Best Practices Guide to Natural Heritage Systems Planning

Ontario Nature’s Greenway Guide Series

Table of Contents

1.0 Introduction ...... 1 1.1 Development of the Guide ...... 4 1.2 The Role of Municipal Land Use Planning ...... 4 1.3 Natural Heritage Systems and Agriculture ...... 6

2.0 Systems-Based Natural Heritage Planning: Rationale ...... 11

3.0 Systems-Based Planning: Principles and Best Practices ...... 15 3.1 Identification, Protection and Restoration of Natural Heritage Systems ...... 19 3.2 Integration of Natural Heritage Systems Planning ..... 45 3.3 Requirements for Environmental Impact Studies ...... 55

4.0 Conclusion ...... 73

Appendix Legislative and Policy Context for Land Use Planning in Southern and Eastern Ontario ...... 74

References ...... 79

Endnotes ...... 81

Figures Figure 1: A Greenway Concept in a Crowded Landscape ...... ii Figure 2: Greenway Connectivity: Slow and Steady ...... iii Figure 3: Ecoregions of Southern and Eastern Ontario ...... 3 Figure 4: Greenbelt Plan, 2005 Schedule 4: Natural Heritage System ...... 8 Figure 5: Flow Paths of the Oak Ridges Moraine Headwaters .. 8 Figure 6: Map of Best Practice Locations ...... 14 Figure 7: Summary of Principles and Best Practices ...... 16

Best Practices Guide to Natural Heritage Systems Planning Figure 1: A Greenway Concept in a Crowded Landscape

SUBDIVISIONS

FORESTS G REE NW A INDUSTRY Y

URBAN CENTRE

AGRICULTURE

PONDS

VALLEY LANDS

WATERWAYS G WETLANDS R E EN WAY

Southern and eastern Ontario was once a lush Carolinian and mixed wood forest with enormous wetland complexes, and cultural and native prairie. In the last 200 years we have seen a dramatic transformation. This landscape is now marked by enormous road networks, major cities, large scale agriculture, and many industrial and commercial activities. Greenway planning is about maintaining, enhancing and restoring livable landscapes in this highly developed region. The Greenway is a systems-based approach to biodiversity conservation, which aims to establish an interconnected web of core natural areas and natural corridors.

Ontario Nature Figure 2: Greenway Connectivity Slow and steady: The Blanding’s vital journey

URBAN AREA ENCROACHING ON FOREST

DANGEROUS ROAD CROSSING

FRAGMENTED WETLANDS AND FOREST

Throughout the year Blanding’s turtles rely on different natural areas including wetlands, rivers, forests and fields. For example, females emerge from wetlands in the spring in search of a suitable area to lay their eggs. Habitat fragmentation and destruction from developments pose a major threat to the Blanding’s turtle. Ron Erwin

Best Practices Guide to Natural Heritage Systems Planning Ontario Nature INTRODUCTION Section 1

atural heritage systems planning is about maintaining, restoring and enhancing ecologically sus- Ntainable and resilient landscapes. It is a strategic approach to addressing biodiversity loss, land use change and the uncertainties of climate change so that we always have clean air, clean water and a rich diversity of plant and animal life to sustain present and future generations. Natural heritage systems planning seeks to engage communities and educate citizens about the many benefits that nature provides and about nature’s fundamental place in supporting social and economic health.

The Best Practices Guide to Natural Heritage Systems Planning is a resource designed for municipal planners. It provides leading examples of natural heritage systems policies in approved, adopted or draft municipal Official Plans from across southern and eastern Ontario, highlighting the good work that municipalities are undertaking to identify, preserve, enhance and restore natural heritage systems. The The purpose of this Best Practices strength of the guide lies in its specific, local ex- “ Guide is to assist with policy amples, drawn from a review of over 80 municipal Official Plans. The goal is to share and promote these development as municipalities examples so that municipalities across the province are better positioned to integrate natural heritage review and update their systems planning with other land use planning objec- Official Plans. It is intended tives. to stimulate and facilitate Natural heritage systems planning goes beyond a features-based approach to natural heritage planning. It innovative, systems-based policy recognizes the inadequacy of protecting a particular development. woodland, river, wetland or natural area in isolation. Instead, it is premised on identifying Greenways – spatially and functionally interconnected” systems of core natural features, corridors and buffers – so that the benefits they provide can be restored, enhanced or protected.

These benefits, often referred to as ecosystem services, are vital to human well-being and to the health and safety of our communities. They include flood control, soil retention, water purification, improved air quality, pollination, climate change mitigation and the provision of wildlife habitat, forest and freshwater foods, and places for outdoor recreation and activities.

Anne & Peter Macdonald Best Practices Guide to Natural Heritage Systems Planning Section 1 functions tocontinue.” working landscapesthatenableecological areas that support hydrologic functions, and the potentialtoberestored toanaturalstate, features, landsthathavebeenrestored orhave conservation reserves, othernaturalheritage and areas, federalandprovincial parksand systems canincludenaturalheritagefeatures of indigenousspecies,andecosystems.These diversity, naturalfunctions,viablepopulations essary tomaintainbiologicalandgeological and supportnaturalprocesses whichare nec- vide connectivity(attheregional orsitelevel) tures andareas, andlinkagesintendedtopro- as “asystemmadeupofnaturalheritagefea- The province definesanaturalheritagesystem Resources’ Natural Heritage Reference Manual, es andexpertise. While therearetoolsto assist municipalities, such astheMinistry ofNatural Many municipalities struggle with natural heritage systems planningbecause ofalack ofresourc in southernandeastern Ontario 6Eand7E). (Ecoregions ment. wetlands andmorethan99percent ofits native grasslands have beenlost toclearing anddevelop- Since European settlement, approximately 80percent of theregion’s woodlands, 72 percent ofits provide. increased pressure ontheremainingnatural heritage features andsystems andthebenefitsthey cent toreach 17.7 millionby 2031. Canada millionpeoplein2011),andits (12.5 population isexpectedtogrow by morethan40per- residential development andothermajor industries. It isalsothemost heavily populated areain region supports agriculture, manufacturing, aggregate extraction, commercialforestry, expanding urban centres, most productive agricultural landandmost biologically diverse ecosystems. The This Practices Best Guidefocusesonsouthernandeastern Ontario, hometotheprovince’s largest , with atargetStrategy date of2015. systems plansat themunicipal level isalsooneofthetargets identified inOntario’s Biodiversity southern andeastern Ontario protectedforconservation, novative, systems-based policydevelopment. municipalities review andupdate theirOfficial Plans. It isintended to stimulatefacilitate and in rather thanpolicydevelopment. ThePractices purposeofthisBest Guideistoaddress thisgap as Natural HeritageSystem 4 As aresult, thediversity ofplant andanimallifehasalsodeclined. With only 3.5percent of 1 3 With population growth, development isintensifying, putting 10

11 most ofthesetoolsfocusontechnical information the region recommended asystems-based approach across protection forsometime, only since2005has it While theProvince hasrequired natural heritage natural heritage andthebenefits it provides. level, municipalities play akey roleinprotecting As regulators theprimary oflanduseat thelocal throughout theGreenbelt and extremeweather events. change, such asdrought, floods,insectinfestations associated with theanticipated impacts ofclimate ical component ofstrategies tomeetthechallenges life ofwhich humans areapart.It willalsobeacrit biodiversity –theintricate andwondrous web of be akey mechanism forrestoring andsustaining requirement toidentify natural heritage systems Policy Statement which (PPS), include anew strengthened in2014with changes totheProvincial 7 9 (and required The development ofnatural heritage 5 natural heritage systems planningwill such anapproach 8 ). This policyregimewas 6 Ontario Nature - - - Figure 1. Natural Heritage Protection Line

! ! Northern limit of Ecoregions* 5E, 6E and 7E for the purposes of policies under 2.1

Northern limit of Ecoregions* 6E and 7E for the purposes of policies under 2.1

Ecoregions* 6E and 7E for the purposes of policies under 2.1

Notes:

* "Crins, W.J. 2002. Ecozones, Ecoregions, and Ecodistricts of Ontario. Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources. Prepared for Ecological Land Classification Working Group."

0 100 200 Km lN

KENORA

PICKLE LAKE

RED L AKE MOOSONEE

EAR FAL LS

SIO UX LOOKOUT KENORA

MACHIN DRYDEN COCHRANE

GREENSTONE

SIO UX NARROWS- NESTOR FALLS THUNDER BAY

HEARST MAT TICE- VAL CÔTÉ

IGNACE VAL OPASATI KA RI TA- LAKE OF HART Y THE WOODS

KAPUSKASI NG MOONBEAM

FAUQ UIER- SM OOTH ST RICKL AND RO CK FAL LS HO RNEPAYNE CO CHRANE

DAWSON MORLEY CHAPPLE MANITOUWADGE Figure 3: Ecoregions of Southern and Eastern Ontario RAINY RI VER RAINY RIVER NI PIG ON LA RED ROCK EM O VALLEE ALBERTONFORT ATI KOKAN FRANCES The area referred to as southern and eastern Ontario encompasses Ecoregions 6E and 7E, roughly south of the

DO RION SCHREIBER TERRACE BAY MARATHO N IROQUOIS FAL LS SHUNIAH Canadian Shield but including the Frontenac Arch. With respect to provincial natural heritage policies, this region

BLACK TERRACE RI VER- BAY WHIT E MAT HESON CO NMEE RI VER is treated somewhat differently fromTIM MINS other parts of Ontario. See, for example, the Provincial Policy Statement THUNDER OLIVER BAY O'CO NNO R PAIPO ONGE

GILLIES (2014), section 2.1.3, which requires the identification of natural heritage systems in Ecoregions 6E and 7E. KIRKLAND NEEBING DUBREUILVILLE LAKE MCGARRY NEEBING GAUT HIER

LARDER LAKE

CHAM BERLAIN WAWA MATACHEWAN ENGL EHART

CHARLTO N EVANT UREL CHAPLEAU AND DACK ARM ST RONG BRETHOUR JAM ES HI LLIARD THORNLOE CASEY HARLEY KERNS ALGOMA HARRIS HUDSON TEMISKAMING TEMISKAM ING SUDBURY SHORES

CO BALT

CO LEMAN

! LAT CHFORD ! !

TEMAGAMI

! ! !

! !

! ! !

GREATER !

SUDBURY

! ! MARKSTAY-

SAULT ! WARREN

ST E.

! PRINCE MARIE !

MACDONAL D, WEST MAT TAWAN MEREDIT H ! NO RT H

ELL IOT NI PISSING MAT TAWA AND ABERDEEN BAY ADDIT IONAL LAKE ! ST.- PAPINEAU- PLUM MER BLI ND NAIRN AND CALVIN CAM ERON LAI RD ! CHARLES EAST BONF IELD HEAD, JOHNSON ADDIT IONAL RI VER HYM AN FERRIS CL ARA AND TARBUT T BALDWIN MARIA AND TARBUTT BRUCE DEEP CALL ANDER ADDIT IONAL MINES HURO N SABLES- RI VER ST. THESSALON SHORES THE NORTH SPANISH ESPANOLA HI LTON SPANISH RI VERS JOSEPH SHORE FRENCH CHI SHOL M LAURENT IAN BEACH NIPISSING RI VER HI LLS HI LTON NI PISSING PRESCOTT JOCELYN KIL LARNEY POWASSAN PETAWAWA PEMBROKE AND RUSSEHLAWLKESBURY ALF RED AND EAST NO RT HEAST ERN LAURENT IAN CHAM PLAIN MACHAR VALLEY PLANTAGENET HAWKESBURY MANITOULI N AND WHIT EWATER GORE THE ISLANDS PARRY SOUND SOUT H REGIO N BAY RI VER CO CKBURN JOLY KIL LALOE, ISL AND GORDON / BARRIE ISL AND SUNDRIDGE HAGARTY NO RT H ALGONA CL ARENCE- BIL LINGS AND WIL BERF ORCE RO CKL AND NO RT H ST RONG RI CHARDS HO RT ON THE GLENGARRY BURPEE NATIO N AND M ILLS KEARNEY RENF REW MAGNET AWAN ARM OUR MCNAB- MANITOULIN WHIT EST ONE BURK'S BRAESIDE ARNPRIOR CASSEL MAN CENT RAL ASSIGINACK MADAWASKA BONNECHERE FAL LS SOUT H ADM ASTO N/ MANITOULI N THE VALLEY VALLEY ARCHIPELAGO RYERSO N ALG ONQUIN BROM LEY RUSSELL S SOUT H TEHKUM MAH A GLENGARRY PERRY NO RT H MISSI SSIPPI OTTAWA D RENFREW MILL S ST ORMONT N MCKEL LAR MCMURRICH- U ER Y MONT EIT H ALG ONQUIN GREAT D R MCDOUGALL MADAWASKA , NO RT HEAST ERN CARLI NG LAKE HI GHLANDS BRUDENELL, NO RT H STOUT H R CO RNWALL MANITOULI N AND LYNDOCH CARLET ON N A OF BAYS HASTI NG S DUNDAS ST ORMONT THE ISLANDS ANDRAGLAN PLACE O G PARRY HI GHLANDS SEGUIN HUNT SVIL LE LANARK M N SOUND CARLO W/ LANARK BECKWI TH R LE MAYO HI GHLANDS OSOUT H NO RT H T G ADDINGT ON MONTAGUE S DUNDA S DYSART ET AL HI GHLANDS DRUM MOND/ GRENVILL E D THE N NO RT H SM ITHS ARCHIPELAGO MUSKOKA L NO RT H ELM SLEY A BANCROFT FAL LS MUSKOKA E FRONT ENAC EDWARDSBURGH/ HALIBURTON PERTH LAKES N MERRICKVILL E- CARDINAL FARADAY N TAY WO LFORD GEO RGIAN BAY HI GHLANDS AUGUSTA BRACEBRIDGE O VALLEY EAST NO RT HERN MINDEN LIMERICK X FRONTENAC PRESCOTT BRUCE HI LLS LEEEDLI ZSABE T HTOWN- PENINSULA WO LLAST ON A CENT RAL KIT LEY TUDOR N FRONT ENAC WESTPORT AND GRAVENHURST NO RT H AND D CASHEL KAWART HA RI DEAU GRAETHENNSVILBROLCKEVILLE A LAKES GALWAY- D FRONT OF SOUT H CAVENDISH PENETANG UISHENE AND HARVEY HASTINGS D YONG E BRUCE MARMORA HAVEL OCK- I PENINSULA MIDLAND AND L AKE N SOUT H LEEDS AND BELM ONT- MADOC TWEED TINY TAY SEVERN FRONT ENAC THE THOUSAND METHUEN G ISL ANDS RAM ARA T GEO RGIAN O ORILLIA ST ONE BLUF FS N ORO- KAWART HA CENT RE MILL S MEAF ORD PETERBDOOUROR- OUGH GANANOQUE MEDONTE LAKES DUM MER HASTI NG S OWEN SM ITH- ST IRLING- WASAG A SOUND ENNISMO RE- RAWDON KINGST ON CO LLINGWOO D BEACH SPRIINMGWCAT EOR E LAKEFI EL D ASPHODEL - TYENDINAGA GREATER LOYALIST THE BLUE NO RWO OD TRENT FRONT ENAC NAPANEE ARRAN- MOUNTAINS HI LLS ISL ANDS PETERBOROUGH BELLEVILL E ELDERSLIE CL EARVIEW BARRIE BROCK SAUGEEN QUINTE DESERONTO CHATSWORTH CAVAN- OTONABEE- SHORES WEST GEO RGINA MONAGHAN SOUT H GREY INNISF IL MONAGHAN HI GHLANDS BRIGHT ON ESSA ALNWICK/ GREY HALDI MAND PRINCE KINCARDINE CRAM AHE MULM UR BRADFORD EAST EDWARD ST BRUCE WE ADJALA- WEST GWILLIM BURY SCUGOG CO UNTY GREY UXBRIDGE BROCKTO N TOSORONT IO GWILLIM BURY HANOVER MELANCT HON PONRT ORHAMTILTHONUMBERLAND NEW SHELBURNE NEWMARKET HO PE TECUMSET H WHIT CHURCH- DURHAM CL ARI NG TON SOUT HGAT E MONO CO BO URG AURORA ST OUFF VI LLE AM ARANTH OSHAWA HURO N- SOUT H PICKERING KINL OSS EAST BRUCE KING WHIT BY LUTHERDUFFERIN YRI COHMRONDK WELL INGTON GRAND AJAX ORANGEVILL E HI LL MARKHAM MINTO NO RT H VALLEY VAUGHAN ASHFI ELD- HO WI CK EAST CO LBORNE- GARAF RAXA PEEL WELLINGTON CALEDON WAWANOHSH UNO RT HON HURO N TORONT O MORRIS- ERIN BRAMPTO N TURNBERRY NO RT H MAPL ET ON CENT RE WELL INGTON GODERI CH PERTH HALT ON HI LLS MISSI SSAUGA GUEL PH/ERAMOSA CENT RAL HURO N HURO N EAST WELL ESLEY WO OLWICH GUEL PH HALTON PERTH MILTO N PERTH OAKVILLE WATERLOO WEST EAST PUSLINCH PERTH BLUEWAT ER WATERKIT CLHEONERO BURLI NG TON WIL MOT CAM BRIDGE ST RAT FORD NO RT H PERTH DUM FRIES NI AGARA- SOUT H SOUT H BLANDF ORD- ON-THE- HURO N ST. EAST BLENHEIM ST. LAKE MARYS ZORRA- HAM ILTON GRIMSBY CATHARINES LUCAN TAVISTOCK LINCOLN BIDDULPH BRANTF ORD WEST WO ODST OCK LAM BTON NO RT H ZORRA LINCOLN NIAGTHAORORLD A SHORES MIDDLESEX BRANT PELHAM NI AGARA WELL AND FAL LS MIDMIDDLESEEX SEX OXFORD INGERSOL L FORT CENT RE NO RWICH WAINFL EET PORT PLYMPTO N- ADELAIDE- SOUT H- HALDI MAND CO LBORNE ERIE WARWICK THAMES CO UNTY POI NT WYOM ING METCALF E WEST LONDON CENT RE OXF ORD EDWARDSARNIA ST RAT HRO Y- LAMBTON CARADOC TILL SO NBURG PETRO LIA BROO KE- NO RFOLK ENNISKILLEN ALVINSTON MALAHIDE CO UNTY Figure 1. Natural HeritSaT. AgYLMER e Protection Line OIL ST. SOUT HWEST THOM AS SPRINGS SOUT HWOLD CENT RAL BAYHAM CL AI R MIDDLESEX ELG IN

DAWN- NEWBURY DUT TON/ DUNWICH EUPHEMIA ELGIN WEST ! ! Northern limitE LG IoN f Ecoregions* 5E, 6E and 7E for the purposes of policies under 2.1

CHATHAM- KENT

WINDSOR LAKESHORE LASALNLTE CUMSEoH rthern limit of Ecoregions* 6E and 7E for the purposes of policies under 2.1 ESSEX AM HERSTBURG KINGSVILL E ESSEX LEAM INGTON Ecoregions* 6E and 7E for the purposes of policies under 2.1 Figure 1. Natural HeriPELtEEage Protection Line

! ! NNorothtersn: limit of Ecoregions* 5E, 6E and 7E for the purposes of policies under 2.1 Northern limit of Ecoregions* 6E and 7E for the purposes of policies under 2.1 E*c o "reCgrioins*, 6 WE a.Jnd. 27E0 0fo2r t.h eE pcuorpzoosnese osf, pEolcicoierse ugnidoenr s2.,1 and Ecodistricts of Ontario. Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources. Prepared for Ecological Land Classification Working Group." Notes:

* "Crins, W.J. 2002. Ecozones, Ecoregions, and Ecodistricts of Ontario. Ontario Ministry 0 100 200 Km of Natural Resources. Prepared for Ecological Land Classification Working Groupl." N

l 0 100 200 Km Source: Ministry of Municipal Affairs and Housing, GovernmentN of Ontario.

Best Practices Guide to Natural Heritage Systems Planning

KENORA

PICKLE LAKE

RED L AKE MOOSONEE

EAR FAL LS

PICKLE LAKE

RED L AKE MOOSONEE

SIO UX LOOKOUT KENORA

MACHIN DRYDEN COCHRANE EAR FAL LS GREENSTONE

SIO UX NARROWS- NESTOR FALLS THUNDER BAY

HEARST MAT TICE- VAL CÔTÉ IGNACE

VAL OPASATI KA RI TA- LAKE OF HART Y THE WOODS

KAPUSKASI NG MOONBEAM

FAUQ UIER- SM OOTH ST RICKL AND RO CK FAL LS HO RNEPAYNE CO CHRANE

DAWSON MORLEY CHAPPLE RAINY MANITOUWADGE RI VER RAINY RIVER NI PIG ON LA RED ROCK EM O VALLEE ALBSEIROTOUNXFORT ATI KOKAN LOOKFORAUNTCES KENORA DO RION SCHREIBER TERRACE BAY MARATHO N IROQUOIS FAL LS SHUNIAH

MACHIN BLACK DRYDEN TERRACE COCHRANE RI VER- BAY WHIT E MAT HESON RI VER CO NMEE TIM MINS GREENSTONE THUNDER OLIVER BAY PAIPO ONGE SIO UX O'CO NNO R NARROWS- NESTOR FALLS GILLIES KIRKLAND THUNDER BAY NEEBING DUBREUILVILLE LAKE MCGARRY NEEBING GAUT HIER

LARDER HEARST LAKE MAT TICE- VAL CÔTÉ

IGNACE CHAM BERLAIN WAWA VAL MATACHEWAN ENGL EHART OPASATI KA RI TA- LAKE OF HART Y CHARLTO N EVANT UREL THE WOODS CHAPLEAU AND DACK ARM ST RONG BRETHOUR KAPUSKASI NG JAM ES HI LLIARD MOONBEAM THORNLOE CASEY HARLEY ALGOMA KERNS FAUQ UIER- SM OOTH HARRIS ST RICKL AND HUDSROON CK FALTLESMISKAM ING TEMISKAMING SHORES HO RNEPAYNE SUDBURY CO BALT CO CHRANE CO LEMAN

DAWSON MORLEY CHAPPLE

RAINY MANITOUWADGE ! LAT CHFORD RI VER !

NI PIG ON RAINY RIVER ! LA RED ROCK EM O VALLEE

ALBERTONFORT ATI KOKAN

FRANCES TEMAGAMI

! SCHREIBER ! !

DO RION !

TERRACE BAY ! MARATHO N IROQUOIS

FAL LS

SHUNIAH !

! !

! BLACK

TERRACE ! RI VER- BAY WHIT E ! MAT HESON

RI VER GREATER

CO NMEE SUDBURY TIM MINS ! ! MARKSTAY-

THUNDER SAULT ! WARREN ST E.

