Ontario’s current approach to managing risks associated with flooding is based on the five core components of emergency management:

  1. Prevention
  2. Mitigation
  3. Preparedness
  4. Response
  5. Recovery

Management is achieved through the use of a series of provincial acts, regulations, policies and technical guides that are implemented through partnerships with a number of provincial ministries, municipalities, First Nations and conservation authorities.

The objectives with this approach are to save lives and money, protect property, public health and the environment, maintain economic stability, help assure the continuance of critical infrastructure, and reduce social disruption associated with emergencies.

5.1 The five core components of emergency management

5.1.1 Prevention

Prevention includes actions taken to prevent flood-related emergencies or disasters from occurring, and includes land use planning and regulatory restrictions to keep development out of the floodplains and other hazardous areas. While we cannot prevent flooding from occurring, keeping people and property out of flood-prone areas helps ensure naturally occurring flood events do not result in local emergencies.

As an overall principle for flood management, the MNRF prioritizes the use of non-structural and land use planning measures as its preferred approach to manage flood risks. This includes the identification of hazardous areas, including floodplains. Municipalities can then plan to prohibit/limit activities, including development, in these areas. The main legislative tools used to support this approach include the Planning Act together with the Provincial Policy Statement and the Conservation Authorities Act.

5.1.2 Mitigation

Mitigation includes actions taken to reduce the effects of flooding, and includes the use of structural measures and floodproofing standards to protect development. Structural measures can include dams, dikes, channels, diversions and other flood control works. Floodproofing standards can include a combination of measures incorporated into the basic design and/or construction of buildings, structures or properties to reduce or eliminate flooding hazards, wave uprush and other water-related hazards, such as constructing the lowest occupancy floor of dwellings, water shut off and electrical control panel above the design flood level, and having water resistant electrical systems.

5.1.3 Preparedness

Preparedness includes the use of flood forecasting and warning to assess the potential for flooding, predict when and where flooding will occur, and help ensure an effective response (e.g. any required evacuations or mitigative activities).

The Province conducts flood forecasting and warning via the MNRF’s Surface Water Monitoring Centre, which monitors weather, rainfall and stream flows, and provides advisories and a suite of products and tools (e.g. weather panels, snow survey reports) to conservation authorities (CAs), municipalities and MNRF work centres on flood potential. The monitoring of flood conditions occurs seven days a week, and the Province is able to contact CAs and other stakeholders immediately with updates.

Local scale flood forecasting and warning is provided by MNRF work centres and conservation authorities. Many of the CAs conduct more detailed flood forecasting and warning for their respective jurisdictions.

5.1.4 Response

Response includes actions taken to respond to flood emergency, such as the use of emergency services (e.g. providing sandbags, community evacuations, etc.) to protect people and property during flood events. Response can also include training for emergency response staff and meeting with stakeholders/partners to ensure an effective response. It also includes providing logistical support and social and health services.

The Emergency Management and Civil Protection Act (EMCPA) establishes Ontario’s legal basis and framework for managing emergencies (see Section 5.2.4). It does this by defining the authority, responsibilities and safeguards accorded to provincial ministries, municipalities and specific individual appointments, such as the Commissioner of Emergency Management.

5.1.5 Recovery

Recovery includes actions taken to recover from a flood emergency, such as the use of disaster financial assistance to restore property to pre-flood conditions.

Provincially, financial assistance is delivered through two programs—the Disaster Recovery Assistance for Ontarians (DRAO) program for homeowners, tenants, small owner-operator businesses and farms, and not-for-profit organizations; and the Municipal Disaster Recovery Assistance (MDRA) program for municipalities. These programs provide funds for eligible expenses following a natural disaster to help Ontarians and municipalities recover from extraordinary costs. The DRAO program covers 90% of eligible costs (subject to a $500 deductible and a cap of $250,000). Since the program launched in 2016, it has been activated for 28 events in 68 municipalities, with $11 million in assistance paid. The MDRA program is based on a sliding-scale cost-sharing formula. Since the program launched in 2016, it has been activated for 16 municipalities, with assistance payments of $4 million.

Municipalities can access the MDRA program when eligible disaster-related costs reach 3% of the municipality’s Own Purpose Taxation levy. Due to the eligibility threshold based on municipal financial capacity, the program is accessed most frequently by small municipalities with a correspondingly small tax base.

The federal government provides funding to provinces and territories for disaster response and recovery costs under its Disaster Financial Assistance Arrangements (DFAA) program. Under this program, the federal government shares costs with provinces and territories based on a sliding-scale per capita formula. Ontario, as the largest province, has the highest threshold for federal funding and consequently is eligible for the DFAA much less frequently than most other provinces. Based on the current formula (which is adjusted for inflation each year), Ontario could access federal funding under DFAA only in the event of a disaster costing the province in excess of $46.2 million.

Ontario has only qualified for DFAA three times in the relatively recent past—for the 1998 ice storm, the 2004 Peterborough flood and the 2013 ice storm. As a result, disaster financial assistance costs associated with recovery are funded almost entirely by provincial coffers, although the overall financial burden for disasters is borne to a great extent by municipalities and property owners as well.

