An Ecodemy public-information initiative

Who should speak for a watershed?

Flood protection, healthy rivers, and local knowledge should guide decisions about our watersheds. Ask Ontario to put environmental need at the heart of its new regional boards.

Ecodemy supports modernization with clear duties, relevant expertise, and transparent decisions. Sarnia-Lambton shows why population alone cannot describe the job.

Prepare your comment Go directly to Ontario

Comments close September 12. Ontario offers a no-account option.

Non-partisanEvidence-ledPersonal comments encouraged

What is changing

A smaller board.
A much larger region.

A watershed is the area of land whose water drains into a shared river, lake, or other outlet. Ontario plans to consolidate 36 conservation authorities into nine regional authorities, with initial municipal appointments based on population-share tiers.

Regionalization may bring shared expertise, common data, more consistent service, and less administrative duplication. Ecodemy supports those objectives.

The unresolved question is whether the appointment formula matches the environmental job these boards perform.

Today01

Local conservation authorities
Locally appointed boards
Local watershed governance

Proposed02

Nine regional authorities
Smaller regional boards
Population-share appointment tiers

Why Lambton is a useful case study

Population is only one part of this watershed.

Lambton is not automatically entitled to more votes because its environment is important. It shows why population cannot describe the full scope of conservation responsibility.

2 of 22

Proposed members

Lambton County's allocation, based on a 9.7% adjusted population share.

Source 02

Connected shorelines

Southern Lake Huron, the St. Clair River, and northeastern Lake St. Clair.

Source 04

209 permits

204 active planning files

2025 workload

Reported across SCRCA's jurisdiction in its 2025 annual report; these are not Lambton-only totals.

Source 03

82 fish

34 mussel species

Sydenham diversity

Native freshwater species documented in the river system.

Source 03

Our environment should not have to win a political contest.

Imagine a regional authority choosing between two projects with limited funds. If the evidence shows the greatest risk or benefit is in Lambton, members appointed elsewhere should support the Lambton project.

If the evidence favours another watershed, Lambton's members should support that one.

Environmental investment should follow evidence, need, statutory responsibility, and public benefit—not geographic voting strength.

Ecodemy's recommendations

Ontario should decide what regional members represent.

These are Ecodemy's preferred and fallback recommendations for improving governance. They are not two options offered by Ontario's consultation.

What are regional members there to represent?

Option A Preferred

Govern for the whole watershed

If members are regional trustees, support them with:

A clear whole-watershed duty
Appropriate collective expertise
Transparent environmental and risk criteria
Meaningful local and Indigenous input where applicable
Geographic impact reporting
Modern, auditable data and decision support

Option B Fallback

Broaden the representation formula

If members remain geographic advocates, also consider:

Watershed geography
Regulatory workload
Flood, erosion, and shoreline hazards
Conservation responsibility
Ecological significance and service demand
Municipal financial contribution

Why now

Ontario is asking right now.

ERO 026-0740 asks for feedback on the appointment formula and related governance regulations. The consultation is open until 11:59 p.m. on September 12, 2026.

Earlier public consultation preceded Ontario's change from seven proposed regional authorities to nine. Constructive comments can help improve the final model.

Read and comment on ERO 026-0740

Suggested comment

Start here.
Then make it yours.

A local example makes your comment more useful. Explain why flood risk, shoreline protection, habitat, or watershed decisions matter to your community.

Make it yours. Edit the starter below and add your own reasoning.
Copy your comment. Your edits stay in this browser tab and are not saved by Ecodemy.
Submit on Ontario's site. Open the consultation, select “Submit a comment,” then choose “Comment without registering” or sign in. Paste, review, and submit there.

Ontario publishes approved comments with its decision. Its form says comments containing identifying details will not be published, so leave out names, addresses, and phone numbers. Ecodemy does not receive or track your submission.

Your comment — edit before copying

I support efforts to modernize Ontario's conservation authorities and improve technical capacity, data, consistency, and administrative efficiency. However, I am concerned that a population-based appointment formula is an incomplete way to represent the responsibilities regional conservation-authority boards will govern.

Ontario should clarify whether regional members are intended primarily to represent their appointing municipalities or to act as trustees responsible for the regional watershed as a whole.

If members are whole-watershed trustees, the governance framework should establish an explicit whole-watershed duty, appropriate competency requirements, meaningful local and Indigenous input where applicable, transparent evidence-based criteria for major resource decisions, and geographic reporting to identify systematic inequities.

If members are expected to remain geographic representatives, Ontario should broaden the formula beyond population to consider relevant factors such as watershed geography, regulatory workload, natural-hazard responsibilities, ecological significance, conservation assets, service demand, and municipal financial contribution.

Limited conservation resources should follow environmental need, risk, evidence, statutory responsibility, and public benefit—not simply geographic voting strength.

Edit here, then copy and paste into Ontario's form. Copy your draft before leaving or reloading this page.

Continue to Ontario's consultation

Sources and method

Check the evidence.

Key claims are tied to Ontario, SCRCA, and Government of Canada sources. Claims that could not be verified precisely were narrowed or omitted.

01
Environmental Registry of Ontario — ERO 026-0740
Consultation scope, dates, tiered formula, and transition context.
02
Official supplemental allocation document
Corrected August 2026; see page 11 for Lambton County.
03
SCRCA 2025 Annual Report
Permitting, planning, and Sydenham biodiversity figures.
04
SCRCA area of jurisdiction
Sydenham watershed and connected Great Lakes shorelines.
05
Fisheries and Oceans Canada — Sydenham River action plan
Aquatic diversity and species-at-risk significance.

About the initiative

A public-information initiative of Ecodemy.

Ecodemy Education Inc. develops education and training related to environmental sustainability, health and safety, and responsible business practices.

Questions about the campaign? Contact Ecodemy.

Better Watershed Governance supports evidence-based, accountable, and effective watershed governance. It is an independent Ecodemy initiative and does not imply endorsement by SCRCA, Conservation Ontario, or any municipality.