! PRINCE ! OLIVER BAY MARIE MACDONAL D,

WEST MAT TAWAN PAIPO ONGE MEREDIT H ! NO RT H

O'CO NNO R AND ABERDEEN ELL IOT NI PISSING BAY MAT TAWA ADDIT IONAL LAKE ! ST.- PAPINEAU- BLI ND NAIRN AND LAI RD PLUM MER ! CHARLES CALVIN CAM ERON JOHNSON RI VER HYM AN EAST BONF IELD HEAD, GILLIES ADDIT IONAL TARBUT T BALDWIN FERRIS CL ARA AND MARIA KIRKLAND AND TARBUTT BRUCE DEEP DUBREUILVILLE CALL ANDER NEEBING ADDIT IONAL MINES HURO N SABLES- LAKE RI VER ST. SHORES SPANISH ESPANOLA HI LTON THESSALON THE NORTH SPANISH JOSEPH RI VERS FRENCH MCGARRY BEACH SHORE CHI SHOL M NIPISSING LAURENT IAN NEEBING RI VER GAUTHI LILESR HI LTON NI PISSING PRESCOTT JOCELYN KIL LARNEY POWASSAN LARPEDTAEWRAWA LAKE PEMBROKE AND RUSSEHALWLKESBURY ALF RED AND EAST NO RT HEAST ERN LAURENT IAN CHAM PLAIN MACHAR PLANTAGENET HAWKESBURY MANITOULI N AND VALLEY WHIT EWATER GORE THE ISLANDS PARRY SOUND SOUT H BAY REGIO N CO CKBURN RI VER JOLY KIL LALOE, ISL AND GORDON / BARRIE ISL AND SUNDRIDGE CHAM BERLAIHNAGARTY NO RT H ALGONA CL ARENCE- BIL LINGS AND NO RT H ST RONG WIL BERF ORCE RO CKL AND WAWA MATACHEWAN REINCHGALRDEHS ART HO RT ON THE GLENGARRY BURPEE NATIO N AND M ILLS ARM OUR KEARNEY RENF REW MAGNET AWAN CHARLTO N MCNAB- MANITOULIN WHIT EST ONE BURK'S EVANT UREL BRAESIDE ARNPRIOR CENT RAL ASSIGINACK MADAWASKA BONNECHERE CASSEL MAN FAL LS SOUT H AND DACK MCHANAITPOULELI AN U THE VALLEY VALLEY ADM ASTO N/ ARCHIPELAGO RYERSO N ALG ONQUIN BRETHOUR BROM LEY RUSSELL S SOUT H TEHKUM MAH ARM ST RONG A GLENGARRY NO RT H PERRY HI LLIARD MISSI SSIPPI D OTTAWA ST ORMONT JAM ES RENFREW MILL S N MCKEL LAR MCMURRICH- U THORNLOE CASEY GREATER D Y MONT EIT H ALG ONQUIN , R NO RT HEAST ERN MCDOUGALL HARLEY MADAWASKA CARLI NG LAKE HI GHLANDS BRUDENELL, NO RT H STOUT H R CO RNWALL MANITOULI N AND KERNS LYNDOCH CARLET ON DUNDAS N A THE ISLANDS OF BAYS HASTI NG S ANDRAGLAN ST ORMONT ALGOMA PARRY PLACE O G SEGUIN HUNT SVIL LE HI GHLANDS HARRIS M N SOUND CARLO W/ LLANANRKARK E HUDSON BECKWI TH R L MAYO HI GHLANDS OSOUT HG TEMISAKDADMINGINT OGN MONTAGUE NO RT H T DUNDA S DRUM MOND/ S TEMISKDYASARTM ET AIL NG HI GHLANDS GRENVILL E D SUDBURY THE SHORES NO RT H N ARCHIPELAGO MUSKOKA L NO RT H ELM SLEY SM ITHS A BANCROFT MUSKOKA E FRONT ENAC FAL LS EDWARDSBURGH/ HALIBURTON CO BALT PERTH LAKES N MERRICKVILL E- CARDINAL FARADAY N CO LEMAN TAY WO LFORD GEO RGIAN BAY BRACEBRIDGE HI GHLANDS O AUGUSTA

EAST VALLEY LIMERICK NO RT HERN MINDEN X FRONTENAC PRESCOTT

BRUCE HI LLS LEEEDLI ZSABE T HTOWN- PENINSULA WO LLAST ON A KIT LEY ! LAT CHFORD CENT RAL ! N TUDOR WESTPORT AND

GRAVENHURST FRONT ENAC NO RT H AND D CASHEL RI DEAU

KAWART HA GRAETHENNSVILBROLCKEVILLE A LAKES GALWAY- D FRONT OF ! SOUT H CAVENDISH PENETANG UISHENE HASTINGS D YONG E BRUCE AND HARVEY MARMORA PENINSULA MIDLAND HAVEL OCK- I SOUT H LEEDS AND AND L AKE MADOC TWEED N TINY TAY SEVERN BELM ONT- FRONT ENAC THE THOUSAND METHUEN G ISL ANDS RAM ARA T

GEO RGIAN ORILLIA

BLUF FS TEMAGAMI ST ONE ORO- CENT RE N MEAF ORD KAWART HA DO URO- MILL S PETERBOROUGH ! GANANOQUE ! MEDONTE LAKES HASTI NG S OWEN DUM MER ST IRLING- WASAG A SM ITH- SOUND RAWDON KINGST ON CO LLINGWOO D BEACH SPRINGWAT ER ENNISMO RE- ! SIMCOE LAKEFI EL D

ASPHODEL - !

TYENDINAGA GREATER LOYALIST FRONT ENAC THE BLUE NO RWO OD TRENT

NAPANEE ISL ANDS ARRAN- MOUNTAINS HI LLS PETERBOROUGH ! BELLEVILL E ELDERSLIE BARRIE SAUGEEN CL EARVIEW BROCK CHATSWORTH OTONABEE- QUINTE DESERONTO SHORES CAVAN- SOUT H WEST GREY INNISF IL GEO RGINA MONAGHAN MONAGHAN

HI GHLANDS BRIGHT ON

! ESSA ALNWICK/ GREY HALDI MAND KINCARDINE CRAM AHE PRINCE

BRADFORD !

MULM UR EAST EDWARD BRUCE WEST !

ADJALA- WEST GWILLIM BURY SCUGOG ! CO UNTY

GREY UXBRIDGE BROCKTO N TOSORONT IO GWILLIM BURY

HANOVER MELANCT HON PONRT ORHAMTILTHONUMBERLAND NEW ! HO PE SHELBURNE TECUMSET H NEWMARKET SOUT HGAT E WHIT CHURCH- DURHAM CL ARI NG TON ! MONO CO BO URG

AURORA ST OUFF VI LLE HURO N- AM ARANTH OSHAWA SOUT H GREAPTIECKRERING

KINL OSS EAST BRUCE KING SUDBURY WHIT BY

! ! YORK MARKSTAY- LUTHERDUFFERIN RI CHM OND !

! WELL INGTON GRAND AJAX

SAULT ORANGEVILL E HI LL MARKHAM WARREN

MINTO NO RT H VALLEY ST E. ASHFI ELD- EAST VAUGHAN ! PRINCE ! HO WI CK

MARIE CO LBORNE-

MACDONAL D, WELLINGTON GARAF RAXA PEEL WEST MAT TAWAN WAWANOSHH NUO RT HON CALEDON MEREDIT H ! NO RT H

HURO N ELL IOT NI PISSING AND ABERDEEN MORRIS- TORONT O MAT TAWA ERIN BRAMPTO N BAY ADDIT IONAL TURNBERLARKY E MAPL ET ON CENT RE ! NO RT H WELL INGTON ST.- PAPINEAU- GBOLDIENRIDCH PERTH NAIRN AND LAI RD PLUM MER ! CHARLES CALVIN CAM ERON JOHNSON RI VER HYHMALTANON EAST BONF IELD HEAD, ADDIT IONAL HI LLS MISSI SSAUGA HURO N GUEL PH/ERAMOSA FERRIS CL ARA AND TARBUT T CENT RAL BALDWIN MARIA AND TARBUTT BRUCE HURO N EAST DEEP WELL ESLEY WO OLWICH GUEL PH MIHLTOAN LTON ADDIT IONAL MINES HURO N PERTH SABLES- CALL ANDER RI VER ST. THESSALON SHORES THE NORTH PERTH SPANISH ESPANOLA OAKVILLE HI LTON SPANISH WATERLOO JOSEPH SHOWREEST EAST RI VERS PUSLINCH CHI SHOL M LAURENT IAN BEACH FRENCH NIPISSING BLUEWAT ER PERTH KIT CHENER BURLI NG TON WATERLOCAOM BRIDGE RI VER HI LLS HI LTON WIL MOT NI PISSING JOCELYN ST RAT FORD NO RT H PRESCOTT KIL LARNEY POWASSAN PETAWAWA PERTH DUM FRIES NI AGARA- SOUT H SOUT H PEMBROKE HURO N BLANDF ORD- ON-THE- AND RUSSELL ST. EAST ST. LAKE HAWKESBURY MARYS BLENHEIM HAM ILTON GRIMSBY LUCAN ZORRA- CATHARINES ALF RED AND TAVISTOCK LINCOLN LAURENT IAN CHAM PLAIN EAST BIDDULPH NO RT HEABSRATNETRFNORD WEST MACHAR PLANTAGENET HAWKESBURY WO ODST OCK LINCOLN VALLEY LAM BTON NO RT H ZORRA MANITOULI N AND THOROLD WHIT EWATER GORE BRANT NIAGARA SHORES MIDDLESEX THE ISLANDS PELHAM PARRY SOUND SOUT H REGIO N BAY NI AGARA RI VER CO CKBURN WELL AND MIDMIDDLESEEX SEX OXFORD FAL LS JOLY KIL LALOE, ISL AND CENT RE INGERSOL L PORT FORT GORDON / BARRIE ISL AND NO RWICH WAINFL EET SUNDRIDGE HAGARTY NO RT H ALGONA CL ARENCE- PLYMPTO N- ADELAIDE- SOBUILTLHI-NGS HALDI MAND CO LBORNE ERIE AND NO RT H WARWICK THAMES CO UNTY WIL BERF ORCE RO CKL AND POI NT WYOM ING METCALF E WEST ST RONG THE LONDON CENT RE OXF ORD RI CHARDS HO RT ON GLENGARRY EDWARDSARNIA BURPEE NATIO N ST RAT HRO Y- AND M ILLS KEARNEY RENF REW CARADOC TILL SO NBURG ARM OUR MCNAB- LPAETRMO LIBA TON MAGNET AWAN BROO KE- MANITOULNO RIFNOLK WHIT EST ONE BURK'S BRAESIDE ARNPRIOR CASSEL MAN ENNISKILLEN ALVINSTON MALAHIDE CENT RAL CO UNATSYSIGINACK MADAWASKA BONNECHERE FAL LS SOUT H ADM ASTO N/ ST. AYLMER MANITOULI N THE VALLEY VALLEY OIL SOUT HWEST THOM AS ST. BAYHAM ARCHIPELAGO RYERSO N ALG ONQUIN BROM LEY RUSSELL SOUT H SPRINGS MIDDLESEX SOUT HWOLD CENT RAL S CL AI R ELG IN TEHKUM MAH A GLENGARRY PERRY MISSI SSIPPI NO RT H D DAWN- NEWBURY DUT TON/ DUNWICH OTTAWA RENFREW MILL S ST ORMONT N EUPHEMIA MCKEL LAR ELGIN MCMURRICH- U WEST GREATER D Y ELG IN MONT EIT H ALG ONQUIN R MCDOUGALL MADAWASKA , NO RT HEAST ERN CARLI NG LAKE HI GHLANDS BRUDENELL, NO RT H STOUT H R CO RNWALL MANITOULI N AND LYNDOCH CARLET ON N A OF BAYS HASTI NG S DUNDAS ST ORMONT THE ISLANDS ANDRAGLAN PLACE O G PARRY HI GHLANDS SOUND SEGUIN HUNT SVIL LE LANARK M N CHATHAM- CARLO W/ LANARK BECKWI TH R E KENT L MAYO HI GHLANDS OSOUT H NO RT H T G ADDINGT ON MONTAGUE S DUNDA S DYSART ET AL HI GHLANDS DRUM MOND/ GRENVILL E D THE N NO RT H SM ITHS WINDSOR ARCHIPELAGO MUSKOKA L NO RT H ELM SLEY A LAKESHORE BANCROFT FAL LS MUSKOKA E FRONT ENAC EDWARDSBURGH/ LASALLTE CUMSEH HALIBURTON PERTH LAKES N MERRICKVILL E- CARDINAL FARADAY N ESSEX TAY WO LFORD AM HERSTBURG GEO RGIAN BAY HI GHLANDS AUGUSTA KINGSVILL E BRACEBRIDGE O VALLEY ESSEX LEAM INGTON EAST NO RT HERN MINDEN LIMERICK X FRONTENAC PRESCOTT BRUCE HI LLS LEEEDLI ZSABE T HTOWN- PENINSULA WO LLAST ON A CENT RAL KIT LEY TUDOR N FRONT ENAC WESTPORT AND GRAVENHURST NO RT H AND D CASHEL KAWART HA RI DEAU GRAETHENNSVILBROLCKEVILLE A LAKES GALWAY- PELEE D FRONT OF SOUT H CAVENDISH PENETANG UISHENE AND HARVEY HASTINGS D YONG E BRUCE MARMORA HAVEL OCK- I PENINSULA MIDLAND AND L AKE N SOUT H LEEDS AND BELM ONT- MADOC TWEED TINY TAY SEVERN FRONT ENAC THE THOUSAND METHUEN G ISL ANDS RAM ARA T GEO RGIAN O ORILLIA ST ONE BLUF FS N ORO- KAWART HA CENT RE MILL S MEAF ORD PETERBDOOUROR- OUGH GANANOQUE MEDONTE LAKES DUM MER HASTI NG S OWEN SM ITH- ST IRLING- WASAG A SOUND ENNISMO RE- RAWDON KINGST ON CO LLINGWOO D BEACH SPRIINMGWCAT EOR E LAKEFI EL D ASPHODEL - TYENDINAGA GREATER LOYALIST THE BLUE NO RWO OD TRENT FRONT ENAC NAPANEE ARRAN- MOUNTAINS HI LLS ISL ANDS PETERBOROUGH BELLEVILL E ELDERSLIE CL EARVIEW BARRIE BROCK SAUGEEN QUINTE DESERONTO CHATSWORTH CAVAN- OTONABEE- SHORES WEST GEO RGINA MONAGHAN SOUT H GREY INNISF IL MONAGHAN HI GHLANDS BRIGHT ON ESSA ALNWICK/ GREY HALDI MAND PRINCE KINCARDINE CRAM AHE MULM UR BRADFORD EAST EDWARD BRUCE WEST ADJALA- WEST GWILLIM BURY SCUGOG CO UNTY GWILLIM BURY UXBRIDGE BROCKTO N GREY TOSORONT IO HANOVER MELANCT HON PONRT ORHAMTILTHONUMBERLAND NEW SHELBURNE NEWMARKET HO PE TECUMSET H WHIT CHURCH- DURHAM CL ARI NG TON SOUT HGAT E MONO CO BO URG AURORA ST OUFF VI LLE HURO N- AM ARANTH OSHAWA SOUT H PICKERING KINL OSS BRUCE EAST KING WHIT BY LUTHERDUFFERIN YRI COHMRONDK WELL INGTON GRAND HI LL AJAX ORANGEVILL E MARKHAM MINTO NO RT H VALLEY ASHFI ELD- VAUGHAN HO WI CK EAST CO LBORNE- GARAF RAXA PEEL WAWANOSH WELLINGTON CALEDON HNUO RT HON HURO N TORONT O MORRIS- ERIN BRAMPTO N TURNBERRY NO RT H MAPL ET ON CENT RE WELL INGTON GODERI CH PERTH HALT ON HI LLS MISSI SSAUGA GUEL PH/ERAMOSA CENT RAL HURO N HURO N EAST WELL ESLEY WO OLWICH GUEL PH HALTON PERTH MILTO N PERTH OAKVILLE WATERLOO WEST EAST PUSLINCH PERTH BLUEWAT ER KIT CHENER BURLI NG TON WATERLOCAOM BRIDGE WIL MOT ST RAT FORD NO RT H PERTH DUM FRIES NI AGARA- SOUT H SOUT H BLANDF ORD- ON-THE- HURO N ST. EAST BLENHEIM ST. LAKE MARYS ZORRA- HAM ILTON GRIMSBY CATHARINES LUCAN TAVISTOCK LINCOLN BIDDULPH BRANTF ORD WEST WO ODST OCK LAM BTON NO RT H ZORRA LINCOLN NIAGTHAORORLD A SHORES MIDDLESEX BRANT PELHAM NI AGARA WELL AND FAL LS MIDMIDDLESEEX SEX OXFORD INGERSOL L FORT CENT RE NO RWICH WAINFL EET PORT PLYMPTO N- ADELAIDE- SOUT H- HALDI MAND CO LBORNE ERIE WARWICK THAMES POI NT WYOM ING METCALF E WEST CO UNTY LONDON CENT RE OXF ORD EDWARDSARNIA ST RAT HRO Y- CARADOC TILL SO NBURG LPAETRMO LIBA TON BROO KE- NO RFOLK MALAHIDE ENNISKILLEN ALVINSTON CO UNTY ST. AYLMER OIL SOUT HWEST THOM AS ST. SOUT HWOLD CENT RAL BAYHAM SPRINGS MIDDLESEX CL AI R ELG IN

DAWN- NEWBURY DUT TON/ DUNWICH EUPHEMIA ELGIN WEST ELG IN

CHATHAM- KENT

WINDSOR LAKESHORE LASALLTE CUMSEH ESSEX AM HERSTBURG KINGSVILL E ESSEX LEAM INGTON

PELEE Section 1 tion, wastetreatment andnutrientcycling). of otherecosystemservices,e.g.,soilforma- supporting (servicesnecessaryforproduction (e.g., recreation, aestheticsandeducation), climate, disease and flood regulation), cultural fuel and genetic resources), regulating (e.g., follows: provisioning (e.g.,food,fresh water, Ecosystem serviceshavebeencategorizedas developed andincorporated into municipal Official Plans insouthernandeastern Ontario. Environmental Commissioner; themap summarizes thegeneral status ofnatural heritage systems tice examples. Additional guidancecamefromamap inthe2010/2011 annual reportofOntario’s side theGreenbelt, recommendations fromplanningexpertsguided theidentification ofbest prac Greenbelt Plan, asignificant number ofexamples camefrom theGreenbelt areaofjurisdiction.Out across southernandeastern Ontario. Sincenatural heritage systems planningisrequired under the To identify best practice examples, Ontario Nature reviewed over 80municipal Official Plans from Natural Heritage DiscussionGroup. sity intheCity Workshop (March 2013 2012 andNovember 2013 obtained feedback during presentations at theA.D. Latornell Conservation Symposium (November of theinformation andits relevance and usability forplanners.For broader input, Ontario Nature opment oftheguide, including insight onrelevant examples, interpretation ofthepolicies,accuracy ministries andotherorganizations. Many oftheseexpertsprovided guidancethroughout thedevel- practitioners representing municipal planningdepartments, conservation authorities, provincial with planningexpertsfromacross southernandeastern Ontario. These expertsincluded planning Natural Heritage Reference Manual andotherrelevant literature, ciples through anexamination ofprovincial policiesandplans,theMinistry ofNatural Resources’ ning principles, each illustrated with best practice examples. Ontario Nature established theseprin The Practices Best GuidetoNatural Heritage Systems Planning isorganized according tosystems plan 1.1 DevelopmentoftheGuide going biodiversity loss. communities ofchallenges intheface associated with growth, development, climate change andon that progressive natural heritage systems policiesarevital ifwe hopetoachieve healthy, sustainable ever, isnoeasy task formunicipalities. It requires broad community support andanunderstanding and healthbenefitsthat natural features and systems provide. Achieving such an outcome, how environments, ensuring that development does notcompromise theecological,cultural,economic vincial policy. Ideally, theseplansrecognizethe inter-relationship between thenatural andbuilt municipal planning. Municipal Official Plans setthedirectionforlanduse, in accordance with pro- Ecosystem Services ), theICLEILivable Cities Forum (November 2012)andtheICLEIBiodiver- 2 ), andtotheSouthCentral Ontario Conservation Authorities directly influenced by andlargely managed through and ensuing development willbeaccommodated are southern andeastern Ontario. How andwhere growth There aremany demands onthelandsandwaters of Planning 1.2 TheRoleofMunicipalLandUse knowledge oftheexamples. instances, thereviewers were plannerswith direct the principles andbest practice examples. In many sive peerreview by planningexpertsfurtherrefined 12 andthrough extensive consultation Ontario Nature 13 Exten ------Land use planning at the municipal level enables communities to outline their vision for the future with respect to growth, development, land use and community well-being. It is a values-based exercise intended to recognize the inter-relationship among environmental, economic and social factors. The process and framework are set out in Ontario by the Planning Act. Under this legislation, the PPS provides further direction on a variety of provincial interests, such as:

• the protection of ecological systems including natural areas, features and functions; • the protection of the agricultural resources of the province; • the conservation and management of natural resources; • the conservation of water; • the orderly development of safe and healthy communities; • the provision and distribution of recreational facilities; • the appropriate location of growth and development; and • the economic well-being of the province and its municipalities.14 All of these interests are connected, and the establishment of healthy and sustainable natural heritage systems directly contributes to achieving provincial goals and objectives related to these interests.

The PPS requires that natural heritage features and areas be protected for the long term. To that end, it sets out some restrictions on development that vary from outright prohibitions to demon- strating that there will be no negative impact on natural features or their ecological functions. In terms of systems-based planning, the PPS also recommends that:

The diversity and connectivity of natural features in an area, and the long-term ecological function and biodiversity of natural heritage systems, should be maintained, restored or, where possible, improved, recognizing linkages between and among natural heritage features and areas, surface water features and ground water features.15

It goes further to require the maintenance of these linkages to protect, improve or restore the quality and quantity of water.16

In some parts of the province, broader land use plans exist to further guide municipalities in meeting specific provincial priorities. In southern Ontario, these plans have been developed in response

Best Practices Guide to Natural Heritage Systems Planning Margaret Bourne “ Section 1

ties andinElginCounty. These Greenway systems ofcorenatural areas andpotential connecting playedfarmers an important rolein designing andmapping Greenways coun inGreyandBruce working with conservation groups like Ontario Nature andthe CarolinianCanada Coalition, Such co-operation andleadership are already evident inmany partsoftheprovince. For example, mutually exclusive. systems andmaintain linkages. Protectingtheenvironment andproducing fooddo notneedtobe and zoningbylaws) willhelptoavoid conflict,foster co-operation, improve the quality ofnatural for agricultural use, forthelongterm.Appropriate planningforbothinterests (inOfficial Plans (2014)protectsnaturalThe features PPS and theirfunctions,aswell asprimeagricultural areas Canadian Shield. landscape,the rural andnearly alloftheprovince’s primeagricultural landsarelocated below the tant andunique consideration insouthernOntario. Agriculture isthepredominant landuseon The inter-relationship between protectingnatural systems andagricultural landuseisanimpor- 1.3 NaturalHeritageSystemsandAgriculture features. water features andground water heritage features andareas, surface between andamongnatural improved, recognizing linkages restored or, where possible, systems, shouldbemaintained, and biodiversityofnaturalheritage the long-termecologicalfunction natural features inanarea, and The diversityandconnectivityof plans include: theNiagara Escarpment Plan (2005), urban boundaries,protectnatural heritage andagricultural land,anddirectgrowth. Specific to thegrowth pressure feltwithin theGreater Golden Horseshoe, inanattempt toestablish firm input fromthepublic andkey stakeholders andmust beadopted by anelectedmunicipal council. that willguide landuse, conservation, development andgrowth. They arepreparedwith extensive for its futurethrough theestablishment ofgoals andobjectives, landusedesignations, andpolicies Within Ontario’s landuseplanningregime, municipal Official Plans setouta municipality’s vision the Lake SimcoeProtectionPlan (2009) –theseareexplainedinmoredepth intheAppendix. (2002), theGreenbelt Plan (2005),theGrowth Plan fortheGreater Golden Horseshoe and (2006) ” hydrological systems that sustain us. the protectionandrestoration ofthenatural and opment approval processesadequately address that municipal landusemanagement anddevel- Greenway approach willbeessential toensuring effective natural heritage policiesthat embody a natural heritage inOntario. Comprehensive and tal component ofthe policiesintended toprotect Municipal Official Plans thereforerepresent avi and otherprovincial landuseplans,ifapplicable. and theyinturnmust beconsistent with thePPS tion andguidancethat Official Plans provide, municipal decisions must comply with thedirec site plancontrol andlanddivision processes.All planning instruments, such aszoningbylaws, Official Plans provide theframework forother 17 theOakRidges Moraine Conservation Plan Ontario Nature - - - Best Practices GuidetoNaturalHeritage SystemsPlanning Exchange isunder development. cies Act, 2007, forexample, aSpeciesat Risk Benefits habitat forwildlife. Under Ontario’s Endangered Spe- impacts ofdevelopment by creating orenhancing tunity, whereby landowners arepaidtooffsetthe Biodiversity offsettingisanotheremerging oppor- production, including andreducing erosion. retainingtopsoil floodingandsoil sites areshowing that environmentally focusedactivitiesfarm canalsoproduce anetbenefitfor provides financialincentivesfarmers forproducing ecosystem to ( services County, counties GreyandBruce andtheUnited Counties ofStormont, DundasandGlengarry, example, Alternative LandUse (ALUS), Services currently beingpilotedinNorfolk County, Elgin towildlifehabitat.parcels offarmland Fortunately, anumber ofopportunities areemerging. For for ecosystem canaddress services financialbarrierstorestoring wetlands orconverting selected tices that do andto promote theiradoption. The introduction ofprogramsthat provide payment loss andfragmentation orleaching nutrients), ofsoil it isimportant torecognizeandvalue prac While practices do allfarming notequally benefittheenvironment (e.g., theymay result inhabitat and do complement natural heritage protection. tem healthgenerally, highlighting an important opportunity toconsider how agricultural landscan ally. ecosystem ofagricultural services landsintheGreenbelt alonewere valued at $329millionannu to foster co-operation. tives, education andrecognition oftheecosystem provide that services farmers forsocietywillhelp cultivate thesupport community ofthefarming fornatural heritage protection. Financial incen Municipalities should beaware ofand,where possible, promotethese andotheropportunities to offsets intheprovince, instruments such asALUS’s Ontario Credit Ecological areindevelopment. Although thereisnotyet amarket forbiodiversity versity offsettingisalsomoving forwardinOntario. owlark, two grassland birdsat risk. Voluntary biodi ers torestore habitat forbobolink andeastern mead mitting requirement, developers arepaying landown tention andwildlifehabitat. over billionannually $1 inecosystem such services aspollination, atmospheric regulation, re- soil Resources in2009estimated that agricultural landsinsouthernandeastern Ontario produced well terms ofecosystem goods Astudy andservices. commissionedby theOntario Ministry ofNatural It isalsoimportant toacknowledge that agricultural landsproduce significant monetary value in planning fornatural heritage protection. corridors were identified toinform decisions about landmanagement, landpurchase andlanduse 31 These studies identify thesignificant contribution of agricultural landsto human andecosys 30 In aseparate study conducted by theDavid SuzukiFoundation, the 32 Already, asaper- - - - which represent onlyminimumstandards. Official PlanscangobeyondPPSpolicies, Regarding natural heritage policies, municipal respect tolanduseandmanagement. expresses thevaluesofthatcommunitywith fundamentally thecreation ofacommunityand tent with provincial legislation andpolicies, it is While amunicipalOfficial Planmustbeconsis- Official Plans Official alus.ca ). Demonstration - - - - 18