5.2 Acts, regulations, policies and technical guides

Ontario’s preventative approach of directing development away from floodplains and other hazardous areas is highly effective in preventing property damage. Property damage associated with the same storm event are often exponentially lower in Ontario than they are in Great Lakes states, with the differences in losses primarily attributed to differences in floodplain management policies and approaches.

Provincial policies have been shown to reduce capital and operating costs associated with managing flooding and other natural hazards, reducing pressure on provincial and municipal infrastructure debts. The existing policies have been estimated to reduce costs associated with ongoing flood and natural hazard management, including costs associated with the operation and maintenance of flood and erosion control infrastructure by 20 to 80% depending on differences in urban density and property values.

These policies have been credited with keeping losses associated with flooding in Ontario lower than losses seen in other Canadian provinces. Responsibility for keeping development out of floodplains is a shared responsibility between municipalities (enforced through municipal planning) and conservation authorities (enforced through regulations made under Section 28 of the Conservation Authorities Act).

These policies will be increasingly valuable in protecting Ontarians from flooding and other natural hazards. Losses associated with flooding and other natural hazards continue to increase because of increasing property values and income levels, urbanization, ongoing loss of wetlands and other green infrastructure, and the increasing frequency and intensity of extreme rainfall events. As these losses rise, so does the value of Ontario’s floodplain and broader hazard management policies.

5.2.1 The Planning Act and the Provincial Policy Statement

The Planning Act and the Provincial Policy Statement (PPS) are the primary provincial tools used to guide local land use planning decisions made by municipalities in Ontario. The PPS is the primary provincial land use policy document guiding municipal decision-making. The Planning Act requires that decisions on land use planning matters be “consistent with” the PPS, and the PPS policies provide the foundation for regulating development.

Municipalities are the primary implementers of the PPS through incorporation of policies into their local official plans, zoning by-laws and other planning-related decisions.

The PPS is administered by the Ministry of Municipal Affairs and Housing (MMAH), and provides policy direction on matters of provincial interest related to land use planning and development, sets the policy foundation for regulating the development and use of land, and supports the provincial goal of enhancing the quality of life of all Ontarians. The focus of the PPS is on guiding municipal decision making regarding new development and redevelopment.

While this Act and Policy is led by MMAH, the MNRF has the lead in developing the natural hazard policies, including policy direction related to flooding/flood hazards, in Section 3.0 of the PPS. The MNRF works with partners and experts in the development of these policies, which are reviewed every 10 years. These policies require municipalities to identify areas subject to natural hazards in order to consider public safety when planning for new development. To support implementation of policies in the PPS, subject area specific guidance is developed by ministries having the lead for those specific policies in collaboration with other applicable ministries. A series of natural hazard technical guides have been developed by the MNRF to support implementation of Section 3.0 of the PPS, and are further outlined in Section 5.2.6 below.

The Ministry of Municipal Affairs and Housing conducted consultations from July 22 to October 21, 2019, on proposed changes to the Provincial Policy Statement (PPS) to help increase the supply of housing, support jobs and reduce barriers and costs in the land use planning system (see the “Provincial Policy Statement Review – Proposed Policies”). Specifically related to flooding, the proposed policies would enhance direction to prepare for impacts of a changing climate; enhance stormwater management policies to protect water and support climate resiliency; and maintain current policies related to natural and human-made hazards, which directs development away from hazardous areas including flood-prone areas in order to protect public health and safety. Given the direct correlation between the policies in Section 3.0 of the PPS and the Special Advisor on Flooding review, a placeholder was put on these policies in the draft PPS being consulted, until the government has an opportunity to consider the recommendations made in relation to potential policy changes.

5.2.2 The Conservation Authorities Act

The purpose of the Conservation Authorities Act is to provide for the organization and delivery of programs and services that further the conservation, restoration, development and management of natural resources in watersheds in Ontario through the establishment of conservation authorities (CAs) organized on a watershed scale. A CA is a municipal public sector organization whose governing structure of members (similar to a Board of Directors) are appointed representatives from the municipalities that established or may have joined the CA and who mostly fund the CA. Many members, for reasons of fiscal accountability, are elected municipal officials. A CA provides programs and services in local resource management within its jurisdiction to both the Province and municipalities.

In 1956, in response to severe economic and human losses associated with Hurricane Hazel (1954), amendments to the Conservation Authorities Act empowered CAs to make regulations to prohibit filling in floodplains. These regulations were broadened in 1960 to prohibit or regulate the placing or dumping of fill in defined areas where, in the opinion of the CA, the control of flooding, pollution or the conservation of land may be affected. In 1968, amendments to the Conservation Authorities Actfurther extended the regulations to prohibit or control construction and alteration to waterways. In 1983, the Minister of Natural Resources delegated to CAs the commenting responsibilities for floodplain management matters. CAs would have the authority to review planning documents and provide comments to federal, provincial ministries and agencies, municipalities and private landowners, including developers.

In 1988, the Minister delegated commenting responsibilities to CAs for matters related to flooding, erosion and dynamic beaches along the shoreline of the Great Lakes/St. Lawrence River System.

In 1995, the Minister confirmed CAs as lead commenting agencies for riverine erosion, slope and soil instability matters, such as areas of high water tables, organic or peat soils, and Leda or sensitive (unstable) marine clay soils.

