COMMENT: Watered-down wildlife construction protocol lacks teeth

This development site off Terry Fox Drive in Kanata was clear cut during the height of the birthing season for baby mammals. Photo courtesy of Donna Dubreuil.

EDITOR’S NOTE: This photo shows a development site off Terry Fox Drive in Kanata that was recently clear cut during the height of the birthing season for mammals. Last month, the city’s planning committee approved a new Wildlife Construction Protocol with guidelines on “best practices” that developers should take to protect wildlife in construction areas.  Donna DuBreuil is the president of the Ottawa-Carleton Wildlife Centre, and doesn’t think the protocol is strong enough.

The jury will remain out on Ottawa’s Wildlife Construction Protocol, at least until the public sees whether its recommendations are put into force.

It’s disappointing that the main implementation tool in the draft protocol has been eliminated in the revised version.  Originally, developers were required to submit a Wildlife Mitigation Plan and Construction Site Management Plan. That’s been replaced only by ‘best practices’ guidelines, which will substantially eliminate the most effective means to reduce direct harm to wildlife during construction.

Best practices will mean little unless accompanied by an implementation plan and a demonstration of where best practices are actually being applied. As the onus has been removed from developers/contractors to submit plans, it now rests squarely on planning staff to ensure the protocol recommendations are part of the Conditions of Approval, particularly when large natural areas, with a variety of wildlife, are involved.

But, will planning staff consider this a priority? The controversial Client Relationship Leaders initiative undertaken by the City to provide a concierge service to developers increases, in many people’s view, the already imbalance between the development industry and community interests when it comes to planning matters.

Even if the protocol is considered a priority, are there staff resources to properly support it?

The goal of avoiding the most sensitive times of the year for the initial clearing of a site, when the greatest harm is done to wildlife, is a critical aspect for many.

This includes winter, when hibernating animals would be physically unable to escape and over-wintering species, forced to leave their dens and food caches, would likely freeze or starve to death. And, during the birthing season when newborns would have no chance of survival when nests and dens are destroyed with them in them.

The public will not accept that living creatures which feel pain and suffering are not accorded even the same degree of protection as trees receive under the City’s Tree Conservation Guideline. The initial stripping, digging, moving of earth and felling of trees in natural areas should not be an intentional death sentence for the animals that reside there.

According to the City, the majority of the 106 comments received from the public were in support of the draft protocol. Why then, was it so significantly altered with respect to its implementation?

Stakeholders were assured that all submissions, both in support and opposed, along with staff comments would be in the report going to committee. That did not happen. Without a fair and transparent consultation process, citizen engagement and trust will continue to decline in Ottawa.

A Wildlife Construction Protocol was first approved by former Regional Government 15 years ago. Not-so-fast forward, the City of Ottawa made a commitment to wildlife-sensitive planning in 2013. The Wildlife Construction Protocol will be the first important test of that commitment. With the number of development projects proposed or underway, it will not take long to see whether the City gets a passing or failing grade on this commitment.


2 thoughts on “COMMENT: Watered-down wildlife construction protocol lacks teeth”

  1. It would have been nice if any of this was taken into consideration before they dug up and killed all the hibernating animals at 6279 Fernbank Rd. in January 2015. The mass grave that borders the UNF beside their massive aggregate pads was a constant reminder as the sun dried it out all summer. Should the development go ahead as planned, we can expect 3 times more carnage over the winter months of 2016.

  2. When I built my house out in the country because I was tired of City rules and regulations, I had to have a ‘comment’ by the Mississippi Conservation Authority, and the Rideau Conservation Authority, just to make sure I was not ruining any trees and the like for our wild animals. Apparently since I am of the human species of animal and not of other wild animals where I dwell is of less importance, and the wild animals rule. With that said though, I thought the City of Ottawa would have even stiffer rules, and processes in place, before a small rural municipality would. Developers should stop looking at the rural areas of Ottawa to build their housing developments. They are either building on heritage property, property where animals live, or too close to natural wetlands. Back off! How are these houses even attractive to the people who move into them with the garage jutting out front, and aluminum siding all around the back. People want to raise families in them yet you can’t even play catch in the back yard!

Leave a Reply