Section 1 Section 1 • • • objectives are: and future generations. Its main and accesstonature for present wildlife habitat,localfoodsources safeguarding cleanair, clean water, cultural landandruralsettlements, tects abandofnaturalareas, agri- for theregion. Itpermanently pro- ofsustainability the cornerstone and water. TheGreenbelt Planis passes 720,000hectares ofland land County, theGreenbelt encom- ton to Rice Lake in Northumber Peninsula, andeastward from Hal- from NiagaratothetipofBruce scape scale.Stretching northward ral heritageplanningataland- systems-based approach to natu- Ontario’s Greenbelt illustrates a A systems-basedapproach Ontario’s Greenbelt: uses. ism, recreation andresource munities, agriculture, tour ties associated with rural com - of economicandsocialactivi- To provide foradiverserange Ontario willbeorganized; and urbanization insouth-central framework around whichmajor and thatformtheenvironmental ecological andhumanhealth source systemsthatsustain natural heritageandwaterre- To permanentlyprotect the land use; agriculture asthepredominant tural landbaseandsupport fragmentation of the agricul- To protect againstthelossand 19 H L u a r D k o U e n

F G F

G e

o B

R r

a g

y i

I a N

Y n G e o B

r a g L

y a i a k ° e - - n O n t a r i o Natural HeritageSystem Figure 4:Greenbelt Plan,2005Schedule4: Moraine Headwaters Figure 5:FlowPathsoftheOakRidges G W B R R N A A O E N R T T F Y E C O B O L R G R K U A U W L N N C E T L T O O E P F Y U O H L O N D R L T D Y U I N F G F T E O R N I N H A M I L T O N H A H L A L T D I O M A N N P D E C O E U L N T Y S I M B C A R O R I E E Y T O O S N R R O I K i L A N m T a G O c k A e o R e A

CAN

U.S AD .A. A L a D k U e R H O A M n t a r i o K A W A R T H A L A K E S © l P s T P e A A S N r n * o e h v a h ro ro f d e O o ca l L f Q o e i vi e a d t t e n t j d e u r 1 u e i i l t g d y i rs t e t i u s: l EG n 0 i a e o ct d a o me c e o f r e n t o n i a e i b i f n o o n so o f rma a n d e o n n ’ n a l d R s rt : f t S U W S R G a . c D s e U Pri Se H b o n h e i EN P t p i a b r g n i o ve a n d T o o a E t t O N P e e p u Ontario Nature u n g su a t t M t u T n s d t i e l l e e r n t n i l a a si e r l E e a So e e a o b d Ontario Nature N r T l d g r n t R z t m k V m r t n i e - g t i e - a a o o o B sp t a e b g a t f e u D d ri a e n i n a o e i R O w so e t e ct n r e . e n a p l e r l u ce n r R a 5 l r i r s n l t n r e 1 a ma O 0 d e O r u ye 9 t e t M A d a 7 s M s: y re rce d U / g n c A E 0 A re l d Mi i G N t d a u u e C se f 5 D a r C H s l r H e a e e AD o s n n n s ri n MT o c e o s c e n a o i d t b i i i ci n o n t ci a a st M u r , (T s y 8 t d c i n h r V * I F n a ry p t p 3 u o N t i p a o i O S e ca h cu e s a t i a r l w r r g m e o p re ct b l O u l l ysi ma a a t n ru f a e K o B Mi n t B i i e g ra R s/ N t si o r i n i a t l S o a o n e p d o a n Vi n t o ry m e T d P e l u s me u yst t e t i f 1 h s s u I e l l u H n y n l l E n 0 A a P 2 t a ra o n ( ry c. d s d 8 t t d U g ca o T e r l i r h l ci a a , e e a e e b u m o R E e M 2 p t s p s r n e r a f i t i 0 e o i i a si e R e ct e a A G B 0 so n A l n s n s g d 5 s B O r t E d r co ri u h e e o e f O c rce e f R H e f i mp u a t ci n h a i f R l L n e t a m s u b e f a i l A O o l r e l t e Pl e e rm G u 2 N l d U t re t 0 a a s) r a f D n n e G ro s t d s. i e t o o m H h n n r F e F b , ro v o o a t a e o h a r p r l d i i d t s p p o ) , s ro re u ma M s n p ci i o n so ri p se r i a st 3 s a u t e ry h 0 b s rce o o mu a o u u s. f l g n d n Mu u d i n i a W ci d ° o ri e n p h t e i a i ci b t s l o l e e i p t a i a e n l s d Created from original map by As the Crow Flies cARTography Schedule 4: Natural Heritage System greenbelt PLAN 2005 Best Practices GuidetoNaturalHeritage SystemsPlanning Best Practices GuidetoNaturalHeritage SystemsPlanning heritage andkeyhydrologic features. tage System,subjecttopoliciesprotecting keynatural mal farmpractices”tocontinuewithintheNatural Heri- cultural, agricultural-related andsecondaryusesnor The planpermits“thefullrangeofexistingandnewagri- ers flowingintotheGreater Toronto Area, andhabitatfor78provincially listedspeciesatrisk. tional inter-relationships betweenthem.…” System are tobe“managedasaconnectedandintegratednaturalheritagesystemgiventhefunc- Area and Protection Area designated under the Niagara Escarpment Plan. Areas within theNatural Natural Linkage Area designated under theOak Ridges Moraine ConservationPlan and theNatural Greenbelt theNaturalHeritageSystembuilduponCore Planpoliciesgoverning Area and knowledges theimportanceofconnecting theGreenbelt tothe larger Great Lakesecosystem. Urban RiverValley amendmentpromotes connectionstotheGreenbelt thevalueofexternal andac- Greenbelt Acttoallowadditionalpubliclandsalong rivervalleycorridorstojointheGreenbelt. This in Halton Region, was the first addition to the Greenbelt. That same month, the Province amended the demonstrate aclearfunctional relationship. InJanuary 2013,Oakville’s Glenorchy ConservationArea, belt, allowingmunicipalities toidentifyproposed expansion areas thatare adjacenttotheGreenbelt or In 2008,theProvince issuedcriteriafor considering requests from municipalitiestoexpandtheGreen- order topreserve theecologicalintegrityofthislandscape. and adjacenttotheGreenbelt topreserve, enhanceandconnectthelarger naturalheritagesystemin system extendfarbeyondthevisiblymappedarea. Itisimportantformunicipalities withlandswithin Much liketheroots ofatree, thefeatures andfunctionsthatunderpintheGreenbelt’s naturalheritage systems: mental inter-relationship betweenagriculturalandnatural Importantly, theGreenbelt Planrecognizes thefunda- system Other strengths oftheGreenbelt Planpoliciesinclude limitingdisturbanceorsitealterationswithinthe sensitive and/orsignificantnaturalfeatures andfunctions,” wetlands, river valleys and forests. This includes areas with “thehighestconcentration of the most Within theGreenbelt, theprotected NaturalHeritage Systemcomprises216,500hectares oflakes, the Greenbelt Planitselfdoes not). encourages municipalitiestoincludenaturalheritagesystemspoliciesinsettlementareas (i.e.,where ing thevastmajority, atover$2.3billionperyear. annually, withthemajorcomponentsofnaturalheritagesystem–forests andwetlands–contribut- by theDavidSuzukiFoundationvaluedGreenbelt’s non-marketecosystemservicesat$2.6billion features, surfaceandgroundwater features andtheirfunctions. Resource System make up the natural system, emphasizing the landscape linkages among natural improve. and practicesthatthisrelationship cancontinueand evolving agriculturalandenvironmental approaches System withintheProtected Countryside.Itisthrough to thelong-termsustainabilityofNaturalHeritage tection. TheAgriculturalSystemistherefore integral facilitated bothenvironmental andagriculturalpro- ic features, andthestewardship ofthesefarmshas also containimportantnaturalheritageandhydrolog - Many ofthefarmswithinthis[Agricultural]system 25 andprovisions toenhancethesysteminlandswhere developmentisoccurring. 28

27 29 23 Together, the Natural HeritageSystemandtheWater 22

- Glenorchy Conservation Area Glenorchy Conservation Top: BirdinginRougePark;bottom: 20 suchastheheadwatersforallmajorriv- 24 26 21 Theplan Astudy

Top: Noah Cole; bottom: B. VanRyswyk, Conservation Halton Section 1 Ontario Nature SYSTEMS-BASED NATURAL HERITAGE PLANNING: RATIONALE Section 2

lanning for the future requires the maintenance, restoration and enhancement of functioning Pand interconnected natural heritage systems. These systems are vital to conserving the strength and resilience of the rich web of life that sustains us. The services that nature provides have been estimated to be worth over $84 billion annually in southern and eastern Ontario.33 Globally, the value has been conservatively estimated at $33 trillion per year, a number that exceeds the combined GDP of all the world’s economies.34 From a human health perspective alone, research shows that the human connection with nature is fundamental to our physical, mental and social well-being.35

In Ontario, across Canada and around the globe, ongoing biodiversity loss and climate change jeopardize human well-being and the natural world. A Greenway approach to protecting and connecting core natural areas across the landscape is a recognized strategy for addressing these dual crises.37

As argued by the United Nations–appointed Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, it is critical that adaptation strategies maintain or establish linkages among natural areas that allow species to move and adapt as habitat changes. Without such areas, species will be less likely to survive. According to the panel, 20 to 30 percent of the earth’s plants and animals may face extinction without the establishment of interconnected natural areas. The possible intensification of natural disturbances such as fires, floods and droughts will further threaten biological diversity.38

Municipalities have a central role to play in conserving biodiversity, as acknowledged, for example, in Ontario’s Biodiversity Strategy, 2011. The provincial strategy envisions a future “where biodiversity loss is halted and recovery is advanced.”39 It sets out targets that reflect international goals, specifically the Aichi Biodiversity Targets agreed to by the parties to the Convention on Biological

Ron Erwin Best Practices Guide to Natural Heritage Systems Planning Health Benefits of Nature In 2010, Dr. Frances (Ming) Kuo reviewed and summarized the evidence from around the world on the connection between human health and access to the natural world. She described the findings as “remarkable” in their strength, consistency and convergence: the health benefits of being connected with nature are real.36 For example, the social health benefits of “green” environments include: • Stronger neighbourhood social ties; • Greater sense of community; • More mutual trust and willingness to help others; • More positive social interaction; and • Greater shared use of space.

The mental health benefits of access to nature include: • Better cognitive functioning; • More effective “life functioning”; Bobcatnorth • More self-discipline and impulse control; • Greater resilience to stress; and • Greater mental health overall.

The physical health benefits of access to nature include: • Enhanced recovery from surgery; • Higher levels of

Sharron Drummond physical activity; • Improved immune system functioning; and

• Improved health Gord Spence status and independent living skills among older adults.

In contrast, Dr. Kuo also looked at the costs of not having access to nature. It’s an impressive – and alarming – list: • Higher rates of aggression, violence and crime; • More loneliness and sadness; • More stress and anxiety; • Higher rates of clinical depression; • Exacerbated attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD); • Higher rates of childhood obesity; • Higher rates of disease (15 out of 24 categories); and • Higher rates of mortality in younger and older adults.

Left top: Hiking in Ancaster; left middle: never too early to get outside; Ontario Nature left bottom; fishing in Clearview; above: meditating in Halton’s Limehouse

Dennis Dalton Conservation Area Diversity, including Canada, in 2010. Two of these provincial targets are of particular relevance to municipal planning:

1. By 2015, natural heritage systems plans and biodiversity conservation strategies are developed and implemented at the municipal and landscape levels;

2. By 2020, at least 17 percent of terrestrial and aquatic systems are conserved through well-connected networks of protected areas and other effective area-based conservation measures.40

The important role of municipalities in identifying and protecting natural heritage systems is likewise Aichi Biodiversity Target 11 acknowledged federally in Environment Canada’s One of 20 time-bound, measurable targets How Much Habitat Is Enough? This document pro- agreed to by Canada and the other parties to vides a science-based framework and guidelines the Convention on Biological Diversity in Na- for maintaining and enhancing wetland, riparian, goya, Japan, in 2010, Target 11 identifies the forest and grassland habitats south and east of the importance of a systems-based approach to Canadian Shield. Intended to serve as a starting natural heritage protection: “By 2020, at least 17 per cent of terrestrial and inland water, and point for the development of conservation strategies 10 per cent of coastal and marine areas, espe- and natural heritage systems, the framework under- cially areas of particular importance for biodi- lines the need for a systematic approach that “better versity and ecosystem services, are conserved captures the complexity of life and the multiple and through effectively and equitably managed, often unknown linkages that allow species to flour- ecologically representative and well connected ish.”41 Of note is the recommendation to look beyond systems of protected areas and other effec- the boundaries of specific planning units, such as tive area-based conservation measures, and integrated into the wider landscapes and sea- municipalities, to take into account surviving habitat scapes.”43 corridors and to promote linkages across the landscape.42

Healthy, functioning and resilient ecosystems require diversity and connectivity. Just as human communities require connectivity to function effectively and efficiently, natural communities are equally dependent on the interchange of resources; the cycling of water, nutrients and minerals; and the movement of plants and animals among green spaces. Connectivity must accommodate movement that occurs at various scales – both geographically and temporally. These scales range from large, cross-continental annual migrations (e.g., migratory birds) to small seasonal move- ments to meet life-cycle requirements (e.g., amphibian breeding). As climate change alters habitat conditions and the ranges of plant and animal species, connectivity becomes ever more critical. A Greenway approach to natural heritage planning will serve to recreate webs of interconnected habitats to ensure functional linkages among areas of high conservation value. This planning approach represents the most promising option available for addressing habitat loss and fragmentation, the major drivers of biodiversity loss in the heavily developed and populated landscape of southern and eastern Ontario.

Best Practices Guide to Natural Heritage Systems Planning Figure 6: Map of Best Practice Locations  Legend N 1 Windsor 12 Vaughan 2 Lambton 13 York 3 London 14 Georgina 4 Elgin 15 Durham 5 Niagara 16 Ajax 6 Hamilton 17 Kingston 7 Guelph 18 Ottawa 8 Waterloo (city 19 Central Frontenac and region) 20 Simcoe 9 Burlington 21 Clearview 10 Oakville 11 Halton Greenbelt

Ontario Nature Best Practices GuidetoNaturalHeritage SystemsPlanning T BEST PRACTICES PRINCIPLES AND PLANNING: SYSTEMS-BASED with hyperlinks foreasy access tothecorrespondingpages. Figure 7presents anoverview oftheprinciples andexamples, municipal policy. They demonstrate what canandhasbeendone. sion andprovide a starting point forthedevelopment ofstrong impact studies. The examples areintended tostimulate discus heritage systems planning; and requirements forenvironmental restoration ofnatural heritage systems; integration ofnatural organized into three broad groups: identification, protectionand ing andenhancingnatural heritage systems. The principles are innovative andprogressive approaches toprotecting, maintain ples ofbest practices frommunicipal Official Plans toillustrate tems planning. For each principle, we have selected exam his sectionlays outkey principles fornatural heritage sys - - - -

Section Section3 3 Figure 7: Summary of Principles and Best Practices Principle Examples from Examples outside Page municipalities with land the Greenbelt within the Greenbelt, Oak Ridges Moraine or Niagara Escarpment 3.1 Identification, Protection and Restoration of Natural Heritage Systems

3.1.1 Policy should ensure that City of Vaughan: Official Plan City of Waterloo: Official 19 natural heritage inventories/ Consolidation – 3.2.2 Plan Consolidation – 8.2.2 studies are undertaken, updated and maintained Clearview Township: Official Plan– 11.13

3.1.2 Policy should require the Town of Ajax: Official Plan City of Ottawa: Official 21 identification and protection of Consolidation – 1.2, 2.2.1 Plan Consolidation – 2.4.2 core natural heritage features and corridors, and linkages to City of Hamilton: Urban surface water and groundwater Hamilton Official Plan features and functions Consolidation – C2.0, C2.7.4, C2.7.5 3.1.3 Policy should establish a City of Vaughan: Official Plan 26 commitment or reference to Consolidation – 3.2.1 maintaining, improving and restoring the biodiversity and Town of Oakville: Livable long-term ecological function of Oakville Plan – 10.1.1 natural heritage systems 3.1.4 Policy should address and Town of Georgina: Official Township of Central 28 protect features, functions Plan Consolidation – 3.5.2.7 Frontenac: Official Plan and linkages not otherwise Consolidation – 7.5.2 identified in the Official Plan City of Vaughan: Official Plan Consolidation – 3.2.3.2 Clearview Township: Official Plan – 4.1.2.3, 4.1.2.4 3.1.5 Policy should direct that York Region: Official Plan 32 permitted uses take into Consolidation – 2.1.9 account the impact on the natural heritage system, including ecological functions, and should incorporate prohibitions on development and site alteration within the natural heritage system 3.1.6 Policy should require the Halton Region: Regional 33 implementation of natural Official Plan Interim heritage system policies in Consolidation– 118 zoning bylaws and subsequent amendments, as well as in other Clearview Township: Official municipal bylaws Plan – 4.1.2.4, 4.1.5

Ontario Nature 3.1.7 Policy should establish Halton Region: Regional Region of Waterloo: 35 provisions to grow and enhance Official Plan Interim Regional Official Plan the secured and environmentally Consolidation– 118 (7, 8, 9) Consolidation – 7 managed portion of the natural heritage system (e.g., through County of Lambton: conservation easements, Official Plan Consolidation stewardship agreements or – 8.3.1 acquisitions) City of Waterloo: Official Plan Consolidation – 8.2.2 (21) 3.1.8 Policy should require monitoring City of Guelph: Official 38 of the ecological health of the Plan Amendment 42 – natural heritage system 6.1.2, 6.1.10.2.5 3.1.9 Policy should enable Clearview Township: Official 40 biodiversity offsetting (i.e., Plan – 4.1.2.2.1, 4.1.2.2.2 compensatory mitigation) on a net gain basis, but only after Town of Ajax: Official Plan avoidance and mitigation have Consolidation – 5.0 a.o.d.xi been fully addressed, and only if: 1) the impacted biodiversity values have been explicitly measured, 2) the restoration of these values within a reasonable timeframe is demonstrably feasible, and 3) uncertainties and risks have been fully accounted for in the loss-gain calculation (i.e., replacement ratio) 3.1.10 Policy should provide for the Halton Region: Regional City of London: Official 43 involvement of the public and Official Plan Interim Plan Consolidation – non-municipal agencies in the Consolidation – 118 (8) 15.3.5.ii identification of natural heritage features and functions and in City of Hamilton: Urban monitoring activities Hamilton Official Plan Consolidation – C2.12.4 Clearview Township: Official Plan – 4.1.3 3.2 Integration of Natural Heritage Systems Planning

3.2.1 Policy should ensure the City of Hamilton: Urban Region of Waterloo: 45 integration of natural heritage Hamilton Official Plan Regional Official Plan systems planning at multiple Consolidation – C.2.7.1 Consolidation– 7.2, 7.F.1 levels: regional, watershed, subwatershed and/or secondary Simcoe County: Official Plan City of Guelph: Official plan level Draft – 3.11.21 Plan Consolidation – 3.3.2, 6.2.1 3.2.2 Policy should acknowledge Simcoe County: Official Plan City of Windsor: Official 47 the importance of cross- Draft: – 3.8.6 Plan Consolidation – jurisdictional communication 5.3.2.5 and co-operation regarding City of Burlington: Official natural heritage systems Plan Consolidation – Part II, Region of Waterloo: 2.4.1a Regional Official Plan Consolidation – Chapter 7 Halton Region: Regional Official Plan Consolidation– City of Ottawa: Official 118 (10) Plan Consolidation – 2.4

Best Practices Guide to Natural Heritage Systems Planning 3.2.3 Policy should recognize the Halton Region: Regional City of London: Official 51 relationship and synergies Official Plan Consolidation – Plan Consolidation – 15.1 between natural heritage 118 (5) systems and the surrounding County of Lambton: environment, including Official Plan Consolidation agricultural lands, urban areas – 8.3.1 and resource extraction areas City of Ottawa: Official Plan Consolidation – 2.4.5 3.2.4 Policy should recognize the Simcoe County Official Plan 54 socio-economic, cultural and Draft – 3.8.8 ecological values associated with natural heritage features and the services that the natural heritage system provides to the community 3.3 Requirements for Environmental Impact Studies

3.3.1 Policy should require Clearview Township: Official 55 proponents to conduct Plan – 4.1.2.2.1, 4.1.2.2.2 environmental impact studies and demonstrate that through avoidance and mitigation measures, there will be no negative impacts on the natural heritage system 3.3.2 Policy should clearly set out Niagara Region: Regional City of Kingston: Official 57 the requirements for impact Policy Plan Consolidation – Plan Consolidation – assessments, including required 7.B.2.2 6.1.10, 6.1.11 content and analysis Clearview Township: Official City of Guelph: Official Plan – 4.1.2.2.1, 4.1.2.2.2 Plan Consolidation – 6.3.1 3.3.3 Policy should require the Elgin County: Official Plan 64 consideration of the role and Consolidation – D1.3.2 importance of lands adjacent to natural heritage systems, City of London: Official an analysis of the impacts of Plan Consolidation – development proposals, and the 15.3.6 establishment of appropriate City of Waterloo: Official ecological buffers and setbacks Plan Consolidation – 8.2.4 3.3.4 Policy should require that Region of Durham: Regional 68 development proponents Official Plan Consolidation – consult with municipal staff, 14.12.2 environmental advisory committees and/or planning Clearview Township: Official boards prior to submitting an Plan – 4.1.2.2.1 application 3.3.5 Policy should provide for Region of Waterloo: 69 extended and meaningful Regional Official Plan consultation with stakeholders Consolidation – 7.A.14 that may exceed requirements in the Planning Act, particularly City of London: Official where large-scale developments Plan Consolidation – or developments with potential 15.3.9 significant impacts are being considered

Ontario Nature Best Practices GuidetoNaturalHeritage SystemsPlanning tem including features andfunctions. tion, aswell asongoing refinement ofthenatural heritage sys Accurate andupdated inventories provide foraccurate delinea monitoring), andit willguide important planningdecisions. restoration, stewardship efforts,andimpact andeffectiveness objectives andinitiatives (e.g., watershed studies, ecological in thesystem, theinventory cansupport multiple municipal of thesystem andabout features andlinkages tobeincluded heritage system. In providing information about thehealth ground-truthing step inidentifying andprotectinganatural Rationale: Anatural heritage inventory isusually theinitial, 3.1.1 3.1 biodiversity. be effectively evaluated with respecttoecologicalfunctionand policy alsoenables the settingoftargets sothat thesystem can date information andrefinethe system onanongoing basis. This the inventory ofnatural features. It recognizestheneedtoup- of thenatural heritage system andevaluate the completeness of Analysis: This policyprovides forstudies toconfirmthe status function andbiodiversity. or modified,andestablishing targets related toecological identifying elements ofthesystem that needtobeadded of determining thepreciselocation ofnatural features, and completeness oftheNatural System with theintent The City may undertake studies toevaluate thestatus 3.1 Identification, Protection andRestorationofNaturalHeritageSystems 3.1 Identification,Protection of NaturalHeritageSystems Identification, Protection andRestoration updated andmaintained heritage inventories/studiesare undertaken, Principle: Policyshouldensure thatnatural Best Practice:CityofWaterloo 44

- - Examining aspecimeninRougePark *

Noah Cole Section 3 Section 3 Paul Henman Hiking inYork 3.1 Identification, Protection andRestorationofNaturalHeritageSystems 3.1 Identification,Protection * uses. require thislevel ofprotectioncanbedesignated forotherland are provided appropriate protectionand that landsthat do not the risk ofinaccuracies andhelpstoensure boththat features purpose.less oftheirprimary Such anapproach minimizes ing arange ofstudies that provide relevant information regard with appropriate information fromavariety ofsources,includ tinuously re-evaluate andupdate its natural heritage system Analysis: These policiesexpressthecity’s commitment tocon comprehensive review ofthisPlan. is beingachieved. Such areview may becoordinated with a to timemaintain effective natural heritage management To evaluate Vaughan’s natural heritage inventory fromtime Schedule 2ofthisPlan, asappropriate … and update Vaughan’s natural heritage inventory and development applications, andothermeans,tomaintain Environmental Assessments, infrastructuredevelopment, data gathered through land-use planningstudies, It isthepolicyofCouncil…To useenvironmental applications. related Environmental Assessments anddevelopment planning studies, infrastructuredevelopment and of environmental reportingassociated with land-use to updating thisinformation through anongoing process up-to-date information available. Vaughan iscommitted information inSchedule 2represents themost detailed and York Region, theProvince andprivate landowners. The the City, theToronto andRegion Conservation Authority, is anongoing processthat involves co-operation between in natural heritage management. Building aninventory and understanding oftheirfunctionsarethefirst steps A comprehensive inventory ofnatural heritage features Best Practice:CityofVaughan 45