The regulatory scope of CAs was broadened again in 1998, giving them the authority to regulate development activities adjacent to Great Lakes shorelines, interconnecting channels and inland lakes, and the authority to regulate activities that may interfere with the hydrologic function of wetlands.

With the advent of the provincial One Window Planning Service, an agreement was developed in 2001 with the MNRF, MMAH and Conservation Ontario to define the roles and relationships between CAs, the MNRF and MMAH in planning for implementation of CA delegated responsibilities under this system. The Agreement focuses on MNRF delegated responsibilities to CAs for the PPS Section 3.1 – Natural Hazard Policies. The CA delegated role does not extend to other portions of the PPS unless specifically delegated in writing by the Province. CAs, as public bodies under the Planning Act, can comment on official plans or development applications on other portions of the PPS but not with the same authority as the delegated commenting role.

Each of Ontario’s 36 conservation authorities currently administer an individual conservation authority “Development and Interference” regulation approved by the Minister of Natural Resources and Forestry, conforming to the requirements prescribed under Ontario Regulation 97/04 – Content of Conservation Authority Regulations Under Section 28 (1) of the Act: Development, Interference with Wetlands and Alterations to Shorelines and Watercourses. A key provincial responsibility that CAs have within their jurisdiction is the regulatory authority under Section 28 of the Conservation Authorities Act—the regulating of development and activities through the permitting process in hazard-prone areas set out in regulation for purposes of public safety and natural hazard management. These regulations are a critical component of Ontario’s broader natural hazard management framework and are designed to achieve the following policy objectives:

  • Preventing loss of life, minimizing property damage and social disruption;
  • Reducing public and private expenditure for emergency operation, evacuation, restoration and protection measures;
  • Regulating development which, singularly or collectively, impact upon existing flood levels, and increasing potential risks to upstream and downstream landowners;
  • Control interference with natural storage areas such as wetlands;
  • Conserving land through the control of development on existing or potentially unstable valley slopes or shoreline bluffs; and
  • Controlling development impacts as they relate to pollution (including erosion & sedimentation) or other degradation of existing and water resources, including groundwater.

Section (4) of the regulation requires that CAs geographically describe the hazardous lands and areas susceptible to flooding based on the design flood event that is applicable (i.e. Hurricane Hazel, the Timmins event, the 100 year, etc.), and details of rain intensity, duration and impacted area are included in an appendix. This geographical description of the regulatory limits can include reference to maps filed at the head office and the regulations specific to each CA identifies that, where there is a conflict in the description of areas identified in maps, the text description of the regulated areas prevails. Floodplain and other hazard mapping and related studies provide a support for implementing the conservation authority regulations under the Conservation Authorities Act and for the conservation authority commenting role on official plan review activities delegated under the Planning Act.

Conservation authority activities are funded through a combination of shared provincial and municipal funding, municipal levy and self-financing. Floodplain mapping and technical studies for delineation of hazard areas for municipal planning (not the authority regulations) are among the items eligible for the cost-shared provincial and municipal funding.

The MNRF continues as lead administrative ministry having overall government responsibility for natural hazard management policies/programs.

The MNRF has proposed changes to regulations administered by CAs and the public was consulted between April 5 and May 21, 2019. The following excerpts are from the Ontario Government’s website titled: “Focusing conservation authority development permits on the protection of people and property”.

The MNRF is proposing a regulation that outlines how conservation authorities permit development and other activities for impacts to the control of natural hazards and public safety. The proposed regulation will make rules for development in hazardous areas more consistent to support faster, more predictable and less costly approvals.

Prohibited activities set out in the un-proclaimed provisions of Section 28 of the Conservation Authorities Actas amended by Schedule 4 of the Building Better Communities and Conserving Watersheds Act, 2017 include:

  • Development in areas related to natural hazards such as floodplains, shorelines, wetlands and hazardous lands (i.e. lands that could be unsafe for development because of naturally occurring processes associated with flooding, erosion, dynamic beaches or unstable soil or bedrock); and
  • Interference with or alterations to a watercourse or wetland

The Ministry is proposing to create a regulation further defining the ability of a conservation authority to regulate prohibited development and other activities for impacts to natural hazards, including flooding and to public safety.

The Ministry is proposing to consolidate and harmonize the existing 36 individual conservation authority-approved regulations into one Minister of Natural Resources and Forestry approved regulation to help ensure consistency in requirements across all conservation authorities while still allowing for local flexibility based on differences in risks posed by flooding and other natural hazards.

Of note, the Ministry is also proposing under this regulation to:

  • Allow conservation authorities to exempt low-risk development activities from requiring a permit provided in accordance with conservation authority policies;
  • Require conservation authorities to develop, consult on, make publicly available and periodically review internal policies that guide permitting decisions; and
  • Require conservation authorities to notify the public of changes to mapped regulated areas such as floodplains or wetland boundaries.

Ensuring conservation authority permitting decisions focus and deliver on their core mandate of protecting people and property from flooding and other natural hazards is part of the government’s Made-in-Ontario Environment Plan to help communities and families prepare and respond to climate change. The proposed changes will also provide the business sector with a clear and consistent regulatory environment in which to operate and will help to make approval processes faster, more predictable and less costly.

