through this consultation so that you are directly aware of our concerns with the hazards component of the PPS. Your efforts to review and ultimately to improve the PPS are appreciated.
    [Show full text]
  • CONSERVATION ONTARIO 2019 Annual Report
    CONSERVATION ONTARIO 2019 Annual Report conservationontario.ca Photo credit: Aerial Axis conservation authorities’ work was loud ADDRESSING THE and clear from partner municipalities, other CHALLENGES agencies and the general public. By September, conservation authorities were invited by the OF 2019 MECP Minister to have individual consultations. We’re very grateful for the work of our Throughout 2019, flooding was the focus partners and friends throughout the year. of work for Conservation Ontario and the An assessment of the 2019 flood events conservation authorities (CAs). It was a very was eventually carried out by a provincially KIM GAVINE, tough year for many Ontario residents and appointed Flood Advisor. He also evaluated GENERAL MANAGER businesses because of extreme flooding and Ontario’s flood management framework record high Great Lakes levels. And, instead and released his report in late 2019. of subsiding, in a number of areas it grew The report recognized the value of the worse with many flood events continuing conservation authority model and strongly on into the summer and even the fall. supported the preventative, watershed- Ironically, just as flooding was ramping up in based approach taken by conservation early April, conservation authorities’ provincial authorities to manage the risk of flooding. funding for natural hazards was cut in half with 2019 was a challenging time for conservation the Ontario spring budget. At the same time, authorities and no final decisions have the Ministry of Environment, Conservation been made yet about their programs and and Parks (MECP) posted their proposed services. A lot of work still has to be done amendments to the Conservation Authorities to fine-tune which activities are required WAYNE EMMERSON, Act (Modernizing Conservation Authority for CAs to be able to deliver the proposed BOARD OF DIRECTORS CHAIR Operations – Conservation Authorities Act) to the mandatory programs and services.
    [Show full text]
  • Hi Kaitie; Based on My Experience Your Contact Lists Look Similar To
    From: Currie, Leslie (MTO) [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: December-14-18 12:18 PM To: Katie Bright Cc: Leanna Burgess; Halim Abdihalim; Rupesh Udash; Simon Strauss Subject: RE: Two projects - request for feedback re: potentially interested Indigenous communities Hi Kaitie; Based on my experience your contact lists look similar to what I would develop at MTO As always, the final decision is up to Metrolinx, and should follow the advice of Metrolinx Legal Services Feel free to contact me if you have any further questions Leslie Currie Indigenous Liaison Phone: 416-235-5229 Cell: 647-274-8489 From: Katie Bright [mailto:Katie Bright@metrolinx com] Sent: December 14, 2018 10:38 AM To: Currie, Leslie (MTO) Cc: Leanna Burgess ; Halim Abdihalim ; Rupesh Udash ; Simon Strauss Subject: Two projects - request for feedback re: potentially interested Indigenous communities Hi Leslie, There are two projects that Metrolinx would appreciate your feedback on re: potentially interested Indigenous communities Below are project descriptions and the lists developed to date: Expansion of Milton GO Station, Redevelopment of Meadowvale GO Station, and Construction of the New Station Operations West Facility Metrolinx is currently completing environmental due diligence studies, including a Stage 1-2 archaeological assessment, for the Expansion of Milton GO Station, Redevelopment of Meadowvale GO Station, and Construction of the New Station Operations West Facility Attached is a study area figure – the study area falls within the Town of Milton and the
    [Show full text]
  • Ontario's Stream Rehabilitation Manual