Ontario Nature - - - Best Practices GuidetoNaturalHeritage SystemsPlanning long term. and ecosystem resiliency aremaintained andenhancedover the the hydrologic system isalsoneeded toensure that biodiversity functions that connectthem.Consideration oftheirlinkages to linkages amongnatural heritage features andtheunderlying Rationale: Asystems approach isbasedonunderstanding the 3.1.2 tions priortoincorporation into theOfficial Plan. cation ofthisinformation inthereview ofdevelopment applica decisions. The policyalsoallows fortheconsideration andappli tion sources,helpingtoensure reliable andsupportable planning through awide range ofprocesses,mechanisms andinforma refinement ofthenatural heritage inventory inpartor whole Analysis: This policyprovides forthedevelopment andcontinual applicant. such recommendations inanamendment requested by an applications intheinterim and/or require incorporation of to theoutcomeofsuch studies inconsidering development Planning Act. The municipality may however have regard program pursuant to Section1.6 ofthedocument and…the or asacomponent of theTownship’s regularupdating of such studies by …amendment into theOfficial Plan appropriate, Councilmay incorporate therecommendations Natural Heritage Inventory andManagement Plan …Where interests. These studies might include thecompletion of: …A the Township, orinpartnership with public orprivate sector or partofthemunicipality, andmay beundertaken solely by of themunicipality. Such studies may beundertaken forall transportation, andindustrial/commercial servicing needs focused specifically ontheheritage, recreational, cultural, preparation ofand/or participation instudies/reports to expandClearview’s landusedatabase through the To assist infuturedecision making, Councilmay choose 3.1 Identification, Protection andRestorationofNaturalHeritageSystems 3.1 Identification,Protection groundwater features andfunctions. and corridors,linkagestosurfacewater, and and protection ofcore naturalheritagefeatures Principle: Policyshouldrequire theidentification Best Practice:ClearviewTownship 46 - - - *

Section 3 Section 3 3.1 Identification, Protection andRestorationofNaturalHeritageSystems 3.1 Identification,Protection Ontario Nature's MalcolmBluff Ontario Nature's Shores Nature Reserve Nature Shores * 1. features[.] … features andareas,surface water features andgroundwater recognizing linkages between andamongnatural heritage be maintained, restored, orwhere possible, improved, biodiversity oftheCity’s natural heritage systems shall natural features andthelong-term ecological functionand functions. In thisregard,thediversity andconnectivity of not result innegative impacts onnatural features ortheir govern how landisusedtoensure that development does System Overlay (Schedules L1,L2andL3) andpoliciesthat use designations, in Schedules AandB,theNatural Heritage protected by watershed andotherenvironmental plans,land- The natural heritage system inOttawa isidentified and b. a. they perform: following significant features andthenatural functions The natural heritage system inOttawa comprises the Resources; species, asapproved by theMinistry ofNatural Significant habitat forendangered andthreatened Ministry ofNatural Resources Provincially significant wetlands asidentified bythe Best Practice:CityofOttawa Ontario Nature

J Reaume Best Practices GuidetoNaturalHeritage SystemsPlanning 3.1 Identification, Protection andRestorationofNaturalHeritageSystems 3.1 Identification,Protection j. i. h. g. f. e. d. c. not meetthecriteria forsignificanceintheir own right, between thesignificant features defined above, but may statements ortree conservation reports aslinkages plans, community design plans,environmental impact subwatershed plans,environmental management or environmental studies such as watershed or floodplains that areidentified through planning Forest remnants andnatural corridors such as area; woodlands, wetlands andravines within theurban Urban Natural Features, consisting ofremnant designated onSchedule K; as identified by the Ministry of Natural Resources ScienceAreasofNaturalEarth andScientific Interest identified by the Ministry of Natural Resources; Life ScienceAreasofNatural andScientific Interest as subwatershed studies orsite investigation; and valleylands; or that may beidentified through 3 m;orwithin significant woodlands, wetlands, with slopes exceeding 75% andheights greater than Significant wildlifehabitat foundonescarpments excluding man-made features such aspits andquarries; m, with water present forsomeperiodoftheyear, slopes greater than 15% andalengthofmorethan50 Significant valleylands defined as valleylands with woodlands; Wetlands foundinassociation with significant iii. ii. i. in acontiguous, forested area: woodlands that combine allthreefeatures listed below Significant woodlands ruralareaas defined inthe areas, orareasofgroundwater upwelling; groundwater feature including springs, seepage as ariver, stream, drain,pondorwetland, orany Woodland adjacent toasurfacewater feature such inside theedge ofaforest patch; and Interior forest habitat located morethan100m Mature stands oftrees80years ofage orolder; and Bullfrog

Ron Erwin Section 3 Section 3 3.1 Identification, Protection andRestorationofNaturalHeritageSystems 3.1 Identification,Protection * requirements toenhanceconnectivity andprotectthenatural biodiversity, andusesdirectclear language insetting outits Analysis: Ajax brings together theconceptsofconnectivity and tection effectively within theentire functioningecosystem. ject tothepolicy. This positions natural heritage systems pro- linkages with surfaceandgroundwater features that aresub- It alsoclearly setsoutthenatural heritage features andthe and thefunctionbiodiversity ofnatural heritage systems. to maintain thediversity andconnectivity ofnatural features Analysis: The policyincludes anexplicit requirement (“shall”) protect thenatural heritage system, andsupport biodiversity. connectivity by makingdecisions andtakingactions that shall the Town shall: …enhancetheGreenlandsSystem andits Goals[:] …To protect andenhancethelocalenvironment, its connectionstonatural areasinadjoining municipalities; functions ofthenatural heritage system within theTown, and and enhancement ofthe ecologicalfeatures andecological and watersheds. …Ajax shall: -Require theprotection broader Great Lakes ecosystem inadjoining municipalities throughout themunicipality tointerconnect with the strong, biologically diverse GreenlandsSystem that weaves The Town will,first andforemost, protectandenhancea l. k. habitat. or topographic characteristics, including fish defined moisture,by theirsoil type, soil vegetation springs, andassociated riparian landsthat canbe lakes, seepage areas,recharge/discharge areas, headwaters, rivers, stream channels, drains,inland related features ontheearth’s surface, including waterSurface features, defined as water- and subsurface hydrogeologic investigations; unsaturated zonesthat canbedefined by surface recharge/discharge areas,water tables, aquifers and features intheearth’s subsurface, including Groundwater features, defined as water-related Best Practice:Town ofAjax 47 Ontario Nature 48 … 49 Sean Marshall Best Practices GuidetoNaturalHeritage SystemsPlanning tage systems do notstop at jurisdictionalboundaries. This isessential fromanecologicalperspective, sincenatural heri include connectionswith adjoining municipalities andwatersheds. heritage system. It takes theconceptoflinkages onestep furtherto ponents ofthenatural heritage system. There isaclear intent to ficial Plan identify linkages andcore areasasthecentral com Analysis: These threeexcerpts fromtheCity ofHamilton’s Of qualities ofthelandscape, wherever possible. … retain andenhancethecultural,aesthetic, andenvironmental design ofnew development requiring approval by thisPlan to The City shall require theincorporation ofLinkages into a report. the Linkage Assessment canbeincluded aspartoftheEIS Environmental Impact Statement (EIS)isbeingprepared, shall prepareaLinkage Assessment. Onsites where an a Linkage intheNatural Heritage System …theapplicant Where new development orsite alteration isproposedwithin functionality andconnectivity ofthenatural system. supportive features (Linkages) that maintain theecological Heritage System which includes CoreAreas,aswell as The systems approach involves delineating aNatural 3.1 Identification, Protection andRestorationofNaturalHeritageSystems 3.1 Identification,Protection 52 Best Practice:CityofHamilton 51 50

- - - Ajax *

Section 3 Section 3 3.1 Identification, Protection andRestorationofNaturalHeritageSystems 3.1 Identification,Protection Hamilton Convention onBiologicalDiversity. international target towhich Canada iscommitted under the tection setoutinOntario’s Biodiversity Strategy, low theprovincial target forlandscape conservation andpro- ecosystem be- function.Southernandeastern far Ontario fall conserve andenhance biodiversity andtomaintain and restore Rationale: Two key objectives ofsystems-based planningareto 3.1.3 ronmental qualities ofthelandscape. a meanstoprotectandenhancethecultural,aesthetic andenvi incorporated into thedesign ofdevelopment proposals,offering fied linkage area.Linkages areseenasbroadly beneficial when age assessment iftheyareproposingdevelopment inanidenti ments with respecttolinkages. Applicants must preparealink operationalize theProvincial Policy Statement require- (PPS) heritage system provides arefully realized. social, environmental andeconomicbenefitsthat thenatural ties, it should guide policydevelopment sothat theimmense works ofconservation lands.While it does notbindmunicipali at least 17percent ofthelandscape through well-connected net

of naturalheritagesystems. the biodiversityandlong-termecologicalfunction reference tomaintaining,improving andrestoring Principle: Policy should establish a commitment or 54 That target is toconserve 53 aswell asthe Ontario Nature - - - - -

Glenn Davy Best Practices GuidetoNaturalHeritage SystemsPlanning enabling flexibility inthemeansto achieve it. the objective ofenhancingfunction andbiodiversity while also the simple protectionoffeatures. The policystrongly expresses ecosystem functionapproach extending consideration beyond of linkages. It alsoexplicitly recognizestheimportance ofan natural heritage network, explicitly recognizingtheimportance diversity andthelong-term ecologicalfunctionofVaughan’s Analysis: This policyaimstoprotect,restore andenhancebio- how that isachieved. and linkingtheNetwork butallow forsomeflexibility in Such anapproach willclearly indicate areasforenhancing and betterlinkingVaughan’s Natural Heritage Network. To utilizeanecosystem functionapproach toenhancing and theirfunctions.… restores and,where possible, enhancesnatural features an ecosystem functionapproach toplanningthat protects, biodiversity oftheNatural Heritage Network by utilizing To maintain thelong-term ecologicalfunctionand of lifeforVaughan residents. … health andthat thesefunctionsimprove theoverall quality natural environment that benefitecologicaland human To recognizethevarious functionsperformedby the It isthepolicyofCouncil:… The general objectives forsustainability are:… sustainability where theTown hasjurisdiction…. objectives andpoliciestoimplement theprinciple of achieve environmental sustainability. This sectionprovides The Town iscommitted tosustainable development inorder to 3.1 Identification, Protection andRestorationofNaturalHeritageSystems 3.1 Identification,Protection b) a) design; to achieve sustainable buildingandcommunity to minimizetheTown’s ecological footprint; Best Practice:CityofVaughan Best Practice:Town ofOakville 55 * *

Section 3 Section 3 Ron Erwin Enjoying apaddleandthebirdlife 3.1 Identification, Protection andRestorationofNaturalHeritageSystems 3.1 Identification,Protection environmental sustainability. embedding thisobjective within anoverall commitment to protect natural heritage systems andothernatural features, Analysis: This policyexplicitly aimstopreserve, enhanceand system. process andtoensure public support forthenatural heritage additional opportunity toengage constituents inthe planning community stakeholders. This provides themunicipality an features inclose consultation with affectedlandowners and icy. Municipalities should develop provisions fornon-identified mapping anddesignation butareinstead governed only by pol- of development andlandusepolicythat arenotcaptured in tems. This approach isentirely consistent with other elements lead toadjustments inthedelineation ofnatural heritage sys understanding ofecosystem functional relationships may also sively reflected. Advances inscienceandtechnologyour identified may berequired sothat the system iscomprehen are notstatic, ongoing revisions andadditions totheelements Official Plan mapping hascaptured them. As natural systems natural heritage features andfunctionsregardlessofwhether in mapping anddesignations. requires Theprotectionof PPS recognizes that functionalrelationships may notbecaptured tion when establishing mapping anddesignations. It also heritage features may notbesufficient tocapture allinforma dynamic andthat municipal resourcesformapping natural Rationale: This principle recognizesthat natural systems are 3.1.4 f) f) e) d) c) identified intheOfficial Plan. features, functionsandlinkagesnototherwise Principle: Policyshouldaddress andprotect Plan. canopy cover of40%Town-wide beyond thelifeofthis to progressively increasetheurban forest toachieve a to maintain theexisting urban forest; and, to enhancetheTown’s airandwater quality; waterfronts; environmental features, natural heritage systems and to preserve, enhanceandprotecttheTown’s 56

Ontario Nature - - - Lydia Dotto Best Practices GuidetoNaturalHeritage SystemsPlanning equally tothosepreviously identified. not have beencaptured inasingle mapping exercise aretreated ensures that matters important tothemunicipality that may guiding principles, objectives andgoverning policies.It also postdate theOfficial Plan willbe subject tothe municipality’s tures, functionsandattributes identified through studies that Analysis: This provision ensures that significant natural fea Best Practice:Township ofCentralFrontenac [Environmental Impact Statements]. Sections 3.6 [Environmental Protection Areas] and6.3.4 of thisPlan andtotheapplicable requirements in will besubject tothe Guiding Principles andObjectives System, that isidentified through subsequent study, function orattribute notidentified intheGreenlands Any propertycontaining asignificant natural feature, the nature andimportance ofthefeature. Such information where the basis of the information is adequate to determine club, conservation authority orotheragency, or by Council be added totheinventory fromsources such asanaturalist not intended tobecomprehensive. Additional features may The above list ofNatural Heritage Features and Areasis 3.1 Identification, Protection andRestorationofNaturalHeritageSystems 3.1 Identification,Protection Best Practice:Town ofGeorgina 57 - Great blueheron Great * *

Section 3 Section 3 3.1 Identification, Protection andRestorationofNaturalHeritageSystems 3.1 Identification,Protection * Georgina ment toincorporate thefeature first. ment forastudy may still apply without theneedforanamend where afeature isnotidentified intheOfficial Plan,therequire- correct theinventory andmapping offeatures. Importantly, even of potential input fromcommunity stakeholders andagencies to and amendments toinclude additions. It allows forawide range areas may have beenidentified, and it provides forplan updates Analysis: This policyrecognizesthat notallnatural features or review ofaPlanning application. not preclude therequirement foranimpact assessment inthe identified ontheLand Use Schedules tothis Plan, thismay or by aspecificamendment. Where aknown feature isnot may beincorporated aspartofaregular update ofthisPlan Conservation Authority orothergovernment agencies. studies carriedoutby theCity, Region, Toronto and Region site-by-site basisthrough the development processorthrough Conservation Authority andtheProvince. This may occurona study undertaken inconsultation with theToronto andRegion mapped network, willbedetermined through appropriate of mapped natural heritage features, andany additions tothe the natural heritage features inVaughan. The precise limits best information available. Schedule 2may notidentify all Heritage Network identified onSchedule 2isbasedonthe Network is an ongoing processandassuch theNatural Identification ofelements comprising the Natural Heritage Schedule 2indetermining theNatural Heritage Network. That thepolicytext prevails over themapping shown on Best Practice:CityofVaughan 58 Ontario Nature 59 -

Bill Barber Best Practices GuidetoNaturalHeritage SystemsPlanning of any development application andshall beincorporated inboth more detailed mapping willtake precedence intheconsideration newly identified features. The policy also clearly establishes that naturalthe PPS, heritage protectionpoliciescanbeapplied to Analysis: This policyclearly establishes that, inaccordance with appropriate landusesandactivities. may beremoved fromthesystem andbecomeavailable forother inappropriately identified aspartofthenatural heritage system be afforded appropriate protection.In otherinstances, lands instances, natural heritage components missedinmapping may features through comprehensive orsite-by-site studies. In some It alsoprovides forcorrectiontoboundariesofnatural heritage ning andthat compliance with planningpolicytakes precedence. cision-making toolwith regardtonatural heritage system plan Analysis: This policyrecognizesthat mapping isnottheonly de- the improved mapping orrequire anapplicant todo so. may amendtheOfficial Plan and/or Zoning By-law toreflect the consideration ofthedevelopment application, andCouncil detailed mapping becomesavailable, it shall take precedence in responsible approval authority(s). In theevent that more established inthe Zoning By-law inconsultation with the of theenvironmental buffers,pursuant toSection4.1.2.6, be preparing implementing zoningcriteria, andthat theextent Areas onSchedules Athrough A14beusedasguide in Greenland-Wetland AreasandGreenland-Natural Heritage It istheintent ofthisPlan that theboundariesof this Plan tosuch identified features. Township may apply thenatural heritage protectionpoliciesof Plan. In accordance with theProvincial Policy Statement, the been identified either inthis Plan orintheCounty Official proposed fordevelopment, whether ornotsuch features have identify thepresence ofnatural heritage features onasite mapping, subwatershed studies, proponents studies etc.) to significant woodlands, endangered andthreatened species natural heritage features (e.g. LANDSAT mapping of The Township may utilizeadditional resourcestoidentify 3.1 Identification, Protection andRestorationofNaturalHeritageSystems 3.1 Identification,Protection Best Practice:ClearviewTownship 60 61 - Monarch butterfly *

DeRosiers Section 3 Section 3 3.1 Identification, Protection andRestorationofNaturalHeritageSystems 3.1 Identification,Protection Jefferson salamander 3.1.5 cal goals andobjectives. the authority toestablish morerestrictive policies torealizelo- stead, it setsoutminimum standards, leaving municipalities it does notprohibit development within theentire system. In hibits development andsite alteration within certainfeatures, social, economicandecologicalobjectives. Whilepro- thePPS Rationale: Natural heritage system protectioncanserve many heritage policies. full extent ofallpoliciestheOfficial Plan, including natural ity ofpotentially inaccurate mapping, butontheintent ofthe Ultimately, landusedecisions arenottobebasedontherigid tion ofmapping delineations forawide variety oflanduses. Plan, aswell asotherOfficial Plans, regardingtheinterpreta policy issimilartootherpoliciesincorporated intheOfficial or theapplicant aspart oftheapplication review process.This the Official Plan and Zoning By-Law, either by the municipality heritage system. development andsitealterationwithinthenatural functions, andshouldincorporateprohibitions on natural heritagesystem,includingecological uses takeintoaccounttheimpacton Principle: Policyshoulddirect thatpermitted 62

Ontario Nature - - -

Ryan Vince Best Practices GuidetoNaturalHeritage SystemsPlanning ing andacquiring natural heritage lands. municipalities toenter into co-operative agreements inmanag control bylaws, treemanagement bylaws, andbylaws allowing to implement natural heritage planningpolicy, such assite plan Plan provides abasisforsettingoutclear authority forbylaws land usesandhow development occursonasite. The Official uses, andgeneral andspecificprovisions, regulate andcontrol Zoning bylaws, through theestablishment ofzones,permitted latory protectionforthemunicipal natural heritage system. menting thepoliciesof anOfficial Plan andprovide theregu Rationale: Well-crafted zoningbylaws areessential toimple- 3.1.6 ment onadjacent lands. preparation ofanenvironmental impact study for any develop- alteration within thenatural heritage system andrequires the Analysis: This policyclearly prohibits development andsite requirements ofthose Plans. watershed, environmental impact studies shall meetthe Ridges Moraine, theGreenbelt and theLake Simcoe requirements ofthe localmunicipality. Within theOak The environmental impact study shall alsoaddress any the approval authority early intheapplication process. meeting andatermsofreferenceshall besubmitted to study willbedetermined through thepre-consultation study. The requirement for, content andscopeofthe System shall beaccompanied by anenvironmental impact applications within 120metresoftheRegional Greenlands System andthat development andsite alteration alteration beprohibited within theRegional Greenlands It isthepolicyofCouncil:…That development andsite 3.1 Identification, Protection andRestorationofNaturalHeritageSystems 3.1 Identification,Protection bylaws. amendments, aswellinothermunicipal policies inzoningbylawsandsubsequent implementation ofnaturalheritagesystem Principle: Policyshouldrequire the Best Practice:York Region 63 - - *

Section 3 Section 3 3.1 Identification, Protection andRestorationofNaturalHeritageSystems 3.1 Identification,Protection * * Halton features andfunctions. should besubject torequirements toprotectnatural heritage speaks to“lotlines,”indicating that landdivision processes other regulations by anappropriate authority. The policyalso other toolssuch assite plancontrol, conditions ofapproval, and Plan policyshould extendbeyond thezoningbylaw toinclude Analysis: This policyrecognizesthat implementation ofOfficial regulations by theappropriate authority. laws, site plancontrol, conditions ofplanningapproval or implemented through officialplanamendments, zoning by- out under Section118(3)andendorsed by theRegionbe including theplacement oflotlinesandstructures,carried recommendations ofanEnvironmental Impact Assessment, It isthepolicyofRegion to:...Require that the responsible approval authority(s). established intheZoning By-law inconsultation with the of theenvironmental buffers,pursuant toSection4.1.2.6, be preparing implementing zoningcriteria, and that theextent Areas onSchedules Athrough A14beusedasguide in Greenland-Wetland AreasandGreenland-Natural Heritage It istheintent ofthisPlan that theboundariesof Best Practice:ClearviewTownship Best Practice:HaltonRegion 65 64 Ontario Nature

Robbie V. Best Practices GuidetoNaturalHeritage SystemsPlanning and functions. plan control canbeusedtoprotectnatural heritage features natural heritage features. The policyalsoindicates that site porate environmental buffersinzoningaddition tozoning Analysis: This policyspecifically recognizestheneedtoincor- of features andfunctions. main privately owned, agreements canprovide fortheprotection partners, aswell asprivate landowners. While thelandsmay re- stewardship agreements with non-government agencies and ties canachieve long-term protectionobjectives by establishing land exchanges andlong-term leases.Additionally, municipali include outright purchase, donations, conservation easements, tems asopportunities arise. The toolsavailable to acquire lands ipalities tohave amandate to expandtheirnatural heritage sys functions over thelongterm.It istherefore important formunic are notsufficient to protectbiodiversity or sustain ecological natural heritage network that arepublicly owned andmanaged developed landscape ofsouthernOntario, theelements ofthe Rationale: In many partsoftheprovince, especially theheavily 3.1.7 Plan, shall apply. concerning site plancontrol inSection8.5ofthisOfficial designated by by-law assite plancontrol areas.Policies … Allareasdesignated GreenlandonSchedule ‘A’ may be Heritage System. … as permitted by legislation, partsoftheRegional Natural obtain, through thedevelopment approval processand Conservation Authorities andotherpublic agencies to Obtain, orencourage Municipalities, theLocal 3.1 Identification, Protection andRestorationofNaturalHeritageSystems 3.1 Identification,Protection acquisitions). easements, stewardship agreements or heritage system(e.g.,through conservation environmentally managedportionofthenatural to grow andenhancethesecured and Principle: Policyshouldestablishprovisions Best Practice:HaltonRegion 66 - - - *

Section 3 Section 3 3.1 Identification, Protection andRestorationofNaturalHeritageSystems 3.1 Identification,Protection * stewardship, landdonations andconservation easements. tage system. Tools identified include: acquisition, private land agencies, landowners andresidents toexpandthenatural heri Analysis: These policiesexpresstheintent towork with multiple conservation easement agreement. lands toapublic agency orcharitable organization through a the protectionofecologicalfunctionsandfeatures onsuch public agencies orcharitable organizations, orthetransferof owned landsintheRegional Natural Heritage System to through stewardship programs,thedonation ofprivately Promote, inconjunction with otherpublic agencies and enhancement, andmaintenance. … residents toparticipate inits identification, protection, Heritage System andencourage landowners andlocal Promote theconceptandfunctionsofRegional Natural Greenlands Network, ortoholdconservation easements. … Land Trust tohold, purchase andmanage elements ofthe 7.I.11 The Region willconsider theestablishment ofa functions. enhance or, wherever feasible, restore theirecological prepare management plansfortheselandstomaintain, ownership ofelements oftheGreenlands Network andto 7.I.10 AreaMunicipalities areencouraged tosecure Network. exercise good stewardship oflandswithin theGreenlands other landstewardship programstolandowners wishing to other stakeholders, willprovide advice andinformation on Municipalities, theGrandRiver Conservation Authority and 7.I.9 The Region, incollaboration with theProvince, Area easements, buffersandwherever appropriate, fencing. on theirpropertythrough measures including conservation enhance or, wherever feasible, restore environmental features 7.I.8 The Region encourages landowners tomaintain, Best Practice:RegionofWaterloo 67 Ontario Nature - Doc Searles Best Practices GuidetoNaturalHeritage SystemsPlanning landowners.ers andotherrural in working with theagricultural community, aggregate develop- sources with policyobjectives. Incentives canbeaneffective tool landowner stewardship andacquisition oflands,which links re- the potential establishment ofafinancialincentive programfor hancing thenatural heritage system. The policyalsoprovides for ship andconservation easements astools forbuildinganden Analysis: This policyidentifies acquisition, landowner steward Greenlands Network. provide fundsforthepublic acquisition oflandswithin the assist private landowners with stewardship initiatives and Network Stewardship financialincentives programto 7.I.15 The Region may create andadminister aGreenlands preserve, enhanceandaccess natural corridors. easements, landtrusts, taxincentives andrights ofway to programs caninclude landowner contacts, conservation partnership with land owners, tomeet theirneeds.These natural resources.These programsshould beestablished in to assist andencourage landowners tomanage their The County supports awide variety ofstewardship options 3.1 Identification, Protection andRestorationofNaturalHeritageSystems 3.1 Identification,Protection Best Practice:CountyofLambton 68 69 - - Lambton *