As more extreme weather events occur that threaten homes, businesses and infrastructure, it’s important to ensure conservation authorities deliver on their core mandate for protecting people and property from flooding and other natural hazards. Improving the efficiency and effectiveness of these regulations is a critical component of this government’s strategy for strengthening Ontario’s resiliency to extreme weather events.

The MNRF believe this regulation is a critical component of Ontario’s approach to reducing risks posed by flooding and other natural hazards and strengthening Ontario’s resiliency to extreme weather events.

At the same time as the MNRF public review period for proposed changes to regulations, the Ministry of the Environment, Conservation and Parks consulted with the public on proposed amendments to the Conservation Authorities Act, which, if passed, would help conservation authorities focus and deliver on their core mandate, and improve governance. More information can be found on the Ontario Government’s website titled: “Modernizing conservation authority operations - Conservation Authorities Act”.

One of the stated areas of focus for conservation authorities will be providing programs and services related to managing risks posed by natural hazards, including flooding. The specific programs and services to be provided by conservation authorities related to flooding and other natural hazards are set to be outlined in regulation.

5.2.3 Lakes and Rivers Improvement Act and water management planning

The Lakes and Rivers Improvement Act (LRIA) provides the Minister of Natural Resources and Forestry with the legislative authority to govern the design, construction, operation, maintenance and safety of dams in Ontario. The Lakes and Rivers Improvement Act and Ontario Regulation 454/96 require dam owners to obtain approval from the MNRF for the construction of new dams, certain repairs and alterations to existing dams, and certain water crossings and channelization works.

The Lakes and Rivers Improvement Act Administrative Guide and supporting technical bulletins and best management practices have been prepared to provide direction to MNRF staff responsible for application review and approval, and guidance to applicants who are seeking approval under the LRIA.

Normal operating ranges for dams authorized under the LRIA are described in Water Management Plans or site-specific operating plans for dams located outside the geographical boundary of a water management plan.

The LRIA was amended in 2002 to create a regulatory framework for existing dam operations. The amendments established the statutory authority for the Minister of Natural Resources and Forestry to order an owner of an existing dam to prepare or amend a management plan for the operation and maintenance of the dam, consistent with Minister approved guidelines.

To implement this legislative amendment, the Water Management Planning Guidelines for Waterpower 2002 (WMPG) were approved by the Minister of Natural Resources and Forestry. The goal of water management planning was to contribute to the environmental, social and economic well-being of the people of Ontario through the sustainable development of waterpower resources, by managing these resources in an ecologically sustainable way. The WMPGs established a planning process for defining goals, objectives, scope and criteria for the preparation of Water Management Plans (WMP). WMPs are owned by the primary waterpower producer and must be prepared with the input of stakeholders along the river to which it is situated.

Existing waterpower facilities on rivers in provincial jurisdiction were ordered to prepare plans for the management of flows and levels at their generating stations. In some instances, owners of non-power producing water control structures within the same river were required to participate in water management planning for rivers in which their dams were situated, if their dams were integral to the regulation of flows and levels.

“Complex” WMPs were generally prepared for rivers with multiple waterpower facilities or control structures with significant control over water levels and flows. Complex plans typically had more than one plan proponent (dam owner or waterpower facility owner) and/or significant competing interests.

“Simplified” WMPs were prepared for sections of rivers where there were one or more waterpower facilities or water control structures that generally had limited control of water levels and flows.

WMPs describe the normal range of operating conditions, defined in terms of seasonal flows and levels for each dam within a WMP. The provisions of a WMP do not apply in the event of a declared flood, low water condition or emergency situation.

In 2016, the Ministry approved the Maintaining Water Management Plans Technical Bulletin, which replaces the 2002 Water Management Planning Guidelines and its appendices.

5.2.4 The Emergency Management and Civil Protection Act

The overall legal framework for emergency management in Ontario is addressed primarily in the Emergency Management and Civil Protection Act, which, along with powers contained in other ministry-specific legislation, allows the government to take necessary steps to deal with a provincial emergency or any emergency in the province. The purpose of the legislation is to promote the public good by protecting the health, safety and welfare of the people of Ontario in times of emergencies.

Ontario Regulation 380/04 establishes the minimum standards for emergency management programs required by municipalities and provincial ministries and supports the requirement in the Act for mandatory emergency management programs.

The Act and Regulation require provincial ministries to develop an emergency management program consisting of:

  • An emergency plan;
  • Training programs and exercises for public servants;
  • Public education on risks to public safety and on public preparedness for emergencies;
  • Any other element required by the standards for emergency management programs;
  • Identify and assess the various hazards and risks to public safety that would result in an emergency, and identify the facilities and infrastructure that are at risk of being affected by emergencies; and
  • Develop a continuity of operations plan.