    Ontario’s Stream Rehabilitation Manual Written by Mark G. Heaton Rick Grillmayer And Jack G. Imhof Illustrations By Roy DeGuisti Copyright by Ontario Streams 17266 Old Main Street, Belfountain, Ontario L0N 1B0 May 2002 All Rights Reserved. Chapter 1 Introduction The Created Need Restoration, Rehabilitation or Reclamation Building on Experience Partnerships Mean Ownership Chapter 2 Perspectives What is a Watershed? Life in a Dynamic Physical Environment ….. Eco ~ System Stream Corridors The Natural Tendency of Rivers (written by Jack G. Imhof) Chapter 3 Look Before You Leap Project Planning Basics STEP 1: Focus STEP 2: Research and Reconnaissance STEP 3: Evaluation and Impact Assessment STEP 4: Goal, Objectives and Targets Chapter 4 Charting the Course to Action! STEP 5: Plan, Prepare and Consult STEP 6: Implement STEP 7: Monitor and Report Chapter 5 Learning From The Past Gathering The Information Drawing Conclusions... Chapter 6 Techniques Introduction Barrier Management Barrier Modification Fishways Soil Bioengineering (written by R. Grillmayer) Live Staking Fascines Brushlayers Brushmattress Live Cribwall Willow Posts Native Material Revetment Live Rock Revetment Habitat Improvement L.U.N.K.E.R.S. Boulder Placement Half Log Cover Instream Log Cover The Sweeper Palette Cover Cabled Log Jam Channel Rehabilitation Natural Channel Reconstruction (Under Construction) Riparian Corridor Rehabilitation (Under Construction) Woody Debris Management Low Stage Weirs (Under Construction) Wing Deflectors Bibliography Bibliography Appendices Appendix
    [Show full text]
  • Province of Ontario Water Conservation and Efficiency Program Annual Review 2017
    Province of Ontario Water Conservation and Efficiency Program Annual Review 2017 The following information is submitted by the Province of Ontario to the Great Lakes Regional Body pursuant to the provisions in the Agreement Article 304 of the Great Lakes-St. Lawrence River Basin Sustainable Water Resources Agreement (Agreement). 1. Lead agencies and contact persons: Ling Mark, Director Jason Travers, Director Land and Water Policy Branch Natural Resources Conservation Policy Branch Ontario Ministry of the Environment and Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources and Climate Change Forestry 2. Status of Ontario’s water conservation and efficiency goals and objectives consistent with the Basin-wide goals and objectives In 2012 Ontario adopted water conservation and efficiency goals and objectives that are consistent with the Basin-wide goals and objectives. The goals and objectives were developed based on stakeholder consultation and public comments received. Ontario’s goals are identical to the goals prescribed in the Agreement. Ontario’s objectives are consistent with the regional objectives adopted for the Basin and have been tailored for Ontario to reflect the direction in the Water Opportunities and Water Conservation Act, 2010, and to address stakeholder requests to emphasize the importance of taking ecological water needs into account in decision making, in keeping with the broader ecosystem protection and restoration goals of the Agreement. Ontario’s water conservation goals and objectives are available at: http://www.ontario.ca/environment-and-energy/ontarios-water-conservation-and-efficiency- goals-objectives-and-programs 3. Ontario’s water conservation and efficiency program overview Ontario’s water conservation and efficiency program consists of a wide variety of statutes, programs and policies administered across nine ministries.
    [Show full text]
  • Meeting #3/13
    INDEX TO AUTHORITY MEETING #3/13 Friday, April 26, 2013 MINUTES Minutes of Meeting #2/13, held on March 22, 2013 107 PRESENTATIONS Fenning, Mike, Senior Manager, Conservation Lands and Property Services, TRCA, re: Land Acquisition. 107 Sgambelluri, Rocco, Chief Financial Officer, re: 2013 Budget, Operating and Capital. 107 TRCA Staff re: Toronto and Region Conservation Authority Strategic Plan - 2013. 107 TORONTO AND REGION CONSERVATION AUTHORITY STRATEGIC PLAN - 2013 108 PARKS CANADA Interim Management Agreement 137 RECREATIONAL FISHERIES PLAN Greater Toronto and Area Waterfront 138 DUFFINS MARSH RESTORATION Ontario Power Generation Pickering Nuclear Station 141 EURASIAN MILFOIL AT FRENCHMAN'S BAY 144 SWAN LAKE RESIDENCE RENOVATION AND RETROFIT PROJECT 148 PARTNERS IN PROJECT GREEN STRATEGY UPDATE AND TERMS OF REFERENCE 151 GREENLANDS ACQUISITION PROJECT FOR 2011-2015 Flood Plain and Conservation Component, Humber River Watershed Lea Vivot and 11220 Highway 27 Holdings Inc. 171 REQUEST FOR DISPOSAL OF TORONTO AND REGION CONSERVATION AUTHORITY-OWNED LAND Rear of 146 Robirwin Street, Town of Whitchurch-Stouffville 172 ROGERS COMMUNICATIONS INC. Proposal for Lease of Land Petticoat Creek Conservation Area, City of Pickering, Region of Durham 173 ROGERS COMMUNICATIONS INC. Proposal for Lease of Land Vicinity of Lake St. George Field Centre 174 TOWN OF AJAX Request for a Permanent Easement for the Pedestrian Bridge, Town of Ajax, Regional Municipality of Durham, Carruthers Creek 175 EMPIRE COMMUNITIES (2183 LAKESHORE BLVD.) LTD. Lease of