Section 3 Section 3 3.1 Identification, Protection andRestorationofNaturalHeritageSystems 3.1 Identification,Protection * Ontario Nature’s Sauble Dunes Nature Reserve Dunes Nature plicitly supporting asystems-based approach. ing andenhancingnatural corridors isspecifically mentioned, im landowners tomaintain natural heritage. The objective ofpreserv Analysis: This policysetsoutseveral methodstoencourage private reporting to municipal council. nicipal staff toidentify monitoring indicators andaprocessfor tors andmetricsforevaluation. Ideally, thepolicydirectsmu objectives, scopeandapproaches, aswell asappropriate indica the directionforongoing assessment including, forexample, avoidance andmitigation techniques. Amonitoring plansets sis forunderstanding improvements oradjustments needed in stressors (e.g., climate change, pollution). It alsoprovides aba system’s responsetotheimpacts ofdevelopment andother objectives. It improves amunicipality’s understanding ofthe ness ofpolicyandimplementation inachieving Official Plan of thenatural heritage system andunderstand theeffective- Rationale: Monitoring serves todetermine theongoing health 3.1.8 the long-term healthofnatural heritage systems. reach andstewardship areimportant components ofsecuring of government. It alsorecognizesthat public education, out Analysis: This policyrecognizestheneedtowork with alllevels stewardship programs. community tosupport education, outreach, andlandowner the GrandRiver Conservation Authority, andthe The City willwork with otherlevels ofgovernment, ecological healthofthenaturalheritagesystem. Principle: Policyshouldrequire monitoringofthe Best Practice:CityofWaterloo 70 Ontario Nature ------

Noah Cole Best Practices GuidetoNaturalHeritage SystemsPlanning the continued effectiveness ofpoliciesandapproaches. the opportunity tocollaborate with other agencies inensuring provals canbeintegrated into municipal policy, andit recognizes recognizes that monitoring resulting from specificplanning ap- toring, linkingit totheachievement ofOfficial Plan objectives. It Analysis: This policyestablishes thepurposeandscopeofmoni of human, natural andhydrological systems. change, which hasthepotential tosignificantly alterthehealth sustainability. Ofnoteisthereferencetoimpacts ofclimate between thecontinued investment inmonitoring andlong-term Analysis: This policyobjective acknowledges theconnection where applicable. will beintegrated into theCity-wide monitoring program, condition oftheplanningapproval processandtheresults 3. Short-term, site-specific monitoring may berequired asa monitoring program(e.g. fisheries, threatened species). the OMNRwillbeincorporated into theenvironmental Opportunities2. forcollaborating with theGRCA and the Natural Heritage System andtheUrban Forest. policies, decisions andprogramsinmeetingtheobjectives of developed andimplemented toassess theeffectiveness ofthe 1. ACity-wide environmental monitoring programwillbe context, aswell such asotherfactors, as climate change. impacts andstresses associated with beinginanurban its long-term sustainability andresilienceinrelation tothe management oftheCity‘s Natural Heritage System toensure Objectives: …n) To support theongoing monitoring and 3.1 Identification, Protection andRestorationofNaturalHeritageSystems 3.1 Identification,Protection Best Practice:CityofGuelph Best Practice:CityofGuelph 72

71 - * *

Section 3 Section 3 Ken Newcombe Barn swallow Barn 3.1 Identification, Protection andRestorationofNaturalHeritageSystems 3.1 Identification,Protection 3.1.9 site by generating ecologically equivalent gainselsewhere.” – entails “compensating forlossesofbiodiversity at animpact Rationale: Biodiversity offsetting–orcompensatory mitigation values tobeoffset. and gains,including identifying, measuring andmonitoring the nents toclearly demonstrate theecologicalequivalence oflosses metrics areneeded. Policy should require development propo- (i.e., aconservation gain) isensured. To thisend,appropriate are available toachieve theoffset,andwhere “additionality” are notfeasible, where tried-and-true conservation techniques should permit offsetting only where avoidance andmitigation should allow offsettingona“net gain” basisonly. Also, policy globally, andgiven theuncertainties andrisks involved, policy going biodiversity decline locally, provincially, nationally and set aprecautionary framework forimplementation. Given on potential benefitsofoffsettingforbiodiversity, policyneeds to Nevertheless, inlight ofseriousconcernsabout theactual or Endangered SpeciesAct, 2007. habitat management andintheimplementation ofOntario’s conservation. Currently, inOntario, it isoneofthetoolsinfish development proponents inproviding solutions forbiodiversity and, ifcarefully implemented, offeranopportunity toengage Biodiversity offsetprogramsareproliferating aroundtheworld (i.e., replacement ratio). fully accountedforintheloss-gaincalculation feasible, and3)uncertaintiesriskshavebeen within areasonable timeframeisdemonstrably measured, 2)therestoration ofthesevalues impacted biodiversityvalueshavebeenexplicitly have beenfullyaddressed, andonlyif:1)the gain basis,butonlyafteravoidanceandmitigation offsetting (i.e.,compensatorymitigation)onanet Principle: Policyshouldenablebiodiversity 75

73 Ontario Nature 74

- Sarah Hedges Best Practices GuidetoNaturalHeritage SystemsPlanning ability orvulnerability ofthebiodiversity affected.” compensated forby abiodiversity offsetbecause oftheirreplace- offset: therearesituations where residual impacts cannotbefully Biodiversity arelimits OffsetsProgramme:“There towhat canbe species orecosystems. As stated inPrinciple 2oftheBusiness and exclude situations involving irreplaceable orhighly vulnerable ations where offsettingwould bedeemed acceptable. This would Finally, andmost importantly, policyshould setclear limits tositu based onasignificant netgain approach). … be applicable only inrestricted circumstances andshall be unavoidable environmental impacts (this latter optionwill and otherapproval agencies, thepotential tocompensate for functions onasite or, where acceptable tothemunicipality potential torestore or enhanceenvironmental features and responsible approval authority, andshall identify: …The professional acceptable totheTownship and/or other Such plansandanalysis shall beundertaken by aqualified be required focusingonprinciples ofsite naturalization. plan. Where appropriate, site remediation plansmay also shall berequired toprepareaprotectionandmitigation evaluation, that development canproceed,theproponent If it isdetermined, through theEISandnatural heritage 3.1 Identification, Protection andRestorationofNaturalHeritageSystems 3.1 Identification,Protection Best Practice:ClearviewTownship 77 76 - in Mississauga plantingevent tree Ontario Nature *

Section 3 Section 3 3.1 Identification, Protection andRestorationofNaturalHeritageSystems 3.1 Identification,Protection * other approval authorities. protection andmitigation planresides with themunicipality and ceptable. The power topermit ordeny compensation aspartofthe that compensation isnotthepreferredoptionandmay notbeac to beallowed “only inrestricted circumstances.” It explicitly states on significant netgain. It alsosetslimits tocompensation, which is Analysis: The policysetsahigh standard forcompensation, based velopment had removed the edge ofawoodlot. and otherrunoff/infiltration measures where aportionof de- led totheplanting ofan extensive Vegetative ProtectionZone principles, goals andpolicies.In oneinstance, thisprovision is aclear linktotheachievement oftheplan’s environmental While thestandard forcompensation isnotnetbenefit,there explicitly includes theconsideration ofcumulative impacts. ponents reduce impacts, including through compensation, and dealing with potential impacts. It thenlooks toensure that pro- Analysis: The policyestablishes avoidance asthefirst step for consultation. this approach, shall informthemunicipality during pre- and otherapproval authorities. The applicant, ifproposing technique shall bedetermined solely by themunicipality The acceptability anddesirability ofcompensation asa preferred optionandmay notbeanacceptable approach. municipality andotherapproval authorities, it isnotthe Although compensation may beconsidered by the environmental principles, goals andpoliciesofthisPlan[.] restoration works acceptable totheTown, toachieve the extent possible, including any compensation necessary or negative impacts, andcumulative impacts tothefullest avoid, orifnotavoidable, reduce potential adverse effects, recommended actions tobetaken by theproponent to An Environmental Impact Study shall: …Explain Best Practice:Town ofAjax 78 Ontario Nature 79 - Best Practices GuidetoNaturalHeritage SystemsPlanning natural heritage protection. opportunities forpromotingbroader awareness andsupport for businesses andotheragencies aremeaningfully involved provides community andthesystem. Ensuring that landowners, residents, toring elements ofthenatural heritage system benefitsboththe Rationale: Public involvement inidentifying, protectingandmoni broader resourcesbeyond already constrained municipal budgets. ral heritage. involvement inprotecting, rehabilitating andenhancingnatu Analysis: This policyprovides strong direction for community natural heritage system. ers andresidents in identifying, protectingandstewarding the Analysis: This policyencourages theinvolvement oflandown 3.1.10 Principle:Policyshouldprovide forthe rehabilitation oftheseareas. facilitate community involvement inthe protection and and enhancement. The City may develop programsto to take anactive roleintheirprotection,rehabilitation City willencourage community groups andindividuals Where natural heritage areasare owned by theCity, the maintenance. in its identification, protection,enhancement, and encourage landowners andlocalresidents toparticipate functions oftheRegional Natural Heritage System and It isthepolicyofRegion to:…Promotetheconceptand 3.1 Identification, Protection andRestorationofNaturalHeritageSystems 3.1 Identification,Protection activities. features andfunctionsinmonitoring agencies intheidentificationofnaturalheritage involvement ofthepublicandnon-municipal Best Practice:CityofLondon Best Practice:HaltonRegion 81 80 It alsocapitalizes ontheavailability of 82 - - - * *

Section 3 Section 3 3.1 Identification, Protection andRestorationofNaturalHeritageSystems 3.1 Identification,Protection * * Plan. monitoring asabasisoreven atrigger forupdating theOfficial ronmental policiesintheOfficial Plan. It alsodirectly identifies vate monitoring programs tomeasure theeffectiveness ofenvi Analysis: This policyencourages theuseofbothpublic andpri partnership with localagencies andorganizations. to gathering data onthehealthofnatural areasandwildlifein Analysis: This policyestablishes thecity’s clear commitment Section 1.6. necessary, thePlan shall be appropriately updated asper of theenvironmental policiesofthisOfficial Plan. If deemed monitoring programs inorder tomeasure theeffectiveness the establishment ofpublic orprivate environmental other agencies andorganizations, shall encourage Nottawasaga Valley Conservation Authority and The Township ofClearview inconsultation with the them. of natural areasandthewildlifeplants that inhabit This data shall beusedtomonitor thecondition andhealth organizations toconduct periodicnatural areainventories. areas through its partnerships with localagencies and The City shall continue togather data onnatural Best Practice:ClearviewTownship 83 Best Practice:CityofHamilton 84 Ontario Nature - -

Ron Erwin Carl Hiebert & Grand River Conservation Authority Best Practices GuidetoNaturalHeritage SystemsPlanning monitor important elements ofnatural heritage systems. meaningful scaleat which toidentify, protect,manage and municipal boundaries,watersheds canserve asanecologically ral heritage features andlinkages areoftenconnectedacross various stages inthedevelopment approval process.As natu identified, as well asprogressive refinement ofthefeatures at cal). Policy should support field verification ofthefeatures at avariety ofscales (e.g., provincial, regional,watershed, lo- system should include features that areconsidered significant tage systems planningandinlanduse decision-making. The Rationale: Scaleisanimportant consideration innatural heri 3.2.1 3.2 ecologically meaningful scaleforplanningand,in The Region recognizes thewatershed astheregionally also toenhanceandrestore theGreenlandsNetwork. applications asopportunities notmerely tomaintain, but Use watershed studies, community plansanddevelopment Planning Integration ofNaturalHeritageSystems secondary planlevel. levels: regional, watershed,subwatershedand/or of naturalheritagesystemsplanningatmultiple Principle: Policyshouldensure theintegration Best Practice:RegionofWaterloo 3.2 IntegrationofNaturalHeritageSystemsPlanning 85 - - Laurel Creek, Waterloo Creek, Laurel *

Section 3 Section 3 3.2 IntegrationofNaturalHeritageSystemsPlanning * * tive, aswell asaregionalperspective. velopment approvals beconsidered fromawatershed perspec Analysis: This strongly worded policy(“shall”) requires that de- impacts andimprove thenatural heritage system. dictional analysis, action andcollaboration toaddress adverse respect towatershed-based planningby supporting cross-juris and decision-making process.It provides strong directionwith ral heritage system at various scaleswithin theland-use planning Analysis: This policyidentifies opportunities to improve thenatu of scalesandforavariety ofnatural heritage features. identifies specific opportunities for implementation ata variety ural linkages within andacross municipal boundaries.It also Analysis: This policyisnotable forits explicit emphasis onnat restore theGreenlandsNetwork. impacts, andtomaintain, enhanceor, wherever feasible, impacts, including cross-jurisdictional andcross-watershed watershed studies bothtominimizeadverse environmental the GrandRiver Conservation Authority, willundertake collaboration with theProvince, AreaMunicipalities and considered within thecontext oftheseplans. Sections 24and25.Development approvals shall be Oak Ridges Moraine Conservation Plan, inparticular water conservation planstomeettherequirements ofthe conservation authorities, including water budgets and in consultation with localmunicipalities andthe amendment processshall becompleted andimplemented Watershed plansdeveloped through anofficialplan watershed plans,andotherstudies. Environmental Impact Statements, Plans, Secondary boundaries through theidentification ofLinkages in within themunicipality andadjacent toits municipal The City shall encourage theconnectionofCoreAreas Best Practice:CityofHamilton Best Practice:SimcoeCounty 86 87 88 Ontario Nature - - - - Best Practices GuidetoNaturalHeritage SystemsPlanning associated with development proposals. scale forplanningandmeasuring environmental impacts nizes that thewatershed/subwatershed level isanappropriate Analysis: This commitment tosystems-based planningrecog and long-term benefitsof systems-based conservation efforts. Rationale: Jurisdictional boundariesoftenimpede thesuccess 3.2.2 tion authorities. municipalities and otherrelevant agencies, such asconserva operation across jurisdictionsandshould involve neighbouring planning forthesesystems requires communication andco- systems extendacross administrative planning boundaries, of theNatural Heritage Reference Manual. tem andwatershed issues. This isalsooutlinedinSection3.2.1 matters including themanagement ofnatural heritage, ecosys dinated, integrated andcomprehensive approach toplanning directsmunicipalities ofthePPS Section 1.2.1 toprovide acoor- comprehensive environmental impact study framework. Municipality. This formofplanningwillalsoserve asa the basisforenvironmental andlanduse planninginthe The City willusewatershed/subwatershed planningas ecosystem values. … systems planning, takinginto account bothlandscape and planning, ecologicalsystems planningandnatural heritage policies that arebasedontheprinciples ofwatershed development by ...[c]ontinuing tomove towards planning The City willpromoteenvironmentally sustainable systems. and co-operationregarding naturalheritage importance ofcross-jurisdictional communication Principle: Policyshouldacknowledgethe Best Practice:CityofGuelph 89 3.2 IntegrationofNaturalHeritageSystemsPlanning 92 As natural heritage 90 - - 91 -

Section 3 Section 3 3.2 IntegrationofNaturalHeritageSystemsPlanning Wasaga BeachandElmvale,Simcoe * * co-operation. that thefunctionality ofits system isdependent onregional sion ofits Greenway System asopportunities arise, recognizing palities andotherorganizations toencourage regionalexten Analysis: Windsor commits toworking with adjacent munici the Greenlands. ecological functionsthat inturncomplement andsupport municipalities toidentify andprotectnatural features and systems ofadjacent jurisdictions,andtorequire local provincial plansand islinked with thenatural heritage and supports thenatural heritage systems established in To ensure that theGreenlandsDesignation complements may beappropriate. planning approval processorthrough othermeasures as of theGreenway System asopportunities arisethrough the other organizations, shall encourage regionalextensions Tecumseh, theEssexRegion Conservation Authority and Council, inco-operation with theTown ofLaSalle, Town of Best Practice:CityofWindsor Best Practice:SimcoeCounty 94 93 Ontario Nature - -

Joe Mabel Ken Newcombe Best Practices GuidetoNaturalHeritage SystemsPlanning provincial plans. will complement thebroader network andby specific referenceto lower-tier municipalities toidentify natural heritage elements that ensure interconnections across jurisdictions,inpartby requiring Analysis: This strongly worded upper-tier policyobjective aimsto do notyet exist. ing areasthat needimprovements tocreate linkages where they of its emphasis on“connections” and, inparticular, onidentify and urban designated areas.The policy also stands outinterms The natural heritage system willbeapplied toboththerural for thecity. Meanwhile, thecity usestheHalton Region system. abling policyuntil thereisanidentified natural heritage system time ofpublication, Burlington isapplying thispolicyasanen ning across lower-tier, upper-tier andprovincial plans.At the Analysis: This policyintegrates natural heritage system plan system. the City willdefine areasforfutureimprovement tothe connections ofnatural heritage do not currently exist, between existing natural heritage features. Where specific Plan. The Natural Heritage System willinclude connections Niagara Escarpment Plan andtheProvincial Greenbelt Halton Region Greenlandssystem of designated lands,the System willconformwith andbecomplementary tothe associated with its protection.The City’s Natural Heritage Heritage System anddevelop appropriate policies The City willundertake toidentify aconnectedNatural Best Practice:CityofBurlington 95

3.2 IntegrationofNaturalHeritageSystemsPlanning - - - Kerncliff Park,Burlington Kerncliff *

Section 3 Section 3 3.2 IntegrationofNaturalHeritageSystemsPlanning * * * cross-jurisdictional co-operation at the upper-tier level. Analysis: This isaclear, conciseexpressionofsupport for ning involves multiple partners,including private landowners. This goal recognizesthat effective natural heritage system plan signals theimportance ofcross-jurisdictional co-operation. Analysis: Thethat fact thisisexpressedasanoverall policygoal Hamilton Areaandneighbouring municipalities. Heritage System with thoseintheGreater Toronto and Support theinterconnection ofHalton’s Regional Natural waterways. groundwater and surfacewater associated with these of environmental studies affectingnatural features, the Algonquins in discussions concerningthepreparation throughout theCity ofOttawa. Hence, theCity willengage Rideau River, Mississippi River, Jock River, andCarpRiver) and utilization ofhistoric waterways (e.g. Ottawa River, fundamental interest inmatters relating totheprotection rivers within thecity, theAlgonquins ofOntario have a their historic andcontinuing useandknowledge ofthe systems, andimpacts onthosesystems. Arisingfrom recognizing that themunicipalities share thesamenatural Conservation Authorities andneighbouring municipalities, undertake environmental studies inpartnership with the systems crossmunicipal boundaries.The City will Natural features, groundwater andsurfacewater comprehensive GreenlandsNetwork within theregion. and private landowners tomaintain, enhanceandrestore a Municipalities, theGrandRiver Conservation Authority Overall Goal–Work with theProvince, Area Best Practice:RegionofWaterloo Best Practice:CityofOttawa Best Practice:HaltonRegion 98

96 Ontario Nature 97 - Sorin Nechita Best Practices GuidetoNaturalHeritage SystemsPlanning and functions. enhance andcomplement measures toprotectnatural systems tionship between thenatural heritage system andotheruseswill and environmentally basedurban design that consider therela environmentally compatible agricultural andextractive practices nents occurcontinuously with surrounding lands.Promoting Interactions amongplants, animalsandotherecologicalcompo- systems andfeatures, theirfunctionsextendinto adjacent areas. Rationale: While designated boundariesdefine natural heritage 3.2.3 tation andpartnership with First Nations. municipalities, butalsotheneedtowork inmeaningfulconsul- partnerships with conservation authorities andneighbouring Analysis: Ottawa expressly recognizesnotonly theneedfor enhances theprotectionandfunctionofboth. locate openspace adjacent toorneartheregionalsystem. This Analysis: This policyencourages lower-tier municipalities to near theRegional Natural Heritage System. the Urban Areaby locating localopenspace adjacent toor function oftheRegional Natural Heritage System within the development processandwhere appropriate, the Ensure that Municipalities theLocal willenhance, through extraction areas. agricultural lands,urbanareas andresource and thesurrounding environment, including and synergiesbetweennaturalheritagesystems Principle: Policyshouldrecognize therelationship Best Practice:HaltonRegion 3.2 IntegrationofNaturalHeritageSystemsPlanning 99 - Crawford Lake,Halton *

Section 3 Section 3 3.2 IntegrationofNaturalHeritageSystemsPlanning * * ban formandcommunity design. heritage system contributes toandhasasignificant roleinur- Analysis: This policyspecifically acknowledges that thenatural to urban formandcommunity design. iv) Enhancethecontribution oftheNatural Heritage System areas, shall bedirectedtowards thefollowing objectives: … hazards, andaggregate, mineralandpetroleumresource heritage areas, areas containing natural or human generated It isintended that thedevelopment anduseofnatural protection orrehabilitation. facilities, andpublic/private sectoragreements tofacilitate development standards, reconfiguration ofuses, shared current development standards or adoption ofalternative limited to, increasesindensity ofdevelopment, revision of are considered. Such techniques may include, but arenot System when development proposalsorpublic works protection andrehabilitation oftheNatural Heritage may utilizesite-specific techniques tomaximizethe The County, inco-operation with localmunicipalities, Best Practice:CountyofLambton Best Practice:CityofLondon 101 100 Ontario Nature

ALUS Brendan Toews Best Practices GuidetoNaturalHeritage SystemsPlanning es tobenefitthenatural andbuiltcomponents ofcommunities. date natural heritage systems. It allows theefficient useofresourc proposals including public works, canbeadjusted toaccommo- Analysis: This policyrecognizesthat thedesign ofdevelopment process by: areasthroughrural theplanninganddevelopment review per cent. The City willincreaseforest cover inurban and maintain atarget forforest cover fortheentire city of30 Pending completion ofaForest Strategy, theCity will c. b. a. developed inconsultation with thedevelopment forest asaresult ofdevelopment. This policy, tobe including apolicyoncompensation forlossof planting inthedevelopment review process, Developing guidelines fortreepreservation and municipal buildings; public works, including road corridors, parks and the requirements for private development and Emphasizing treepreservation andplanting in environmental assessments foradjacent lands; designated inthePlan, including provisions for Identifying andprotectingenvironmental areas Best Practice:CityofOttawa 3.2 IntegrationofNaturalHeritageSystemsPlanning - Tapping mapletrees *

Section 3 Section 3 Casey Lessard Sunnivue Farm, acommunityland-trust Sunnivue Farm, 3.2 IntegrationofNaturalHeritageSystemsPlanning * other community objectives andgoals. ing quality oflife. It integrates thenatural heritage policieswith heritage infostering healthy, liveable communities andenhanc Analysis: This policyrecognizesthebroader value ofnatural to thelong-term sustainability ofthenatural heritage system. benefits willhelptocreate anengaged constituency committed and economicopportunities. Cultivating appreciation ofthese ecosystem aswell services, aspublic health,recreational, social they provide significant benefittocommunities interms of systems forawide variety ofreasonsandtoacknowledge that Rationale: It isimportant toexplicitly value natural heritage 3.2.4 compensation forforest loss. cess. Guidelines fortreepreservation willinclude apolicyon forest cover, tobeintegrated with thedevelopment review pro- Analysis: This policysetsaclear target forthemaintenance of and quality oflifethat characterize the County. and liveable communities and enhancethesenseofplace keeping with theGreenlandsobjectives, that foster healthy and appreciation and forrecreational andtourismusesin To provide opportunities fornatural heritage enjoyment to thecommunity. services thatthenaturalheritagesystemprovides associated withnaturalheritagefeatures andthe economic, culturalandecologicalvalues Principle: Policyshouldrecognize thesocio- sites owned by theapplicant ortheCity. forms ofcompensation, including planting onother industry andthecommunity, willconsider various BestPractice:SimcoeCounty 103 102 Ontario Nature - Best Practices GuidetoNaturalHeritage SystemsPlanning relevant approval agencies ineach circumstance. requirements should bedetermined inconsultation with the the scaleofproposalandits potential impacts, andstudy impact study requirements should beflexible inrelation to rive at aworkable planningrecommendation, environmental is nonegative impact onthenatural heritage system andtoar- of natural heritage features andfunctions.To ensure that there specific investigation, thefulland accurate presenceandextent Such studies arealsoimportant inidentifying, through site- ing that development willnothave potential adverse impacts. protect natural heritage features andfunctionsby demonstrat Rationale: Environmental impact studies (EIS)areintended to 3.3.1 3.3 Studies Requirement forEnvironmental Impact impacts onthenaturalheritagesystem. mitigation measures, there willbenonegative and demonstratethatthrough avoidanceand to conductenvironmental impactstudies Principle: Policyshouldrequire proponents 3.3 Requirements for Environmental ImpactStudies forEnvironmental 3.3 Requirements - ALUS wetland,Norfolk