The Act and Regulation require municipal programs to address two core components of emergency management—preparedness and response:

  • Appoint an Emergency Management Program Committee;
  • Develop an Emergency Response Plan for types of emergencies assigned pursuant to Order-in-Council 1157/2009, conduct a Hazard Identification Risk Assessment, and identify critical infrastructure;
  • Identify an Emergency Operations Centre;
  • Appoint an information officer and conduct public education;
  • Conduct training for the Community Emergency Management Coordinator (CEMC), Alternate CEMC, and Emergency Control Group;
  • Conduct an exercise for the Emergency Control Group to test Emergency Operations Centre protocols, procedures and response plans; and
  • Undertake an annual review of the Emergency Management program.

5.2.5 The Environmental Assessment Act

The environmental assessment (EA) process is established to ensure that governments and public bodies consider potential environmental effects before an infrastructure project begins. Consideration of impacts in and around hazardous lands is primarily through the Provincial Policy Statement and permissions issued under the Conservation Authorities Act.

In this context, the Provincial Policy Statement is a planning tool which applies only to “new development” proposals that require approval under the Planning Act, and from an infrastructure lens, applies only to infrastructure that forms the foundation for development. Permits issued under the Conservation Authorities Act apply to both new development and alteration to existing development, as well as the placement of fill, in defined areas of regulatory control.

Flood mitigation activities that fall outside the scope of these two legislative authorities may be subject to the Environment Assessment Act, either as an individual EA or a streamlined EA through the Conservation Authority Class EA for Remedial Flood and Erosion Control Projects or the Class EA for Municipal Infrastructure Projects. Class Environmental Assessments set out a standardized planning process for classes or groups of activities. It applies to projects that are carried out routinely and have predictable environmental effects that can be readily managed. An evaluation of activities under the EA process provides an opportunity for the MNRF to review proposed infrastructure activities, such as flood protection works, including the creation or maintenance of a berm or dike. Various infrastructure works proposed through this process may also be subject to additional approval requirements, such as under the Lakes and Rivers Improvement Act (LRIA) or the Public Lands Act (PLA) or subject to Ministry of Environment, Conservation and Parks permissions, such as Environmental Compliance Approvals for any discharges to the air, land or water under the Environmental Protection Act, or a Permit to Take Water under the Ontario Water Resources Act.

5.2.6 Natural hazard technical guides

To support municipal implementation of the natural hazard policies of Section 3.1 of the PPS, a series of natural hazard technical guides were developed and approved by the MNRF. These documents also assist in the municipal land use planning approval process and in explaining, or if necessary, defending technical methodologies when challenged.

The Province strongly discourages deviations from technical guidance; however, because technical guidance is not in regulation, the MNRF cannot ensure municipal compliance with provincial policy and can only point to technical guidance for direction on the appropriate use of policies, methods and protocols.

The natural hazards technical guides are represented by the following documents:

  1. Understanding Natural Hazards (2001), which provides the planning concepts to address natural hazards.
  2. Technical Guide – River & Stream Systems: Flooding Hazard Limit (2002), which documents standardized approaches to manage flood susceptible lands across the province. It outlines the three flood event standards used in Ontario and outlines hydrologic and hydraulic work needed to conduct floodplain analysis and delineate flood-prone areas.
  3. Procedures for Approval of New Special Policy Areas (SPAs) and Modifications to Existing SPAs Under the Provincial Policy Statement, 2005 (PPS, 2005), Policy 3.1.3 – Natural Hazards – Special Policy Areas. The procedural document that supersedes and replaces the information in Part B of Appendix 5 of the Technical Guide – River & Streams: Flooding Hazard Limit (2002).
  4. Technical Guide – River & Stream Systems: Erosion Hazard Limit (2002) which has the purpose of providing a consistent and standardized procedure for the identification and management of riverine erosion hazards in Ontario.
  5. Great Lakes-St. Lawrence River Shorelines: Flooding, Erosion and Dynamic Beaches (2001), which focuses on documenting standardized approaches to shoreline management and land use planning and management to address shoreline flooding, erosion and dynamic beaches, with a focus on the need to better understand the system, particularly its formation, evolution and potential impacts.
  6. Technical Guide for Large Inland Lakes Shorelines: Flooding, Erosion and Dynamic Beaches (1996), which addresses effective shoreline management and land use management approach for addressing shoreline natural hazards.
  7. Hazardous Sites – Technical Guide (1996), which provides technical support in identifying areas of unstable soils, including sensitive marine clays and organic soils as well as unstable bedrock, including karst bedrock.

5.3 Organizational roles and responsibilities

In Canada, flood management is the responsibility of the provinces and territories, and is often delegated to municipalities through legislation. Therefore, most flood management activities including mapping, planning, preparation, response and recovery are executed at the local rather than provincial, territorial or federal levels. The management of flooding hazards, including the prevention and mitigation of impacts, is a coordinated approach by the province, municipalities and conservation authorities. The federal government can become involved if federal disaster assistance is triggered. Management is achieved through a series of provincial acts, regulations, policies, and technical guides (see Section 5.2), which together enable local decision making to protect people and property from the impacts of flooding. These individual tools are managed by various agencies in the province based on expertise, creating a network of policies which together implement the flood management program.

5.3.1 Ministry of Natural Resources and Forestry

Since 1975 and re-affirmed by Order-in-Council 1157/2009 of the Emergency Management and Civil Protection Act, the MNRF is the provincial lead for seven hazards, including floods.