    [Show full text]
  • Protecting Ourfuture Ontario Provincial Plans and Conservation Authorities
    Protecting OurFuture Ontario Provincial Plans and Conservation Authorities March 2015 Greenbelt Plan I Niagara Escarpment Plan I Growth Plan for the Greater Golden Horseshoe I Oak Ridges Moraine Conservation Plan A Healthy & Strong Future For Ontarians Sustainable Ecosystem Benefits Economy Clean, Sustainable Forests, Wetlands, Water, Food, Resilient Water, Soil, Habitat, Environment Plants, Animals Flood Control, & more Healthy People Green spaces, wetlands, forests, moraines, escarpment, Through their watershed planning process, land and the Great Lakes improve water quality, provide drinking management activities, regulatory programs, recreational water, help to prevent flooding and erosion, contribute to opportunities and stewardship initiatives, Conservation our economy, and provide important habitat for wildlife Authorities help to meet the goals and objectives of the and birds. They also help us to connect to Nature. Provincial plans. The Oak Ridges Moraine Conservation Plan, Greenbelt Conservation Authorities do this work in partnership with Plan, Niagara Escarpment Plan, and the Growth Plan for municipalities, the Provincial and Federal governments, the Greater Golden Horseshoe protect important natural landowners, other agencies and many community groups. resources and promote more sustainable growth patterns. Eighteen of Ontario’s 36 Conservation Authorities play a key role in helping to meet the goals and objectives of these plans. Ontario’s Conservation Authorities are watershed management agencies that protect important ecosystems using an integrated watershed management approach. Integrated watershed management means managing upstream activities so that downstream resources are healthy and sustainable. This approach considers economic, social and ecological interests, together, with issues such as climate change impacts or intense urbanization. Balancing economic and social interests with the long- term health of the environment results in smarter, collaborative decisions.
    [Show full text]
  • PROJECT TRACKING – FULL VERSION June, 2018
    CONSERVATION ONTARIO PROJECT TRACKING – FULL VERSION June, 2018 GOVERNMENT RELATIONS Project Lead(s) & Project Description Committee Push for a Provincial Integrated Water Policy K.Gavine (CO) See background note May/01 and Jun/12 and Dec/13 chart. The Walkerton submissions recommend development of a Provincial integrated water policy framework and this need is reiterated wherever appropriate in dealings with the province. CO’s 2011-2015 Strategic Directions reaffirm the commitment to facilitating the development of a provincial water management framework and national water strategy (2.1). Most likely vehicles to further this agenda are implementation of Ontario’s Great Lakes Strategy and the Watershed Management Futures whitepaper. A meeting between CO/CAs and several Ministries has been scheduled for April 9th to discuss the whitepaper. CO staff and CAs met with the ministries of Natural Resources, Environment and Municipal Affairs and Housing on April 9th to discuss the whitepaper. CO agreed to further flesh out the proposed amendments and return to this group for further examination and discussion. Political meetings have also taken place with the Minister Jeffrey (MMAH) on April 24/13, Minister Leal (Rural Affairs) on May 13/13 and Christine Leduce (Policy Advisor – MNR) on June 6/13. Minister Chan (Tourism, Culture and Sport) on July 22/13, Gord Miller (Environmental Commissioner) on July 25/13, Linda Kamerman (Mining and Lands Commissioner) on September 3rd, Laurie Scott (MPP Haliburton, Kawartha Lakes, Brod) on September 12/13, Frank Klees (MPP Newmarket – Aurora) on September 27/13. The CO endorsed Whitepaper working group will continue to identify options for promoting the Whitepaper.
    [Show full text]