Section 3 Section 3 Joe Mabel Clearview TownshipClearview 3.3 Requirements for Environmental ImpactStudies forEnvironmental 3.3 Requirements Niagara Region * impact study can development proceed. out. Only when themunicipality approves theenvironmental dations ofanenvironmental impact study areproperly carried require agreements andsecurities toensure that therecommen gation plans,andit establishes theability forthemunicipality to development. It requires thepreparation ofprotection andmiti features’ functionsand significanceandthe appropriateness of an environmental impact study, including ananalysis ofthe Analysis: This policyestablishes therequirement toundertake policies ofthisOfficial Plan. requirements ofthemunicipality, andtheotherpertinent proceed onthebasisofrecommendations oftheEIS, the with soundmanagement practices, the permitted usemay authority(s), that development canoccurinaccordance Township ofClearviewand/or otherresponsible approval where it isestablished through anEIS, approved by the with thenatural system through sensitive design. …Only is concluded tobeappropriate, toensure its integration and functionsofthearea,second,where development the potential impacts ofdevelopment onthenatural features The objectiveprimary of an EIS is first, to identify and assess heritage features, or where development may impact thefunctionsofnatural Where development isproposedinnatural heritage features, EIS. … protection andpreservation plan,remediation plan,and/or preservation techniques described intheevaluation study, associated securities toensure theimplementation ofthe Clearview may require theentering into ofagreements and on principles ofsite naturalization. …The Township of site remediation plansmay alsoberequired focusing a protectionandmitigation plan.Where appropriate, can proceed,theproponent shall berequired toprepare the EISandnatural heritage evaluation, that development suitability fordevelopment. If it isdetermined, through and functiontoassessthesignificanceofarea its as partofanEIS, anevaluation ofthefeature’s composition Best Practice:ClearviewTownship 104 the proponent shall berequired toprepare, 105 Ontario Nature - - Best Practices GuidetoNaturalHeritage SystemsPlanning for impacts. proach suited tothenature ofthedevelopment andits potential Guidance onrequirements should alsoprovide forascaledap- submitting information insupport ofdevelopment proposals. requirements provide strong direction toapplicants who are levels ofbackground research andimpact assessment. Detailed the minimum requirements forcontent andtheappropriate set outrequirements formonitoring. Policy should establish ment should occur; provide mitigation recommendations; and ment proposal;provide directiononwhether ornotdevelop- The studies must determine thepotential impacts ofadevelop- component oftheplanninganddevelopment review process. Rationale: Environmental impact assessments areanessential 3.3.2 required contentandanalysis. requirements forimpactassessments,including Principle: Policyshouldclearlysetoutthe 3.3 Requirements for Environmental ImpactStudies forEnvironmental 3.3 Requirements Sanctuary Nature Reserve Nature Sanctuary Altberg Wildlife Ontario Nature's

Section 3 Section 3 Wen Zhang 3.3 Requirements for Environmental ImpactStudies forEnvironmental 3.3 Requirements * general, anenvironmental impact assessment must: the preparation ofenvironmental impact assessments. In are attached tothisPlan asAppendix “A”, andwillguide amended fromtimetoby theConservation Authority The “Guidelines forEnvironmental Impact Assessment” as system. … impacts ofaproposeddevelopment onthenatural heritage environmental impact assessment adequately evaluates the Section 6.1.12 may beincreasedinorder toensure that the Authority may recommendthat thedistances notedin natural heritage feature orfunction,theConservation Ministry. For areashaving aparticularvalue fortheir Conservation Authority orotherappropriate agency or in consultation between theCity, theCataraqui Region assessment required by thisPlan must bedetermined The scopeandscaleofany environmental impact f. e. d. c. b. a. from otheragency orscientific sources and discuss summarize thebest information available collected landforms), hydrology orhydrogeology; provide relevant information on geology (significant seasonal timespanthat isappropriate; related habitat communities tobecompleted over a provide athorough inventoryfauna offloraand and alteration and/or development; contours toshow proposeduses,site use appropriately scaledmaps with topographic areas adjacent toit; have beendeemed significant forthe subject site and heritage features andareas,whether ornotthey existing usesandbuildings, andallexisting natural use appropriately scaledmaps toshow topography, circumstances; or otherspecialtyasrequired by thespecific knowledge inthefieldofbiology, ecology, hydrology be undertaken by aqualified personwith current Best Practice:CityofKingston 106 Ontario Nature Best Practices GuidetoNaturalHeritage SystemsPlanning mine thescopeandscale oftheassessment. conservation authority and other appropriate agencies to deter - requires theproponent toconsult with themunicipality, the veloping effective mitigation andmonitoring plans. The policy ties, isalsoincorporated asanimportant consideration inde- cumulative impacts, including thoseofotherproposed activi assessment isexplicitly required. The requirement toassess tent, thepolicyalsoprovides forflexibility. A systems-based tion authority. Thus, while providing clear directiononcon the requirements, asrecommended by therelevant conserva vironmental impact study while also allowing thecity toadjust Analysis: This policysetsoutdetailed requirements foranen i. h. g. • • • construction; and, the natural heritage system during andafter or site alteration onthevarious attributes of assess theimpact oftheproposeddevelopment proposals inthevicinity; and, proposal andany otherexisting orknown future assess thecumulative impacts ofthedevelopment natural heritage system; habitat needsandthecontribution ofthesite tothe heritage features andareasidentified including review theecologicalfunctionsofnatural associated ecologicalfunctions; the natural heritage features andareas,the this Plan. Provincial Policy Statement andthepoliciesof feature(s) orarea(s) affected,consistent with the measures needed toprotectthenatural heritage and areas,related functions,andany proposed potential impacts tonatural heritage features whether theproposalisacceptable, considering provide aprofessionalconclusion asto monitoring requirements; and, review alternative optionsandidentify any result innonegative impact; is nodisturbance ofthefeature, andthat will recommend measures designed toensure there 107 3.3 Requirements for Environmental ImpactStudies forEnvironmental 3.3 Requirements - - - - Kingston

Dennis Jarvis Section 3 Section 3 Kiril Strax Niagara 3.3 Requirements for Environmental ImpactStudies forEnvironmental 3.3 Requirements * ecological functionsofadjacent lands. an assessment ofcumulative impacts, aswell asimpacts onthe considers impacts on features, functions andlinkages. It requires Analysis: This policyrequires a systems-based assessment that preparation ofthestudy. and, where appropriate, theConservation Authority priorto review totheRegion, theappropriate localmunicipality The Terms ofReference foranEISshall besubmitted for and ofexpectedimpacts onthosefunctions. evaluation oftheecologicalfunctionsadjacent lands adjacent landsasspecifiedin Table 7-1 it shall include an Where theEISdeals with development orsite alteration on as outlinedintheEISGuidelines: An Environmental Impact Study shall include thefollowing e) d) Anassessment, with respecttostandards setoutinthe c) b) a) with thedevelopment asproposedormodified. Recommendations ontheadvisability ofproceeding and term afterthesemeasures have beenimplemented; net environmental impacts expected over thelong EIS Guidelines, ofthesignificancecumulative water features andhydrologic functions; functions, andonsignificant andground surface impacts onsignificant natural features andecological on theCoreNatural Heritage System, including not possible, tominimizeormitigate negative impacts A description ofmeasures toavoid or, ifavoidance is A description oftheproposeddevelopment; them; and; hydrologic functions,andofthelinkages among of significant andground surface water features and significant natural features andecologicalfunctions, and theidentification, analysis and evaluation of an assessment ofits settinginthebroader landscape A description oftheexisting environment including: Best Practice:NiagaraRegion 108 Ontario Nature Best Practices GuidetoNaturalHeritage SystemsPlanning b) vii. vi. v. iv. iii. Adescription ofadjacent landuseandtheexisting ii. i. The environmental impact study shall address: viii. ix. Adescription ofalternative methodsofprotecting impacts upon natural heritage features; change, mitigate orremedy any expectednegative A description oftheactionstoprevent, necessary each; assessment oftheadvantages anddisadvantages of development proposalcouldtake including an A description ofalternate formsthat the significance ofthenatural heritage feature; development proposalincluding astatement ofthe and its associated ecologicalfunctionsby the reasonably becaused tothenatural heritage feature A description ofthenegative impacts that might be negatively impacted; ecological functionsthat might directly orindirectly A description ofallnatural features andtheir adjacent lands; regulations affectingthedevelopment proposaland areas andotherapplicable matters; hydrology, hydrogeological soils, conditions, habitat vegetation, fauna, site topography, drainage, buildings, existing landusesandbuildings, existing including alocation map showing proposed A description oftheproposeddevelopment, proposal; the development proposalandalternatives tothe A description ofandstatement oftherationale for features andtheirecologicalfunctions; provide fortheenhancement ofnatural heritage Where reasonable andappropriate measures to the ecologicalfunctionsofareasaffected; Best Practice:CityofGuelph 3.3 Requirements for Environmental ImpactStudies forEnvironmental 3.3 Requirements *

Section 3 Section 3 3.3 Requirements for Environmental ImpactStudies forEnvironmental 3.3 Requirements * term monitoring techniques. as appropriate, andarequirement to describe short- andlong- the enhancement ofnatural features andecologicalfunctions, advantages ofeach. It alsoincludes arequirement toaddress alternate formsofdevelopment andtheadvantages anddis Analysis: This policyincorporates arequirement todescribe • • • • • • • • which may require consideration through theEISprocess. The following provides examples ofthetypesissues removal. The potential impacts ofgrade alterations andtopsoil storm water run-off. The quality, quantity, distribution andwater balanceof on wildlife. The potential impacts andotherdisturbances ofnoise an area,corridors andconnectivity. The potential impacts ofdevelopment onbiodiversity of wildlife andhabitat. The potential impacts ofdevelopment onvegetation, The potential impacts ofdevelopment onfish habitat. quality andquantity. The potential impacts ofdevelopment onsurfacewater quantity andquality andrecharge/discharge function. The potential impacts ofdevelopment ongroundwater xi. x. Best Practice:ClearviewTownship heritage feature under investigation. proposal inrelation totheparticularnatural is deemedtoevaluate necessary thedevelopment or theGrandRiver Conservation Authority that (including its Environmental Advisory Committee) Any otherinformation required by theCity trigger identified remediation measures; and features areoccurring; thismay alsobeusedto determine ifnegative impacts tothenatural heritage techniques/devices that to willbenecessary A description ofany short/long termmonitoring 109 Ontario Nature - Best Practices GuidetoNaturalHeritage SystemsPlanning can proceed,theproponent shall berequired toprepare the EISandnatural heritage evaluation, that development suitability fordevelopment. If it isdetermined, through and functiontoassessthe significanceoftheareaand its as partofanEIS, anevaluation ofthefeature’s composition heritage features, theproponent shall berequired toprepare, or where development may impact thefunctionsofnatural Where development isproposed innatural heritage features, • • • • • • other responsible approval authority(s), anEISshall include: Subject tothefurtherrequirements oftheTownship and/or • • • • plan. … The preparation ofanimplementation andmonitoring enhancement, restoration … An analysis oftheopportunities forenvironmental development. methods ofavoiding ormitigating theimpacts of A review ofalternate development optionsandultimate functions. development onthesite’s natural heritage features and A description ofthepotential impacts oftheproposed detailed site plan. A description ofthedevelopment proposalincluding a adjacent totheproposeddevelopment site. general description ofthesamephysical features forlands watercourses andother relevant features, together with a vegetation,structures, soils, wildlife, habitat, topography, proposed tobedeveloped, including buildings, A description ofthephysical features ofthelands authority. … the Township ofClearvieworotherresponsible approval Any otherissues deemed towarrant consideration by Monitoring requirements. Methods ofavoiding ormitigating theimpact. place ondevelopment. sites andotherpotential sourcesofcontamination may The potential constraints openorclosed waste disposal 110 3.3 Requirements for Environmental ImpactStudies forEnvironmental 3.3 Requirements Minesing swamp,Simcoe

Noah Cole Section 3 Section 3 Noah Cole 3.3 Requirements for Environmental ImpactStudies forEnvironmental 3.3 Requirements Red-tailed hawkinPortRowan set outadditional requirements toaddress site-specific issues will occur. that nonegative impacts on thenatural features orfunctions features andareasexcept where evaluation hasdemonstrated teration arenotpermitted onlandsadjacent tonatural heritage Rationale: In accordance, development with thePPS andsite al- 3.3.3 of thestudy, providing forsomeflexibility. other thanthetownship regardingtheundertaking andapproval The policyalsomentions thepotential involvement ofauthorities analysis andfindings with planning decisions andinstruments. as well assite remediation plans.This requirement bridges the quirement forthepreparation ofprotectionandmitigation plans, in anenvironmental impact study, thepolicyalsosetsoutare- Analysis: In addition tooutliningthematters tobe considered include theentire adjacent lands.” functions, buffersidentified tomitigate theseimpacts could lands willhave anegative impact onnatural features andtheir determine that development anywhere within theadjacent ment orsite alteration. According tothemanual: “If studies to prevent potential negative impacts fromaproposeddevelop- ed distance fromnatural heritage features identified inthePPS The Natural Heritage Reference Manual provides arecommend term viability ofnatural heritage systems. impact. They helptosustain theecologicalfunctionandlong- buffer toprotectnatural heritage features andfunctionsfrom … the Township and/or otherresponsible approval authority[.] shall beundertaken by aqualified professional acceptable to principles ofsite naturalization. Such plansandanalysis site remediation plansmay alsoberequired focusingon a protectionandmitigation plan.Where appropriate, 111 and setbacks. establishment ofappropriate ecologicalbuffers impacts ofdevelopmentproposals, andthe to naturalheritagesystems,ananalysisofthe of therole andimportanceoflandsadjacent Principle: Policyshouldrequire theconsideration 112 The intent istoensure that adjacent landsact asa 113 Municipal policyshould Ontario Nature - Best Practices GuidetoNaturalHeritage SystemsPlanning for example. provide recommendations onthewidth andnature ofbuffers, any adverse impacts on the natural heritage system. They could and toensure that buffersandsetbacks aredesigned toprevent Fish Habitat Significant Valleylands Scientific Interest –LifeScience Provincially SignificantAreas ofNaturaland Scientific Interest –EarthScience Provincially SignificantAreas ofNaturaland threatened species Significant habitatofendangered speciesand areas Significant wildlifehabitatandcore Significant woodlands Provincially Significant Wetlands NATURAL HERITAGE FEATURE the following Table. ofnaturalboundary heritage features andareas assetoutin are defined asalllandswithin thespecifieddistance ofthe area. For thepurposesofthisOfficial Plan, adjacent lands alteration would have anegative impact onthefeature or feature orareawhere it islikely that development or site Adjacent landsarethecontiguous toanatural heritage ecological functions . will benonegative impact onthenatural features ortheir through anEnvironmental Impact Study (EIS),that there lands hasbeenevaluated andit hasbeendemonstrated, adjacent landsunlessthe ecological functionoftheadjacent development orsite alterationNo shall bepermitted onthese Best Practice:ElginCounty 114 3.3 Requirements for Environmental ImpactStudies forEnvironmental 3.3 Requirements LANDS (metres) ADJACENT 120 120 120 120 120 120 120 50 *

Section 3 Section 3 3.3 Requirements for Environmental ImpactStudies forEnvironmental 3.3 Requirements * White-tailed deer rection onwhat istobeconsidered adjacent lands. there willbenoadverse impacts. The policyprovides clear di heritage system. It allows development onadjacent landsonly if impacts onbothnatural features andfunctionsofthenatural Analysis: This policyrequires proponents toevaluate potential study and/or municipal guidelines. design andusearetobe basedupon anenvironmental impact heritage system fromadverse impacts. It establishes that their and requires that theybeestablished toprotectthenatural Analysis: This policyacknowledges theimportance ofbuffers secondary planand/orsecondary anenvironmental impact study. Determining Setbacks buffers aspartofa andEcological through application oftheCouncilapproved Guidelines for impacts ofdevelopment onadjacent landswillbe specified toprotectnaturalbuffers necessary heritage areasfromthe ii) The location, width, composition anduseofecological Impact Study. the recommendations ofanapproved Environmental components oftheNatural Heritage System, basedupon buffers willberequired around,oradjacent to, andother and integrity oftheNatural Heritage System. Ecological i) buffersserve Ecological toprotecttheecologicalfunction Best Practice:CityofLondon Ontario Nature 115 -

Lydia Dotto Robbie Vize Best Practices GuidetoNaturalHeritage SystemsPlanning in thebuffermust beminimized. ic criteria aresatisfied. Adverse impacts ofpermitted activities adverse impacts onthecorenatural features andifother specif ment ofstormwater facilities ispermitted only ifthereareno those allowed inthenatural features themselves. The develop- impact usesinthebuffers,andthesemust beconsistent with or naturalized bufferswithin urban areas.It allows only low- Analysis: This policyacknowledges theimportance ofnatural the bufferareminimizedtoextent possible. impacts ontheCoreNatural Feature andtheworks within be permitted where therewillbenoadverse environmental public agencies having jurisdiction.Such works willonly environmental analysis accepted by theCity andtheother management that conformtodetailed engineeringand works associated with public trailsandstormwater and grading willnotbepermitted, except forapproved existing functionofthebufferlands.Impervious surfaces impacted, andthefacility replicates orcomplements an the extent feasible outside thebuffer, rootzonesare not low impact development measures areimplemented to can beenhanced,nootheralternative location isfeasible, facilities may bepermitted where theCoreNatural Feature Features. In addition, portionsofstormwater management consistent with thosepermitted within CoreNatural Core Natural Features willbelimited tolow impact uses or approved works. Permitted useswithin thebuffersof naturalized state ifdisturbed through historical landuse primarily natural state orberestored toaprimarily Buffers ofCoreNatural Features aretoremainina Best Practice:CityofWaterloo 3.3 Requirements for Environmental ImpactStudies forEnvironmental 3.3 Requirements 116 - Niagara Escarpment, Halton *

Section 3 Section 3 3.3 Requirements for Environmental ImpactStudies forEnvironmental 3.3 Requirements * 3.3.4 bylaws torequire such pre-consultation. municipal tool,andamunicipality canestablish policiesand Planning Act hasidentified pre-consultation asanimportant expectations andsoliciting advice fromvarious authorities. The mission willassist inidentifying information gaps, outlining hensively address multiple values. Consultation priortosub- submission ofcomplete, accurate applications that compre- early intheplanningprocesswillbenefitallparties by ensuring planning authorities andotherinvolved approval agencies Rationale: Requiring adevelopment proponent toconsult with of theirapplication. sis oftherequired studies andplanstobesubmitted insupport forms proponents oftheintended content andexpectedanaly considerations tobeintegrated into development review. It in agencies andallows forenvironmental andothermunicipal pre-consultation bylaw. It enables theinvolvement ofother through theOfficial Plan andin accordance with theregion’s Analysis: This policyestablishes mandatory pre-consultation from Regional approval. regardless ofwhether it hasbeendeemed tobenon-exempt application foranareamunicipal officialplanamendment purposes, thispolicyisnotintended toapply toan agencies andRegional departments. For clarification more thanonepre-consultation meetingandinvolve other ‘E8’ andothersectionsoftheOfficial Plan andmay require complete application asspecifiedinSchedule ‘E’– Table process isintended to address therequirements fora Mandatory Pre-Consultation By-law. The pre-consultation accordance with the provisions ofthisPlan andtheRegion’s shall pre-consult with theRegion’s Planning Department in for which theRegion istheapproval authority, applicants Prior tothesubmission ofany development application planning boards priortosubmittinganapplication. environmental advisorycommitteesand/or proponents consultwithmunicipalstaff, Principle: Policyshouldrequire thatdevelopment Best Practice:RegionofDurham 117 Ontario Nature - - Paul Hamilton Best Practices GuidetoNaturalHeritage SystemsPlanning other relevant agencies. impact study, andit alsosignalsthepotential involvement of pre-consultation todetermine thescopeofenvironmental and thecomplexity ofarequired study may vary. It requires Analysis: This policyrecognizesthat theissues tobeaddressed information, andother measures. review periods,extended orwider public access toapplicant portunities. These may include additional meetings, extended spectives fromtheoutset,through additional consultation op- minimum standard tobetterreflectcommunity values andper- ment proposal.Municipal policyshould buildontheprovincial public meetingtobeheldregardingany particulardevelop- for public consultation, which generally require only asingle Rationale: The Planning Act setsoutminimum requirements 3.3.5 approval authority(s), priortotheEISproceeding. with theTownship ofClearviewand/or otherresponsible be determined onasite by site basisinpre-consultation its distance fromtheresourceareainquestion andshall will varywith thescaleandtypeofdevelopment and/or The issues tobeaddressed andthecomplexity ofanEIS are beingconsidered. developments withpotentialsignificantimpacts particularly where large-scaledevelopmentsor may exceedrequirements inthePlanningAct, meaningful consultationwithstakeholdersthat Principle: Policyshouldprovide forextendedand Best Practice:ClearviewTownship 3.3 Requirements for Environmental ImpactStudies forEnvironmental 3.3 Requirements 118 *

Section 3 Section 3 3.3 Requirements for Environmental ImpactStudies forEnvironmental 3.3 Requirements * tage, agriculture andeconomicdevelopment. to theroleofotheradvisory committees on such topicsasheri a particularinterest innatural heritage matters. This issimilar vice notjust fromstaff butalsofromanadvisory group that has mittee, themunicipal councilhastheadvantage ofreceiving ad Analysis: Through theinvolvement ofapublic advisory com adopted andperiodically reviewed by Regional Council. and othermatters, in accordance with terms ofreference in thereview ofdevelopment applications, policyproposals Environmental Advisory Committee toadvise theRegion Regional Councilwillmaintain and anEcological Best Practice:RegionofWaterloo Ontario Nature - 119 - -

Glenn Davy Denis Giles Best Practices GuidetoNaturalHeritage SystemsPlanning tation ofits Official Plan. mental expertswith respecttotheformulation andimplemen committee, thecity receives additional advice fromenviron Analysis: Through theinvolvement ofanexpertpublic advisory determined by City Council,fromtimetotime. and operational requirements fortheCommittee willbe Plan. Detailedterms-of-reference, membership guidelines the formulation andimplementation oftheCity’s Official of Londononenvironmental matters that arerelevant to or availability, toprovide experttechnical advice totheCity of theirexpertise, experience, academic qualification and/ committee, consisting ofindividuals appointed onthebasis City Councilmay establish anenvironmental advisory Best Practice:CityofLondon 3.3 Requirements for Environmental ImpactStudies forEnvironmental 3.3 Requirements 120 - - London *

Section 3 Ontario Nature CONCLUSION Section 4

he protection of southern and eastern Ontario’s natural heritage is vital to maintaining and Tenhancing a livable landscape in the region. As evidenced by the best practices presented in this guide, many municipalities across Ontario are developing the policies necessary to ensure that present and future generations will always be able to enjoy the province’s forests, rivers, lakes and wildlife, and the many benefits that they provide.

Ontario Nature hopes that the guiding principles and best practice examples provided will inform and inspire planners across Ontario who wish to improve municipal natural heritage policies. It is acknowledged, of course, that every municipality faces unique pressures and unique opportunities – there is no “one size fits all” when it comes to municipal policy. Nevertheless, the principles and examples should, at the very least, provide good reference points, given that the best practices span upper-, lower- and single-tier municipalities from Lambton County to Ottawa.

A robust natural heritage system with a strong associated policy framework sets the stage for the planning of healthy, resilient communities. In addition to the policy framework, municipalities must be committed to implementation. This means setting aside budgetary and other resources to allow for the identification, inventory, management, restoration and securement of core natural areas and connecting corridors.

Ultimately, the protection of natural heritage is essential to meeting the needs of Ontario’s expanding population and requires the co-operation of all sectors and interests. Municipal land use planning provides an ideal opportunity to integrate Greenway planning into urban design, agricultural management and other resource utilization activities, and to achieve multiple long-term benefits for all members of society.