While the MNRF plays a major role in flood response and response support, the MNRF’s current approach focuses on prevention—keeping people out of harm’s way and minimizing loss of human life, injury, damage to property and the environment, and mitigation of economic and social disruption through a range of legislative, policy and technical mechanisms. As part of this approach, regulatory and land use restrictions are developed by the MNRF and put in place by municipalities through the Provincial Policy Statement (PPS) land use planning policies, with their implementation supported by a series of technical guidelines produced by the MNRF. Also, under the Planning Act, conservation authorities have a delegated responsibility through the MNRF to provide plan input on matters of provincial interest relating to Section 3.1 of the PPS focusing on the Official Plan and Official Plan Amendment stages as well as site plan applications, on a site-by-site basis. In combination, these actions work to prevent new or intensified development in areas prone to flooding and other natural hazards, and regulate activities that can create or increase hazards (e.g. alterations to watercourses and wetlands). The MNRF does not have its own piece of legislation to implement the hazard program and uses a series of tools to enable flood management. These program tools include:

  • The Planning Act and Provincial Policy Statement (see Section 5.2.1 above);
  • The Conservation Authorities Act (see Section 5.2.2 above);
  • Natural Hazard Technical Guides (see Section 5.2.6 above);
  • Mapping and Geomatics Services (see Section 5.3.1.1 below); and
  • Flood Forecasting and Warning Services (see Section 5.3.1.2 below).

5.3.1.1 Mapping and geomatics services

Geospatial data is critical to flood mapping as it serves as authoritative data for the entire flood mapping process. The two main types of geospatial datasets used in flood mapping are: 1) Imagery, for two-dimensional feature positions (e.g. roads, rivers and buildings); and 2) Elevation, for three dimensional heights (e.g. height of riverbank, height of road).

The Mapping and Geomatics Services Section (MGSS) of the Mapping and Information Resources Branch in the MNRF is responsible for capturing, creating and maintaining Ontario’s foundation geospatial data/base data for government, academia and the general public.

The MGSS acquires, maintains and distributes authoritative, open, provincial-scale geospatial data by coordinating provincial acquisition projects (imagery, elevation, lidar, bathymetry, roads, water, wetlands, etc.); developing mapping guidelines and standards; providing leadership and guidance in the management of geospatial data; establishing data sharing agreements and funding partnerships between local, provincial and national agencies; and making data discoverable and accessible as Open Data.

Besides its responsibilities for provincial-scale mapping and MNRF geomatics, the MGSS also coordinates the Land Information Ontario program (LIO) on behalf of all Ontario ministries. LIO improves geospatial service delivery for Ontario Public Service (OPS) ministries and partners by:

  • Coordinating governance for collective decision making and leadership;
  • Engaging with geospatial communities to identify needs;
  • Delivering services and products that meet common needs and realize collective benefits; and
  • Sharing geospatial knowledge to establish and review best practices.

LIO’s core principles include the value of collaboration for geospatial data and services and the principle of “do once, use many times.” A good example of this is the LIO Imagery Program, which acquires high-resolution imagery for the provincial government and numerous partners across the private, public and academic sectors. The success of the LIO Imagery Program is defined by:

  • Leveraging internal and external partnerships across multiple sectors;
  • Meeting multiple business needs;
  • Achieving financial cost sharing; and
  • Establishing a predictable, 5-year imagery acquisition cycle.

5.3.1.2 Flood forecasting and warning services

Flood forecasting and warning services are delivered by the MNRF through its Surface Water Monitoring Centre (SWMC) in cooperation with conservation authorities where they have been established and local MNRF work centres, which provide local level expertise and information through flood warning and watch messages to municipal responders.

The ability to provide this service rests with information provided through the hydrometric network, a federal/provincial partnership, and its 600 gauges across the province, more heavily concentrated in those watersheds of greatest population and therefore greatest risk of harm.

The agreement requires a monetary investment by the Province, most recently in the amount of $4.6M for 2019/20. It is expected that the cost of the agreement will increase at an annual inflationary rate of 2% per year. The agreement ensures that the gauges are monitored and maintained to provide the “eyes on the ground” toward flood forecasting.

While there are a number of recommendations in Section 6.3 to improve preparedness, the SWMC advises that it is committed to and continues to learn from each event, and has undertaken numerous steps toward continuous improvement. These actions include:

  • Implemented a new Kisters WISKI data environment and developed multiple new products for scripting custom products to improve operations.
  • Developed a new early warning system for static (calm) water levels on the Great Lakes and consolidated working relationships with federal government for Great Lakes Briefing products.
  • Developed new tools for communicating Ottawa River Secretariat forecasts to conservation authorities and work centres of the Ministry of Natural Resources and Forestry.
  • Initiated updates to provincial flood forecasting and warning guidelines (scheduled for completion in 2020).
  • Sponsored transfer payment funding to multiple conservation authorities for new flood communication tools on the Ottawa River, GAWSER snowmelt modelling routine in WISKI, and HEC-HMS model development. The Province can evaluate and use these products now that they have been developed.
  • Sponsored multiple knowledge transfer and training sessions for internal and external clients—After Action reviews, modelling and technology transfer, flood forecasting and warning community workshops, annual internal training, and collaboration with hydrometric network partners.
  • Restructured business practices with Water Surveys Canada to improve field responses to gauge maintenance and field measurements for record events.
  • Implementing a new communications plan, including webpage refreshes and web usage statistics.

