Wildlife Strategy

City of Ottawa Wildlife Strategy

The City of Ottawa is reviewing its Wildlife Strategy. This strategy covers mostly the issue of resident-wildlife interactions, not the broader issue of wildlife conservation and biodiversity. The current policy, which dates from 2013, is considered regressive, involving mostly trapping and removal and in the case of beavers, habitat destruction. GA member Ottawa Carleton Wildlife Centre has been very active preparing for this policy review, advocating for the adoption by the City of a progressive policy more focused on human-wildlife coexistence. They have developed <position papers> on a series of wildlife issues. These have been shared with City staff but there is little evidence that they have been considered. None of the papers, nor the two meetings with staff organized by the OCWC, are mentioned in the What We Heard report. Staff is seen as an obstacle in this matter and the push at this time is to get more residents and councillors engaged in the issue. The new policy will be presented to the Agriculture and Rural Affairs Committee (June 6), the Environment and Climate Change Committee (June 18) and the Emergency Preparedness and Protective Services Committee (June 20). It will then be quickly moved to full Council for approval on June 26.

It was agreed that the GA should align with the policy positions developed by the OCWC and promote them with its membership and followers, encouraging them to contact their councillors  over the next month to advocate for a more progressive wildlife strategy. The GA will also work with its POP partners to ensure that public delegations present this perspective at the various committee meetings in June.

Action: Assemble and make available the position papers and disseminate broadly a call for action through the GA list.

Review of City of Ottawa Public Engagement Strategy

Changes to public engagement published in ERO

The deadline for submission for changes regarding certain public notices was Monday April 15.  While the ERO entry sounded like this would be a serious curtailment of public engagement, upon further examination it was found to be restricted very narrowly to five specific types of orders under the Lakes and River Improvement Act. Under this change, public input would not be sought on the following types of orders:

• Subsection 17(1) – order to repair or remove a dam
• Subsections 17(2) – orders to rectify problems with a dam based on an engineer’s report
• Subsection 17(3) – order to do what is necessary in respect of a dam to further the purposes of the LRIA based on an examination and report of an engineer
• Subsection 17(4) – order to construct a fishway at a dam
• Subsection 36(2) – order to take steps to remove a substance or matter from a lake or river

Many of these orders are sought in emergency situations and need to be acted upon urgently, hence the rationale for curtailing public input, and we suspect we would always support the orders for fishway construction. Accordingly, the GA did not make any submissions nor did it respond to the call for action from CELA.

Members at the meeting however underlined how some of these orders could have broad greenspace and environmental impact, in particular orders under 36(2). It was agreed that we would revisit the issue and take an appropriate position after further investigation.

Comprehensive Zoning By-Law Review

Comprehensive Zoning Bylaw Review

The calendar for the Comprehensive Zoning Bylaw Review is taking shape, with the publication of an overview paper on April 18, followed by its presentation to a joint meeting of ARAC and the Planning and Housing Committee on April 29 2024. This will be our first glimpse at the approach and broad directions that the ZBL Review will take. It will be followed by the publication of the first draft of the new Zoning By-law on May 31, 2024.  Our focus will be on zoning provisions that support the preservation of greenspace and tree canopy, and also on provisions that support intensification through more compact, connected and walkable neighbourhoods.

Action: Analyze the April 18 staff report and prepare summary positions on the points of interest to the GA. Coordinate with our POP partners on public delegations at the April 29 joint meeting of ARAC and Planning.

Waste to Energy

JP provided a summary of an international webinar he attended on waste management which dealt with the pros and cons of incineration as a solid waste management strategy. With the City of Ottawa in the midst of finalizing its Solid Waste Master Plan, the foreseeable end of service life of the Trail Road land fill and the outspoken support for incineration by some members of the current City Council, this webinar is very timely and relevant. The GA has not as yet taken any position on this issue but tends to align with its POP partners regarding the advisability of pursuing incineration as a main strategy.

Action: Disseminate webinar materials to members and followers through the GA list.

Bill 185

Ontario Bill 185

Just this week, the Province has announced yet another omnibus bill to spur more rapid residential construction, walking back some provisions of previous housing bills, bringing back provisions previously dropped in similar earlier bills and other general flailing around to address housing supply. There has been no time to analyze the new Bill more carefully but one provision that stands out is granting proponents the ability to apply for Official Plan amendments to expand the urban boundary at any time. Unless well framed and regulated, this could easily lead to more loss of rural greenspace.

Action: Analyze Bill 185 to identify the issues of particular interest to the GA and develop summary positions. Work with our POP partners to coordinate our analysis and advocacy positions.