Nature Guardians Youth Camping Trip, Ontario Nature`s Altberg Wildlife Sanctuary Nature Reserve

Nicole Chamula Best Practices Guide to Natural Heritage Systems Planning APPENDIX

Legislative and Policy Context for Land Use Planning in Southern and Eastern Ontario There are many laws and policies directing land use planning in Ontario. Over the last 20 years, the province has begun to systematically address the impacts of growth and development on the landscape, including the loss of biodiversity and ecosystem function. Within southern and eastern Ontario, a suite of laws and policies guide municipal land use planning with respect to natural heritage. This includes geography-specific plans such as the Niagara Escarpment Plan, the Oak Ridges Moraine Conservation Plan, the Greenbelt Plan, the Growth Plan for the Greater Golden Horse- shoe, and the Lake Simcoe Protection Plan. These plans provide an additional level of direction to that set out under the Planning Act and the PPS for municipal planning within these regions, as discussed below. Planning Act and Provincial Policy Statement Land use planning in Ontario is governed by the Planning Act, which “describes how land uses may be controlled, and who may control them.”121 The purposes of the act are:

(a) to promote sustainable economic development in a healthy natural environment within the policy and by the means provided under this Act; (b) to provide for a land use planning system led by provincial policy; (c) to integrate matters of provincial interest in provincial and municipal planning decisions; (d) to provide for planning processes that are fair by making them open, accessible, timely and efficient; (e) to encourage co-operation and co-ordination among various interests; (f) to recognize the decision-making authority and accountability of municipal councils in planning.122 The act sets out provisions by which municipalities are empowered to control land uses and development, as well as requirements for municipal planning. It also lists provincial interests and requires all planning decisions to be consistent with provincial policy statements intended to address those interests.

The PPS provides specific guidance for municipalities regarding the preparation of Official Plans and other planning instruments (including bylaws). Section 2.1 of the PPS specifically addresses natural heritage:

Ontario Nature Best Practices GuidetoNaturalHeritage SystemsPlanning dressed. through thedevelopment ofmunicipal Official Plans that localinterests, values andpriorities are ad est. Whilesetsminimum standards thePPS andrequirements toaddress provincial interests, it is are morestringent, aslongthosepoliciesdo notconflictwith anothermatter ofprovincial inter- It isimportant does tonotethat notprevent thePPS municipalities fromestablishing policiesthat 2.1.9 Nothing is intended inpolicy2.1 tolimit theability ofagricultural usestocontinue. the natural features orontheirecologicalfunctions. cent landshasbeenevaluated andit hasbeendemonstrated that therewillbenonegative impacts on features2.1.6 andareasidentified2.1.5, and 2.1.4, unlesstheecologicalfunctionof inpolicies adja Development2.1.8 andsite alteration shall notbepermitted onadjacent landstothenatural heritage threatened species,except inaccordance with provincial andfederal requirements. 2.1.7 Development andsite alteration shall notbepermitted inhabitat ofendangered speciesand provincial andfederal requirements. Development2.1.6 andsite alteration shall notbepermitted infish habitat except in accordance with Development2.1.5 andsite alteration shall notbepermitted in: environment, and toensure only such development occursasiscompatible with that natural envi tenance oftheNiagara Escarpment and landinits vicinity substantially asacontinuous natural The purposeoftheNiagara Escarpment Planning andDevelopment Act is“toprovide forthemain Niagara Escarpment PlanningandDevelopmentActNiagara EscarpmentPlan Development2.1.4 andsite alteration shall notbepermitted in: itage systems willvaryinsizeandformsettlement areas,andprimeagricultural areas,rural areas. Natural2.1.3 heritage systems shall beidentified recognizing thatEcoregions 6E&7E, natural in her- ter features andgroundwater features. improved, recognizinglinkages between andamongnatural heritage features andareas,surfacewa tion andbiodiversity ofnatural heritage systems, should bemaintained, restored or, where possible, The2.1.2 diversity andconnectivity ofnatural features inanarea,andthelong-term ecologicalfunc Natural2.1.1 features andareasshall beprotectedforthelongterm. f) f) e) d) c) b) a) b) a) ecological functions. has beendemonstrated that therewillbenonegative impacts onthenatural features ortheir coastal wetlands 6Eand7Ethat 5E, arenotsubject inEcoregions topolicy2.1.4(b) unlessit significant areasofnatural andscientific interest; and significant wildlifehabitat; Marys River); significant valleylandsEcoregions 6Eand 7E in (excluding islands inLake Huron andthe St. Marys River); significant Ecoregions 6Eand 7E woodlands in (excluding islands inLake Huron andthe St. significant wetlands intheCanadian6Eand7E; Ecoregions 5E, Shield northof significant coastal wetlands. significant 6Eand7E; Ecoregions 5E, wetlands in ------

Appendix Appendix ment Plan istobereviewed in2015,at thesametimeasGreenbelt Plan. tion, are: ment inthewest totheTrent River intheeast. The objectives oftheplan,as setoutinlegisla geological landformthat covers anareaof160kilometres,extendingfromtheNiagara Escarp- servation Act, 2001,guides landuseandresourcemanagement intheOakRidges Moraine, a The OakRidges Moraine Conservation Plan, established under theOakRidges Moraine Con Plan Oak RidgesMoraineConservationAct,2001and ronment.” natural andopenspace linkages. Buffers andsetbacks arealsoprescribed forkey natural fea connections between coreareasandalongriver andstream systems through theprotectionof and linkages by limiting landuseactivities. The planexplicitly recognizestheimportance of feature ofthisplan,designated with the intent ofprotectingsensitive natural heritage features over municipal Official Plans andzoning bylaws. Natural core andlinkage areasareaunique considering thepoliciesinreview ofdevelopment applications. The plantakes precedence Municipalities located within the moraineareresponsible forimplementing theplanandfor all otherapplicable landuseplanningpolicies,regulations orstandards. they prevail over any otherlocalplansorzoningbylaws. They must beread inconjunction with continue toapply. Furthermore, where thepoliciesof the Niagara Escarpment Plan areineffect, ning andDevelopment Act . In otherwords, therequirements oftheNiagara Escarpment Plan in themorerecent law derogates fromtheprovisions of theearlier Niagara Escarpment Plan The planareaisincluded within theGreenbelt areaunder theGreenbelt Act, 2005,butnothing ecosystem, thus transcendingmunicipal boundaries. contrast tomunicipal planning, thecommissionisdirectedtoplanforNiagara Escarpment that reviews andmakes decisions onawide range oflanduseissues affectingtheplanarea.In plan,” teria, andpark andopenspace policies.It isCanada’s “first large-scale environmental landuse Niagara Escarpment andsurrounding landsthrough landusedesignations, development cri (i) (h) (g) (f) (e) (d) (c) (b) (a) 124 any otherprescribed objectives. providing forotherpublic recreational access totheOakRidges Moraine Area;and is accessible toallincluding personswith disabilities; providing foracontinuous recreational trailthrough theOakRidges Moraine Areathat recognizing existingsettlements; rural providing forcontinued development within existing urban settlement areasand other objectives ofthePlan; providing forlandand resourceusesanddevelopment that arecompatible with the landform andenvironment forthebenefitofpresent andfuture generations; ensuring that theOak Ridges Moraine Areaismaintained asacontinuous natural quantity ofits water andits otherresources; and hydrological functionsoftheOakRidges Moraine Area, including thequality and maintaining, improving orrestoring alltheelements that contribute totheecological ecological andhydrological functionsoftheOakRidges Moraine Areaarepermitted; ensuring that only landandresourceusesthat maintain, improve orrestore the protecting theecologicalandhydrological integrity oftheOakRidges Moraine Area; overseen by theNiagara Escarpment Commission,anindependent and impartial body 123 Under thisact, theNiagara Escarpment Plan guides development andprotectsthe 126

125 The Niagara Escarp- Ontario Nature - - - - - Best Practices GuidetoNaturalHeritage SystemsPlanning the PPS. Greenbelt Plan prevails inthecaseofaconflictwith municipal Official Plans, zoning bylaws and palities arerequired tobringtheirOfficial Plans into conformity with theGreenbelt Plan. The plan areasandwithin thewatersheds. (For furtherinformation, seepp.14ofthisguide.) Munici Escarpment Plan andOakRidges Moraine Conservation Plan, andtoimprove linkages between Greenbelt Plan policiesareintended toenhanceandextendtheprotectionafforded by theNiagara Moraine Conservation Plan istobereviewed in2015,at thesametimeasGreenbelt Plan. The purposesofthePlaces toGrow Act, 2005are: Places toGrow Act,2005andGrowth PlanfortheGreater GoldenHorseshoe region. The objectives oftheplan,assetoutinlegislation, are: systems while establishing aProtectedCountryside inthefast-growing Greater Golden Horseshoe carpment andOakRidges Moraine plan areasandtheprotectiontheyprovide tonatural heritage The Greenbelt Plan, created under theGreenbelt Act, 2005,knits together theexisting Niagara Es Greenbelt Act,2005andGreenbelt Plan with allotherapplicable landuseplanningpolicies,regulations orstandards. of theOakRidges Moraine Conservation Plan continue toapply. They must beread inconjunction The areaisincluded within theGreenbelt areaunder theGreenbelt Act, 2005,buttherequirements development orsite alteration activities areproposed. tures orhydrologically sensitive features, andtheplanrequires that thesesetbacks bemetwhere (a) (l) (k) (j) (i) (h) (g) (f) (e) (d) (c) (b) (a) strong communities andpromoteahealthy environment andacultureofconservation; to enable decisions about growth to be made inways that sustain arobust economy, build any otherprescribed objectives. to promotesustainable resourceuse;and environmentally sensitive manner; to ensure that thedevelopment oftransportation andinfrastructureproceedsinan to control urbanization ofthelandstowhich theGreenbelt Plan applies; to promotelinkages between ecosystems andprovincial parks orpublic lands; support thesocialneeds ofarapidly expandingandincreasingly urbanized population; to provide openspace andrecreational, tourismandculturalheritage opportunities to Escarpment; to promoteconnectionsbetween lakes andtheOakRidges Moraine andNiagara ecological andhydrological functionsoftheGreenbelt Area; to provide protectiontothelandbaseneeded tomaintain, restore andimprove the to recognizethecritical importance oftheagriculture sectortothe regional economy; to preserve agricultural landasacontinuing commercialsourceoffoodandemployment; communities;farming to sustain thecountryside, andsmalltowns rural andcontribute totheeconomicviability of Moraine andtheNiagara Escarpment; to establish anetwork ofcountryside andopenspace areaswhich supports theOakRidges 129 128

127 The OakRidges - -

Appendix Appendix government’s interests inregardstogrowth management. Greater Golden Horseshoe’s natural system. This, alongwith theplanslisted above, expressthe the Greenbelt, OakRidges Moraine and Niagara Escarpment asthekey buildingblocks ofthe that contribute totheconnectednessandenhancement ofnatural systems. The planidentifies gion. The planencourages planningauthorities toidentify natural heritage features andareas identified aspriorities oftheplanandimportant contributors toeconomicprosperity inthere- for growth anddevelopment oftheregionto2041.Natural heritage andresourceprotectionare Under thislegislation, theGrowth Plan fortheGreater Golden Horseshoe setsthedirection ner inthepublic securement ofnatural heritage systems. velopment. Conservation authorities have substantial land holdings andarea significant part indirectly protectnatural heritage systems fromimpacts associated with site alteration andde- portant rolethrough theirsettingofdevelopment control regulations, which candirectly and review ofmunicipal planningdocuments anddevelopment applications. They alsoplay anim which canbeusedforthesamepurpose. Conservation authorities areofteninvolved inthe the preparation ofOfficial Plans. Many have undertaken watershed or subwatershed studies, natural heritage studies toidentify natural heritage systems, providing avaluable resourcein ing, developing ormanaging natural resources.Someconservation authorities have undertaken study andinvestigate thewatershed toidentify programswith theintent ofconserving, restor- knowledge andexpertadvice. Under theConservation Authorities Act, theyhave thepower to Conservation authorities play animportant roleinmunicipal planning, providing technical Conservation AuthoritiesandtheOfficial Plan to appeal municipal decisions. dependent tribunal provides anopportunity forpersons,public bodiesorincorporated groups peals totheboardinvolvefall under landuseplanningconflictsthat the Planning Act. This in tions andappeals related tomunicipal planning, financialmatters andlandmatters. Most ap- The Ontario Municipal Boardisaprovincial adjudicative tribunal that hearsarange ofapplica Ontario MunicipalBoard strictive. DecisionsofCouncilmust comply with theOfficial Plan. is inplace, thelower-tier planmust comply with it, though thelower-tier planmay bemorere- may becreated at boththeupper andlower municipal tiers.Where anupper-tier Official Plan ularly reviewed andupdated and applicable toreflectthePPS provincial plans.Official Plans healthy communities andhave included strong natural heritage policies.Official Plans arereg nicipal Official Plans recognizethe value ofnatural heritage systems inmaintaining resilient, input fromstakeholders such aslandowners, developers, plannersandthepublic. Many mu Official Plans arecreated through acommunity-oriented development processthat solicits out avision,values, goals, objectives, policiesandlandusedesignations forthemunicipality. Municipal Official Plans arefundamental landuseplans, developed by municipalities, setting Official Plans (d) (c) (b) government. growth andprovide fortheco-ordination ofgrowth policiesamongalllevels of to ensure that along-term visionandlong-term goals guide decision-making about and isintegrated across natural andmunicipal boundaries; to enable planningforgrowth inamannerthat reflectsabroad geographical perspective infrastructure; on community priorities, strengths and opportunities andmakes efficient useof to promotearational andbalancedapproach todecisions about growth that builds 130

131

Ontario Nature ------REFERENCES

Official Plans City of Burlington – Official Plan Consolidation (June, 2012) [Approved by the OMB Oct 2008]. City of Guelph Official Plan Amendment 42 (July 27, 2010) City of Guelph – Official Plan Consolidation (March 20, 2013) [Provincial approval December 1995]. City of Hamilton – Urban Hamilton Official Plan Consolidation (October 2013) [OMB Decision August, 2013]. City of Kingston – Official Plan Consolidation (June 1, 2013) [Approved by MMAH January 2010]. City of London – Official Plan Consolidation (December 17, 2009) [adopted by Council June 1989]. City of Ottawa – Official Plan Consolidation (May 22, 2013) [adopted by Council May 2003]. City of Vaughan – Official Plan Consolidation (June 28, 2012) [endorsed by Regional Council June 2012]. City of Waterloo – Official Plan Consolidation (December 21, 2012) [approved by Regional Municipality of Waterloo November 2012]. City of Windsor – Official Plan Consolidation (August 28, 2013) [approved by the MMAH August 2013]. Clearview Township – Official Plan (last amended May 27, 2013) [approved Jan 2002]. County of Lambton – Official Plan Consolidation (January 3, 1998) [approved by County Council September 1997]. Elgin County – Official Plan Consolidation (October 9, 2013) [Approved by MMAH October 2013]. Halton Region – Regional Official Plan Interim Consolidation (October 21, 2013) [approved by OMB for certain parts February 4, 2014]. Niagara Region – Regional Policy Plan Consolidation (August 1, 2012) Region of Durham – Regional Official Plan Consolidation (January 9, 2013) [Approved by MMAH November 1993]. Region of Waterloo – Regional Official Plan Consolidation (December 22, 2010) [approved by Council December 2010 *the plan in its entirety is currently under appeal]. County of Simcoe – Official Plan Draft (January 22, 2013) [endorsed by Council Jan 2013]. Town of Ajax – Official Plan Consolidation (February 10, 2012) (2.2.1) [approved by Durham Region Dec. 23, 2011]. Town of Georgina – Official Plan Consolidation [approvals by the Regional Municipality of York and/or the Ontar- io Municipal Board, as well as Amendments to the Official Plan approved between October 17, 2002, and October 1, 2010]. Town of Oakville – Livable Oakville Plan (June 2009) [Approved by the OMB May 2011]. Township of Central Frontenac – Official Plan Consolidation [approved June 2008]. York Region – Official Plan Consolidation (June 20, 2013) [approved by MMAH Sept 2010 *area/site-specific appeal of Chapter 2].

Best Practices Guide to Natural Heritage Systems Planning References Group, 2009. AreporttoOntario’s Ministry ofNatural Resources. Troy, Bagstad. A.and K. in Pleasanton, Estimating SouthernOntario. Ecosystem CA: Services Spatial Informatics 10 DecisionX/2, Nagoya, Japan. diversity Targets: Living in Harmony with Nature. Convention onBiologicalDiversity ConferenceoftheParties (COP) Secretariat oftheConvention onBiologicalDiversity. 2010. Strategic PlanforBiodiversity 2011-2020 andthe Aichi Bio - conservation planningapproach. The Forestry Chronicle88,no. 6(2012):722–35. Puric-Mladenovic, D. andS. Strobl, Designingnatural heritage systems insouthernOntario using asystematic Sustains Us. Ontario Biodiversity Council,Peterborough, ON. Ontario Biodiversity Council.2011.Ontario’s Biodiversity Strategy, 2011: Renewing OurCommitment toProtecting What Peterborough, ON. Ontario Biodiversity Council.2010. State ofOntario’s Biodiversity 2010. AreportoftheOntario Biodiversity Council, Statement, Second 2005, Edition.Toronto: Queen’s Printer forOntario, 2010. Ministry ofNatural Resources. Natural Heritage Reference Manual forNatural Heritage Policies ofthe Provincial Policy Queen’s Printer forOntario, 2013. Ministry ofFinance. Population Ontario Projections Update: 2012-2036: andIts 49 Ontario CensusDivisions.Toronto: sessing the Knowledge andGaps,reportpreparedfortheOntario Ministry ofNatural Resources (March 2012). Miller, EricandPatrick Lloyd-Smith, andBiodiversity TheAs ofEcosystem(TEEBO): in Economics Services Ontario (Octobercal 155 2012):141-8. Conservation and C.A.McAlpine. “Faustian bargains? Restoration realities inthecontext ofbiodiversity offsetpolicies.”Biologi- Maron, M.,R.J. Hobbs, A.Moilanen, J. W. Matthews, Christie, K. T. A.Gardner, D. A.Keith, D. B.Lindenmayer Books, 2005) Louv, Richard. LastChild in the Woods: Saving OurChildren fromNature-DeficitDisorder (Chapel Hill, NC:Algonquin . Toronto:Southern Ontario Ministry ofNatural Resources, 2011. C.M.ConnectingLemieux, Nature andPeople: AGuidetoDesigning andPlanning Natural Heritage Systems (NHS)in tional Recreation andPark Association, 2010). Kuo, Frances (Ming). E. Parks andOther Green Environments: ComponentsofaHealthy Essential Human Habitat- (Na tario. Downsview: GreenInfrastructure Ontario Coalition, 2012. Green Infrastructure Ontario Coalition. Health, andSustainability: Prosperity The CaseforGreen Infrastructure in On Cambridge: Cambridge University Press:2007. Panel onClimate Change. Parry, M.L. O. F. Canziani,J. P. Palutikof, P. J. van der LindenHanson, andC.E. eds. and Vulnerability. Contribution ofWorking Group IItotheFourth Assessment Report oftheIntergovernmental and A.Velichko. “Ecosystems, theirproperties,goods Climate andservices.” Change 2007: Impacts, Adaptation Fischlin, A.,G. F. Midgley, J. T. Price, B.Gopal,C.Turley, R.Leemans, M.D. A.Rounsevell, O. P. Dube, J. Tarazona Toronto: Environmental CommissionofOntario, 2011. Environmental CommissionerofOntario. 2010/2011 Annual Report ofthe Environmental CommissionerofOntario. Environment Canada. How Much Habitat isEnough? Third Edition.Toronto: Environment Canada, 2013. port totheUnited Nations Environment Program. streaming the ofBiodiversity: Economics ASynthesis ofthe Approach, Re ConclusionsandRecommendations A ofTEEB. The ofEcosystem Economics andBiodiversity (TEEB).2010. The ofEcosystems Economics andBiodiversity. Main couver: David SuzukiFoundation, 2008. David SuzukiFoundation. Ontario’s Wealth, Canada’s Future: Appreciating the value ofthe Greenbelt’s. Van eco-services David SuzukiFoundation andOntario Nature. Biodiversity in Ontario’s Greenbelt. Toronto: 2011. world’s ecosystem andnatural services capital.” Nature 387 (May 15,1997): 253-60. Costanza, R.,R.d’Arge, R.de Groot,S. Farber, M.Grasso, B.Hannon,Limburg, K. value etal.“The K., ofthe D.C.: BBOP, 2012. Business andBiodiversity Resource OffsetsProgramme(BBOP). Paper: Limits toWhat Offset CanBe Other References . Washington, Ontario Nature - - - - - ENDNOTES

1 Ontario Ministry of Municipal Affairs and Housing, Provincial Policy Statement, 2014, Section 6.0 Definitions. 2 Millennium Ecosystem Assessment. Ecosystems and Human Well-Being: A Framework for Assessment (Washing- ton D,C.: Island Press, 2003), millenniumassessment.org/en/Framework.aspx. As noted in A. Troy and K. Bagstad, Estimating Ecosystem Services in Southern Ontario (Pleasanton, CA: Spatial Informatics Group, 2009), 3, commis- sioned by the Southern Region Planning Unit of the Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources. 3 Ontario Ministry of Finance, Ontario Population Projections Update: 2012-2036: Ontario and Its 49 Census Divi- sions (Toronto: Queen’s Printer for Ontario, 2013). 4 Environmental Commissioner of Ontario, 2010/2011 Annual Report of the Environmental Commissioner of Ontario (Toronto: Environmental Commissioner of Ontario, 2011), 53. 5 Ontario Biodiversity Council, State of Ontario’s Biodiversity (Toronto: Ontario Biodiversity Council, 2010), 88. 6 A. Fischlin et al., “Ecosystems, their properties, goods and services,” Climate Change 2007: Impacts, Adaptation and Vulnerability, Contribution of Working Group II to the Fourth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. M. L. Parry et al., eds (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press: 2007). 7 Ontario Ministry of Municipal Affairs and Housing, Provincial Policy Statement, 2005, section 2.1.2. 8 Ontario Ministry of Municipal Affairs and Housing, Greenbelt Plan, 2005, section 3.2. 9 Ontario Ministry of Municipal Affairs and Housing, Provincial Policy Statement, 2014, section 2.1.3. 10 Ontario Biodiversity Council, Ontario’s Biodiversity Strategy 2011: Renewing our Commitment to Protecting What Sustains Us (Peterborough: Ontario Biodiversity Council, 2011), 49. Note the strategy calls for natural heritage systems plans at both municipal and landscape levels. 11 Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources, Natural Heritage Reference Manual for Natural Heritage Policies of the Provincial Policy Statement, 2005, Second Edition (Toronto: Queen’s Printer for Ontario, 2010), http://www.mnr.gov. on.ca/en/Business/LUEPS/Publication/249081.html. The Natural Heritage Reference Manual presents the Ministry of Natural Resources’ recommended technical criteria and approaches to help guide municipalities and other practitioners, such as conservation authorities, in the development of a natural heritage system. See especially Table 12-1, “Official Plan Approaches for Protecting Natural Heritage Systems, Features and Areas.” 12 See P. Berke and D. Godschalk, “Searching for the Good Plan: A Meta-Analysis of Plan Quality Studies,” Journal of Planning Literature 23, no. 3 (2009): 227–40; T. A. Steelman and G. R. Hess, “Effective Protection of Open Space: Does Planning Matter?” Environmental Management 44, no. 1 (2009): 93–104; J. Posen, “Greening the Green- field, Planning Natural Heritage Systems in New Subdivisions” master’s( report, School of Urban and Regional Plan- ning, Queen’s University, 2011); and S. D. Brody and W. E. Highfield, “Does Planning Work?: Testing the Implemen- tation of Local Environmental Planning in Florida,” Journal of the American Planning Association 71, no. 2 (2005): 159–75. 13 Environmental Commissioner of Ontario, 2011, p. 54. Note, this map was originally published in D. Puric- Mladenovic and S. Strobl, “Designing natural heritage systems in southern Ontario using a systematic conservation planning approach,” The Forestry Chronicle 88 , no. 6 (2012). 14 Planning Act, 1990, section 2.