5.3.1.3 Remote Sensing Science Group

The hub of remote sensing expertise in the provincial government is housed within the MNRF’s Provincial Services Division (PSD), Science and Research Branch (SRB), Forest Resource Inventory (FRI) Unit. The Remote Sensing Science Group is primarily focused on Provincial Land Cover and Disturbance mapping and, as provincial data custodians, they support a wide range of users and applications. They also possess the skills and experience necessary to support Emergency Management Near Real Time image processing, interpretation, automation and publishing. Operationally, to support provincial emergency management flooding efforts, the Remote Sensing Science Group works closely with the Surface Water Monitoring Centre and Natural Resources Canada’s (NRCan) Canada Centre for Remote Sensing and Emergency Geomatics Services Offices.

Two remote sensing products are primarily used by the group—the Canadian Space Agency’s RADARSAT-2 and NASA’s MODIS. These products provide more spatial information on water, ice and watershed conditions, information between stream gauges, information in remote areas, quantify conditions that cannot be determined from stream gauges, and are used to assess risk, inform flood messaging and emergency operations. They add to the body of knowledge available about flood, ice and more, and supplement human efforts on the ground (i.e. reconnaissance flights, snow surveys, ice observations). In short, these products help to make better, more informed decisions about a flood.

RADARSAT imagery allows for the accurate mapping of ice conditions through inclement weather and night time hours (as opposed to major limitations with optical imagery and local reconnaissance flights). With frequent revisit times, RADARSAT images can be acquired several times per week for each river, which improves the ability for the early detection of ice jamming.

RADARSAT is also used to provide near real time flood maps and information (extent, severity and progression); greatly improves situational awareness during flood events; facilitates better decision making and flood forecasting; creates documentation and increases knowledge that supports future flood management; and supports the development of accurate floodplain maps.

MODIS Optical Imagery is used to monitor river ice breakup in Ontario’s far north coastal rivers. Acquisition, interpretation and communication used to be an entirely manual process; however, in-house tool enhancements from 2016 to 2019 have resulted in an entirely automated process.

The Canadian Space Agency is replacing the RADARSAT-2 satellite with three small identical satellites under the RADARSAT Constellation Mission (RCM), which were launched on June 12, 2019. The RCM will capture images of the earth’s water, land, ice and atmosphere during the day and night and in all types of weather, including heavy cloud cover, smoke and haze, which is a huge improvement in optical products. The new RADARSAT Constellation will provide near real time data for all of Ontario and provide more information to support the assessment of flood risk, effective flood messaging and emergency operations.

5.3.2 Ministry of Municipal Affairs and Housing

The Ministry of Municipal Affairs and Housing (MMAH), in their role as lead agency for the administration of the Planning Act and the Provincial Policy Statement (PPS), plays a critical role in supporting the MNRF through inclusion of hazard policies in the PPS for new development and redevelopment, as previously discussed in Section 5.2.1 above.

MMAH also delivers the Disaster Recovery Assistance for Ontarians (DRAO) program (for private property owners) and at the municipal level, the Municipal Disaster Recovery Assistance (MDRA) program for eligible expenses following a natural disaster (see Section 5.1.5 above).

In addition to these programs, and in response to flooding in the spring of 2019, MMAH created a $1 million pilot project designed to help municipalities repair flood damaged roads, bridges and other infrastructure to a higher standard, meaning they can better withstand extreme weather. As part of a $1 million pilot project, the Province will provide municipalities that qualify for MDRA funding with up to 15% above the estimated cost of rebuilding damaged public infrastructure to make it more resilient to extreme weather. Examples include raising roads to provide better protection from overland flow of water, improving the columns or footings of bridges, or increasing the size of ditches and catch basins to increase their capacity to hold water. Communities that were affected by spring flooding that occurred after March 1, 2019, are eligible for the enhanced funding under the pilot.

5.3.3 Ministry of Environment, Conservation and Parks

The Ministry of Environment, Conservation and Parks (MECP), with priority on protection of public safety and the environment, is the provincial lead for a number of water-related initiatives including:

  • Protecting the Great Lakes;
  • Protecting waterways and inland waters;
  • Ensuring sustainable water use and water security for future generations;
  • Providing provincial oversight of municipal and private wastewater and stormwater; and
  • Enhancing data, information and knowledge sharing.

MECP also has overall responsibility for the Conservation Authorities Actand non-natural hazard related programs and services developed and delivered by CAs.

Ontario’s 2018 Environment Plan outlines the government’s intention to undertake a comprehensive, multi-sectoral assessment of climate change-related impacts, including vulnerabilities, risks and opportunities, to help provide a detailed understanding of how and where climate change will affect Ontario’s economy, infrastructure, communities, public health and safety and ecosystems, and what the likely challenges and opportunities associated with those impacts would be. The draft plan commits to working with industry, such as real estate and insurance, to raise awareness among homeowners about the increasing risk of flooding as more frequent extreme weather events are being experienced. This initiative is also being led by MECP.