Best Practices Guide to Natural Heritage Systems Planning Endnotes 21 20 19 18 belt Plan. and in2005.It willbereviewed again in2015,alongwith theOakRidges Moraine Conservation Plan andtheGreen 17 16 15 2012]. government/officialplan.asp onSeptember 23,2013 [approved by Regional Municipality of Waterloo November 44 43 42 41 40 Sustains Us (Peterborough: Ontario Biodiversity Council,2011),iii. 39 38 (COP) 10DecisionX/2 (Nagoya, Japan), Target 11http://www.cbd.int/sp/targets. Biodiversity Targets: Living in Harmony with Nature. Convention onBiologicalDiversity ConferenceoftheParties 37 36 Healthy Human Habitat (National Recreation and Park Association, 2010). Algonquin Books, 2005)andFrances (Ming) E. Kuo, Parks andOther Green Environments: Componentsofa Essential 35 Program, 2010. A Synthesis ofthe Approach, ConclusionsandRecommendations AReport ofTEEB. totheUnited Nations Environment and Biodiversity (TEEB), The ofEcosystems Economics andBiodiversity: Mainstreaming the ofBiodiversity: Economics 253–60. For furtherinformation onnature’s benefitsandtheir value tosociety,Ecosystem seeEconomicsof The 34 33 Assessing the Knowledge andGaps,reportpreparedfortheOntario Ministry ofNatural Resources (March 2012),35. 32 31 30 29 28 27 26 25 24 23 (Vancouver: David SuzukiFoundation, 2008), 2. 22 5. dation, 2011),33, David SuzukiFoundation andOntario Nature, Biodiversity in Ontario’s Greenbelt (Toronto: David SuzukiFoun Ibid.,section3.2.1. Ontario Ministry ofMunicipal andHousing, Affairs Greenbelt Plan, 2005,section1.2. Ontario Ministry ofMunicipal andHousing, Affairs Provincial Policy Statement, 2014,section4.9. The Niagara Escarpment Plan cameoutin1985, andsincethenhasbeenreviewed andrevised twice, in1994 d). Ibid.,section2.2.1 Ontario Ministry ofMunicipal andHousing, Affairs Provincial Policy Statement, 2014,section2.1.2. City ofWaterloo –Official Plan Consolidation (December 21,2012) Last(8.2.2) accessed from waterloo.ca/en/ Secretariat oftheConvention onBiological Diversity. 2010. Target 11http://www.cbd.int/sp/targets. Ibid.,7. Environment Canada, How Much Habitat is Enough? Third Edition(Toronto: Environment Canada, 2013), 1,4. Ontario Biodiversity Council,2011,49. Ontario Biodiversity Council,Ontario’s Biodiversity2011: Renewing Strategy ourCommitmenttoProtecting What A.Fischlin etal.,“Ecosystems,” 213. Secretariat oftheConvention onBiologicalDiversity. 2010. Strategic PlanforBiodiversity 2011-2020 andthe Aichi Kuo, Parks andOther Green Environments , 5. SeeRichard Louv, LastChild in the Woods: Saving OurChildren fromNature-DeficitDisorder (Chapel Hill, NC: R.Costanzavalue etal.,“The oftheworld’s ecosystem andnatural services capital,” Nature 387 (May 15,1997): Troy andBagstad, 18,Table Estimating Ecosystem Services, 4. EricMiller andPatrick Lloyd-Smith, andBiodiversity The ofEcosystem(TEEBO): in Economics Services Ontario David SuzukiFoundation, Ontario’s Wealth, Canada’s Future, 41. As notedinTroy andBagstad,, 18,Table Estimating Ecosystem Services 4. Ibid.,section3.2.2.1. Ibid.,section3.2.1. Ibid.,section3.2.2.5. Ibid.,section3.2.2.4. Ibid.,section3.2.2. Ibid.,section3.2.1 Ontario Ministry ofMunicipal andHousing, Affairs Greenbelt Plan, 2005,section3.2.1. David SuzukiFoundation, Ontario’s Wealth, Canada’s Future: Appreciating the value ofthe Greenbelt’s eco-services Ontario Nature - - Best Practices GuidetoNaturalHeritage SystemsPlanning 2010 *area/site-specific appeal ofChapter 2]. y6ImD9EFP_C4Nhjwo!/dl5/d5/L2dBISEvZ0FBIS9nQSEh/#.UtBNz9JDtiZ onJan. 10, 2014[approved by MMAHSept _9UFeTdDHhhosWdjQ8IepoFMdYt6OgW1G050l1KZGkW9HWXoj6qZsH7S2nrmmyLZ6cqiRxHW6c9fr4Wdb2czQ tpMC37R8qNwUXRoOSaZ5RcdXeDRSnf7veZr2Lvs_6QKPnv3M-lK_cY225oBhBDOCcQPXovzgMJTQicgYEJ_h74I t2ooq9jdqKdvRMj9cZ_urW3VY5wdeijNifI1SoNhkFgajsHJm2CtwDErtleHadA0Mjx3bxcpZqpzBjeXDkPF4aEBdgL fojCcQDy3SQA-zP0YewTIxENvKEMZE7KVG5SeuiVrhMyFHMGp6XYKHCSX72di09T5he7yUqmP4LLTqikKzji Pw0PpL-KP_qI2HZAKcuccmAF1MrYBUKYmfmPv2KLtkedMSkWV_au_xy7d0VZShBmaBHXlLJG0GrHmfuMvK portal/yorkhome/yorkregion/yr/regionalofficialplan/officialplanpackages/officialplanpackages/!ut/p/a1/vVJfb4IwH 63 62 view.ca/home/information/publications/op_with_links.pdf?attredirects=0 January 14,2014[approved Jan 2002]. 61 view.ca/home/information/publications/op_with_links.pdf?attredirects=0 January 14,2014[approved Jan 2002]. 60 dorsed by Regional CouncilJune 2012]. vaughan.ca/projects/policy_planning_projects/official_planning_2010/Pages/default.aspx onSeptember 23,2013[en 59 www.centralfrontenac.com/Planning.html onSeptember 23,2013[approved June 2008]. 58 Board, aswell asAmendments totheOfficial Plan approved between October 17, andOctober 2002, 1,2010]. opr-index.aspx onSeptember 23,2013[approvals by theRegional Municipality ofYork and/or theOntario Municipal 57 hall/livable-oakville-official-plan.html onJanuary 10, 2014[Approved by theOMBMay 2011]. 56 Regional CouncilJune 2012]. ca/projects/policy_planning_projects/official_planning_2010/Pages/default.aspx onSeptember 20, 2013[endorsed by 55 54 53 February 28,2014.[OMB DecisionAugust, 2013]. www.hamilton.ca/NR/rdonlyres/0A939735-8827-4D79-8C54-B01970515106/0/UHOPVol1PoliciesrevOct2013.pdf on 52 February 28,2014.[OMB DecisionAugust, 2013]. www.hamilton.ca/NR/rdonlyres/0A939735-8827-4D79-8C54-B01970515106/0/UHOPVol1PoliciesrevOct2013.pdf on 51 February 28,2014.[OMB DecisionAugust, 2013]. www.hamilton.ca/NR/rdonlyres/0A939735-8827-4D79-8C54-B01970515106/0/UHOPVol1PoliciesrevOct2013.pdf on 50 doingbusinessinajax/officialplan.asp onJanuary 10, 2013[approved by Durham Region Dec. 23,2011]. 49 doingbusinessinajax/officialplan.asp onJanuary 10, 2013[approved by Durham Region Dec. 23,2011]. 48 Council May 2003]. hall/planning-and-development/official-plan-and-master-plans/official-plan onFebruary 28,2014[adopted by 47 ca/home/information/publications/op_with_links.pdf?attredirects=0 January 14,2014[approved Jan 2002]. 46 Regional CouncilJune 2012]. ca/projects/policy_planning_projects/official_planning_2010/Pages/default.aspx onSeptember 23,2013[endorsed by 45 York(June Region 20, –Official Plan Consolidation 2013) (2.1.9) Last accessed fromhttp://www.york.ca/wps/ Ontario Ministry ofMunicipal andHousing, Affairs Provincial Policy Statement, 2014,section4.9. ClearviewTownship –Official Plan (last amended May 27, 2013) Last(4.1.2.4) accessed fromhttp://www.clear- ClearviewTownship –Official Plan (last amended May 27, 2013) (4.1.2.3) Last accessed fromhttp://www.clear- City ofVaughan –Official Plan Consolidation (September Last7, 2010)(3.2.3.2) accessedfromhttps://www. Township ofCentral Frontenac(June 18,2008) –Official Plan Consolidation (7.5.2) Last accessed fromhttp:// Town ofGeorgina –Official Plan Consolidation (October 1,2010)(3.5.2.7) Last accessed fromhttp://georgina.ca/ Town ofOakville –Livable Oakville 2009) Plan (June (10.1.1) Last accessed fromhttp://www.oakville.ca/town City ofVaughan(June Last(3.2.1) 28,2012)accessedfromhttps://www.vaughan. –Official Plan Consolidation Secretariat oftheConvention onBiologicalDiversity. 2010. Target 11http://www.cbd.int/sp/targets . Ontario Biodiversity Council,2011,15. City of Hamilton – Urban Hamilton Official Plan Consolidation (October 2013) (C.2.7.5) Last accessed from City of Hamilton – Urban Hamilton Official Plan Consolidation (October 2013) (C.2.7.3) Last accessed from City ofHamilton –Urban Hamilton Official Plan Consolidation (October 2013) (C.2.0) Last accessed fromhttp:// Town ofAjax –Official Plan Consolidation (February 10, Last 2012)(2.2.1) accessedfromhttp://www.ajax.ca/en/ Town ofAjax –Official Plan Consolidation (February 10, 2012)(1.2)Last accessed fromhttp://www.ajax.ca/en/ City ofOttawa –Official Plan Consolidation (May 2013)Last 22, (2.4.2) accessed fromhttp://ottawa.ca/en/city- ClearviewTownship –Official Plan (last amended May 27, 2013) (11.13) Last accessed fromhttp://www.clearview. City ofVaughan(June Last(3.2.2) 28,2012)accessedfromhttps://www.vaughan. –Official Plan Consolidation http:// http:// ------

Endnotes Endnotes 2013 [adopted by CouncilJune 1989]. london.ca/business/Planning-Development/Official-Plan/Pages/OfficialPlanDocument.aspx onSeptember 24, 82 OMB forcertainpartsFebruary 4,2014]. http://www.halton.ca/cms/One.aspx?portalId=8310&pageId=115808#ropdocs onFebruary 28,2014[approved by 81 Policies oftheProvincial Policy Statement, 2005.SecondEdition. Toronto: Queen’s Printer forOntario. 165. 80 2011]. ajax.ca/en/doingbusinessinajax/officialplan.asp onJanuary 10, 2013[approved by Durham Region December 23, 79 2002]. clearview.ca/home/information/publications/op_with_links.pdf?attredirects=0 January 14,2014[approved Jan 78 2002]. clearview.ca/home/information/publications/op_with_links.pdf?attredirects=0 January 14,2014[approved Jan 77 oping best practices onbiodiversity offsetsandconservation bankingworldwide. http://bbop.forest-trends.org companies, financialinstitutions, government agencies andcivil societyorganizations, that aretesting and devel- ton, D.C.: BBOP, isacollaboration BBOP 2012),2. ofmorethan75 leading organizations andindividuals, including 76 75 74 biodiversity offsetpolicies,” Biological(October 155 2012):141–8 Conservation . 73 being appealed totheOMB]. plans-and-strategies/natural-heritage-strategy/ onSeptember 25,2013[adopted by CouncilJuly 2010*currently 72 appealed totheOMB]. and-strategies/natural-heritage-strategy/ onSeptember 25,2013[adopted by CouncilJuly 2010*currently being 71 November 2012]. waterloo.ca/en/government/officialplan.asp onSeptember 24,2013[approved by Regional Municipality ofWaterloo 70 ber 24,2013[approved by County CouncilSeptember 1997]. lambtononline.ca/HOME/RESIDENTS/PLANNINGANDDEVELOPMENT/Pages/OfficialPlan.aspx onSeptem 69 December 2010*theplaninits entirety iscurrently under appeal]. www.regionofwaterloo.ca/en/regionalGovernment/PreviousROP.asp onSeptember 24,2013[approved by Council 68 by OMBforcertainpartsFebruary 4,2014]. from http://www.halton.ca/cms/One.aspx?portalId=8310&pageId=115808#ropdocs onFebruary 28,2014[approved 67 view.ca/home/information/publications/op_with_links.pdf?attredirects=0 January 14,2014[approved Jan 2002]. 66 view.ca/home/information/publications/op_with_links.pdf?attredirects=0 January 14,2014[approved Jan 2002]. 65 certain partsFebruary 4,2014]. www.halton.ca/cms/One.aspx?portalId=8310&pageId=115808#ropdocs onFebruary 28,2014[approved by OMBfor 64 City ofLondon–Official Plan Consolidation (December 17, 2009) (15.3.5.ii) Last accessed fromhttps://www. Halton Region –Regional Official Plan Interim Consolidation (October 21,2013) (118 (8,)) Last accessed from Ontario Ministry ofNatural Resources. March 2010. Natural Heritage Reference Manual forNatural Heritage Town ofAjax –Official Plan Consolidation (February 10, 2012)(5.0 a)o)d)xi)) Last accessed fromhttp://www. ClearviewTownship –Official Plan (last amended May 27, 2013)Last (4.1.2.2.2) accessed fromhttp://www. ClearviewTownship –Official Plan (last amended May 27, 2013)Last (4.1.2.2.1) accessed fromhttp://www. Business andBiodiversity Resource OffsetsProgramme(BBOP), Paper: Limits toWhat Offset CanBe (Washing Ibid.,145.This hasproven very challenging. Ibid.,141. Regarding thelast threepoints, seeM.Maron etal.,“Faustian bargains? Restoration realities inthecontext of (July City ofGuelph –Official Plan Amendment27, 42 2010) (6.1.10.2.5) Last accessed fromhttp://guelph.ca/ (July City ofGuelph –Official Plan Amendment27, 42 2010) (6.1.2) Last accessed fromhttp://guelph.ca/plans- City ofWaterloo –Official Plan Consolidation (December 21,2012) (21))Last(8.2.2 accessed fromhttp://www. (January County ofLambton 3, –Official1998)Plan Consolidation (8.3.1) Last accessed fromhttp://www. Region ofWaterloo –Regional Official Plan Consolidation (December 2010) 22, (7.I) Last accessed fromhttp:// Halton Region –Regional Official Plan Interim Consolidation (October 21,2013) (118(7, 8, 9)) Last accessed ClearviewTownship –Official Plan (last amended May 27, 2013) (4.1.5) Last accessed fromhttp://www.clear- ClearviewTownship –Official Plan (last amended May 27, 2013) Last(4.1.2.4) accessed fromhttp://www.clear- Halton Region – Regional Official Plan Interim Consolidation (October 21, 2013) (118) Last accessed from Ontario Nature http:// . - - Best Practices GuidetoNaturalHeritage SystemsPlanning 2013 [approved by County CouncilSeptember 1997]. tononline.ca/HOME/RESIDENTS/PLANNINGANDDEVELOPMENT/Pages/OfficialPlan.aspx onSeptember 25, 101 [adopted by CouncilJune 1989]. don.ca/business/Planning-Development/Official-Plan/Pages/OfficialPlanDocument.aspx onSeptember 25,2013 100 OMB forcertainpartsFebruary 4, 2014]. http://www.halton.ca/cms/One.aspx?portalId=8310&pageId=115808#ropdocs onFebruary 28,2014[approved by 99 Council May 2003]. hall/planning-and-development/official-plan-and-master-plans/official-plan onFebruary 28,2014[adopted by 98 Council December 2010*theplaninits entirety iscurrently under appeal]. http://www.regionofwaterloo.ca/en/regionalGovernment/PreviousROP.asp onSeptember 23,2013[approved by 97 OMB forcertainpartsFebruary 4,2014]. http://www.halton.ca/cms/One.aspx?portalId=8310&pageId=115808#ropdocs onFebruary 28,2014[approved by 96 lington.ca/Page846.aspx onSeptember 23,2013[Approved by theOMBOct 2008]. 95 by CouncilJan 2013]. ws_cos/groups/public/@pub-cos-pln/documents/web_content/wscos_040107.pdf onSeptember 23,2013[endorsed 94 Official-Plan.aspx onSeptember 23,2013[approved by theMMAHAugust 2013]. windsor.ca/residents/planning/Plans-and-Community-Information/Windsor---Official-Plan/Pages/Windsor- 93 92 (Toronto:in SouthernOntario Ministry ofNatural Resources, 2011). 91 plans-and-strategies/official-plan/ onSeptember 24,2013[Provincial approval December 1995]. 90 plans-and-strategies/official-plan/ onSeptember 24,2013[Provincial approval December 1995]. 89 by CouncilJan 2013]. ws_cos/groups/public/@pub-cos-pln/documents/web_content/wscos_040107.pdf onSeptember 24,2013[endorsed 88 tonNewOfficialPlan/MinistryApprovedUrbanHamiltonOfficialPlan.htm onSeptember 24,2013. ilton.ca/CityDepartments/PlanningEcDev/Divisions/StrategicServicesSpecialProjects/Policy+Planning/Hamil- 87 Council December 2010*theplaninits entirety iscurrently under appeal]. http://www.regionofwaterloo.ca/en/regionalGovernment/PreviousROP.asp onSeptember 24,2013[approved by 86 December 2010*theplaninits entirety iscurrently under appeal]. www.regionofwaterloo.ca/en/regionalGovernment/PreviousROP.asp onSeptember 24,2013[approved by Council 85 view.ca/home/information/publications/op_with_links.pdf?attredirects=0 January 14,2014[approved Jan 2002]. 84 28,2014. ruary hamilton.ca/NR/rdonlyres/0A939735-8827-4D79-8C54-B01970515106/0/UHOPVol1PoliciesrevOct2013.pdf onFeb - 83 County of Lambton – Official Plan Consolidation (January County ofLambton 3, –Official1998)Plan Consolidation (8.1) Last accessed fromhttp://www.lamb- City ofLondon–Official Plan Consolidation (December 17, 2009) (15.1)Last accessed fromhttps://www.lon Halton Region –Regional Official Plan Interim Consolidation (October 21,2013) (118(5))Last accessed from City ofOttawa –Official Plan Consolidation (May 2013) Last 22, (2.4) accessed fromhttp://ottawa.ca/en/city- Region ofWaterloo –Regional Official Plan Consolidation (December 2010) 22, (Chapter 7) Last accessed from Halton Region –Regional Official Plan Interim Consolidation (October 21,2013) (118(10)) Last accessed from (June, City ofBurlington –Official Plan Consolidation 2012)(Part2.4.1a) II, Last accessed fromhttp://cms.bur- (January 2013)(3.8.6) 22, Last Countyaccessed fromhttp://www.simcoe.ca/ ofSimcoe–Official Plan Draft City ofWindsor –Official Plan Consolidation (August 28,2013)Last (5.3.2.5) accessed fromhttp://www.city Ontario Ministry ofNatural Resources, Natural Heritage Reference Manual, section3.2.1. C.M.Connecting Lemieux, Nature andPeople: AGuidetoDesigning andPlanning Natural Heritage Systems (NHS) City ofGuelph –Official Plan Consolidation (December 2012) (6.2.1) Last accessed fromhttp://guelph.ca/ City ofGuelph –Official Plan Consolidation (December(3.3.2) Last 2012) accessed fromhttp://guelph.ca/ (January 2013)(3.11.21)Last 22, Countyaccessedfromhttp://www.simcoe.ca/ ofSimcoe–Official Plan Draft City ofHamilton –Official Plan Consolidation (August 16, 2013) (C.2.7.1) Last accessed fromhttp://www.ham Region ofWaterloo –Regional Official Plan Consolidation (December 2010) 22, (7.F.1) Last accessed from Region ofWaterloo –Regional Official Plan Consolidation (December 2010) 22, (7.2) Last accessed fromhttp:// ClearviewTownship –Official Plan (last amended May 27, 2013) (4.1.3) Last accessed fromhttp://www.clear- City ofHamilton –Official Plan Consolidation (August 16, 2013) Last (C.2.12.4) accessed fromhttp://www. - - -

Endnotes Endnotes Council December 2010 *theplaninits entirety iscurrently under appeal]. http://www.regionofwaterloo.ca/en/regionalGovernment/PreviousROP.asp onSeptember 24,2013 [approved by 119 2002]. clearview.ca/home/information/publications/op_with_links.pdf?attredirects=0 January 14,2014[approved Jan 118 cludes/planningFooter.inc onSeptember 24,2013[Approved by MMAHNovember 1993]. www.durham.ca/planed.asp?nr=/departments/planed/planning/op_documents/ropa128.htm&setFooter=/in 117 November 2012]. terloo.ca/en/government/officialplan.asp onSeptember 24,2013[approved by Regional Municipality ofWaterloo 116 [adopted by CouncilJune 1989]. don.ca/business/Planning-Development/Official-Plan/Pages/OfficialPlanDocument.aspx onSeptember 24,2013 115 2013]. county.ca/departments/administrative-services/official-plan onJanuary 14,2014[Approved by MMAH October 114 113 112 2002]. clearview.ca/home/information/publications/op_with_links.pdf?attredirects=0 January 14,2014[approved Jan 111 2002]. clearview.ca/home/information/publications/op_with_links.pdf?attredirects=0 January 14,2014[approved Jan 110 and-strategies/official-plan/ onSeptember 24,2013[Provincial approval December 1995]. 109 regional.niagara.on.ca/living/icp/policy-plan.aspx onSeptember 24,2013. 108 2010]. ton.ca/business/planning-and-development/official-plan onSeptember 24,2013[Approved by MMAHJanuary 107 2010].ary ingston.ca/business/planning-and-development/official-plan onSeptember 24,2013[Approved by MMAHJanu 106 2002]. clearview.ca/home/information/publications/op_with_links.pdf?attredirects=0 January 14,2014[approved Jan 105 2002]. clearview.ca/home/information/publications/op_with_links.pdf?attredirects=0 January 14,2014[approved Jan 104 January 2013]. search/index.htm?ssUserText=official+plan+draft#.UkBgQexzbcu onSeptember 24,2013[endorsed by Council 103 Council May 2003]. hall/planning-and-development/official-plan-and-master-plans/official-plan onFebruary 28,2014[adopted by 102 Region ofWaterloo –Regional Official Plan Consolidation (December 2010) 22, (7.A.14) Last accessed from ClearviewTownship –Official Plan (last amended May 27, 2013)Last (4.1.2.2.1) accessed fromhttp://www. Region(January ofDurham –Regional Official Plan Consolidation9,2013) Last (14.12.2) accessed fromhttp:// City ofWaterloo –Official Plan Consolidation (December 21,2012) Last(8.2.4) accessed fromhttp://www.wa City ofLondon–Official Plan Consolidation (December 17, 2009) (15.3.6) Last accessed fromhttps://www.lon ElginCounty –Official Plan Consolidation (October 9, 2013) (D1.3.2) Last accessed fromhttp://www.elgin Ontario Ministry ofNatural Resources, Natural Heritage Reference Manual, 45. Ministry ofMunicipal andHousing, Affairs Provincial Policy Statement, 2014(2.1.8). ClearviewTownship –Official Plan (last amended May 27, 2013)Last (4.1.2.2.2) accessed fromhttp://www. ClearviewTownship –Official Plan (last amended May 27, 2013)Last (4.1.2.2.1) accessed fromhttp://www. City ofGuelph –Official Plan Consolidation (March 20, 2013) (6.3.1) Last accessed fromhttp://guelph.ca/plans- Niagara Region –Regional Policy Plan Consolidation (August 1,2012)(7.B.2.2) Last accessed fromhttp://www. (June City ofKingston 1,2013) –Official Plan Consolidation (6.1.11) Last accessed fromhttp://www.cityofkings (June City ofKingston 1,2013) –Official Plan Consolidation (6.1.10) Last accessed fromhttp://www.cityofk ClearviewTownship –Official Plan (last amended May 27, 2013)Last (4.1.2.2.2) accessed fromhttp://www. ClearviewTownship –Official Plan (last amended May 27, 2013)Last (4.1.2.2.1) accessed fromhttp://www. (January 2013)(3.8.8) 22, CountyLast ofSimcoe–Official accessed fromhttp://www.simcoe.ca/Plan Draft City ofOttawa –Official Plan Consolidation (May 2013)Last 22, (2.4.5) accessed fromhttp://ottawa.ca/en/city- Ontario Nature ------Artform Canada Best Practices GuidetoNaturalHeritage SystemsPlanning Kawartha Highlands 124 123 122 for Ontario, 2010). 121 24, 2013[adopted by CouncilJune 1989]. london.ca/business/Planning-Development/Official-Plan/Pages/OfficialPlanDocument.aspx onSeptember 120 131 130 129 128 127 126 125 carpment.org/landplanning/index.php. “LandUse Planning,” Ontario’s Niagara Escarpment website, accessed January 20, 2014,http://www.es Niagara Escarpment Planning andDevelopment Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. N.2, s.2. The Planning Act, 1994, c. 23,s.4. Ministry ofMunicipal andHousing, Affairs Citizen’s Guide1:The Planning Act (Toronto: Queen’s Printer City ofLondon–Official Plan Consolidation (December 17, 2009) (15.3.9) Last accessed fromhttps://www. Ibid. Places toGrow Act, 2005,section1. Greenbelt Act, 2005,section8. Greenbelt Act, 2005,section5. Ministry ofMunicipal andHousing, Affairs Provincial Policy Statement 2005,section4.12. OakRidges Moraine Conservation Act, 2001,section4. Ministry ofMunicipal andHousing, Affairs Provincial Policy Statement, 2005,section4.12. -

Endnotes

J Reaume Above: Naturalist talks about a smooth green snake; left: honey bee and chive, Guelph

Support Ontario Nature Join our community today and help protect wild species and wild spaces in Ontario. Visit ontarionnature.org or call 416-444-8419 to learn more. Patty O`Hearn-Kickham About Ontario Nature

Ontario Nature protects wild species and wild spaces through conservation, education and public engagement. It connects thousands of individuals and communities with nature through more than 150 member groups across the province (charitable registration #10737 8952 RR0001).

214 King Street West, Suite 612 Toronto, ON M5H 3S6 Tel: 416-444-8419 Fax: 416-444-9866 Toll free (within Ontario): 1-800-440-2366 [email protected]

OntarioNature.org