MECP develops municipal guidance documents to support stormwater management planning and design, which assists municipalities in developing stormwater servicing master plans as well as planning for infrastructure that provide protection of public safety and the environment.

5.3.4 Ministry of Infrastructure

The Ministry of Infrastructure’s connection to flood management and prevention is:

  • MOI is responsible for making recommendations on priorities for infrastructure and effective coordination of infrastructure across provincial ministries within the government.
  • MOI works with partner ministries and Infrastructure Ontario to design, implement and administer public infrastructure programs.
  • MOI manages the Asset Management Planning for Municipal Infrastructure Regulation, O. Reg. 588/17, which guides asset management and provides tools and support for municipalities in Ontario to meet their current and future infrastructure needs (see Municipal asset management planning).
  • MOI leads the design and implementation of federal-provincial infrastructure programs, working with partner ministries and the federal government.

Resilient infrastructure that helps communities cope with the intensifying effects of climate change and floods has become a key area for targeted investment for MOI in recent years.

MOI administers the Ontario Community Infrastructure Fund (OCIF) which, since 2014, has provided application- and predictable formula-based funding to help build and repair core infrastructure (e.g. road, bridge, water, wastewater infrastructure) in more than 420 small, rural and northern communities. The Province is currently reviewing the design of the OCIF to ensure that it continues to support municipalities to improve and implement asset management plans.

The Green stream of the Investing in Canada Infrastructure Program (ICIP) consists of up to $7.12 billion in combined federal ($2.85 billion), provincial ($2.3 billion), and other partner ($1.92 billion) funding for projects that improve outcomes under one of the three federal sub-streams—Climate Change Mitigation, Environmental Quality, and Disaster Mitigation.

MOI launched the first intake of the Green stream on October 25, 2019 (see Ontario Investing in Green Infrastructure to Help Smaller Communities). The focus of this first intake is to address critical health and safety issues in small municipalities and First Nations communities with populations under 100,000 for water, wastewater and stormwater infrastructure.

MOI will be working with other government departments, including the MNRF, to design additional intakes of the Green stream that could support innovative natural infrastructure and green technology solutions to address current and future challenges in environmental quality, climate change and disaster mitigation.

5.3.5 Office of the Fire Marshall and Emergency Management (Ministry of the Solicitor General)

The Office of the Fire Marshall and Emergency Management, Emergency Management Branch—better known as Emergency Management Ontario (EMO)—is the overall provincial emergency management organization and is responsible for monitoring, coordinating and assisting in the development and implementation of effective emergency management programs throughout Ontario, and for the coordination of these programs with the federal government. In fulfilling this special coordination role, EMO coordinates the provincial emergency response through the Provincial Emergency Operations Centre, when required; provides advice and assistance to communities and ministries in all areas of emergency management; and maintains two provincial level emergency response plans—the Provincial Nuclear Emergency Response Plan and the Provincial Emergency Response Plan (PERP).

The PERP is the plan that is used to coordinate overall provincial emergency response and outlines how EMO and the ministries respond to widespread or large-scale emergencies.

Key initiatives of EMO related to flooding include hosting an annual flood and forest fire symposium, publishing and holding workshops on Hazard Identification and Risk Assessment; conducting a review of national and international best practices to evolve the program; updating the Provincial Emergency Response Plan; and updating the Incident Management System.

For flood events, the Provincial Emergency Operations Centre (PEOC) outreaches to Community Emergency Management Coordinators potentially impacted by flooding to determine anticipated resource requests; develops GIS mapping and incident information products for situational awareness; deploys field officers to provide advice to municipalities and liaise between the PEOC and on-site responders; and develops and circulates flood resource materials (lists of flood-related resources and materials and a Flood Recovery Guide).

5.3.6 Municipalities

In the MNRF technical guides, municipalities are delegated the responsibility under the Emergency Management and Civil Protection Actof identifying areas subject to natural hazards and to develop management plans (i.e. flood contingency plans) to limit exposure to public health and safety risks. This includes identifying floodplains in municipal plans and incorporating policies to address new development consistent with the PPS policy. It is up to the municipality to determine how best to achieve this requirement and the use of floodplain mapping is one tool available to demonstrate hazard areas. Municipalities can choose to involve their conservation authority in preparing floodplain mapping on the municipality’s behalf, but are not required to do so.

Any updated or new mapping is generally funded on an as-needed priority basis by municipalities, or through proponent driven development applications. Neither the MNRF nor the Province provides funding for new or updated flood hazard mapping, nor approves new or updated mapping; however, the Province has provided small transfer payments for pilot projects related to mapping technologies in the last few years.

Maps are retained at the municipality and are used for specific land use planning purposes. It is up to the municipality to update their maps when required, which usually is development driven, including updates or amendments to official plans. The MNRF does not track or monitor the development of mapping locally and cannot report on its status or progress.

Municipalities are responsible for municipal stormwater management (e.g. planning, standards, design, establishment, operation and maintenance). Municipal stormwater management deals with the component of the urban surface runoff that is or would be collected by means of separate municipal storm sewers and, in some areas, by combined sewers.

Municipal stormwater management can include green infrastructure that captures (partially or fully) where snow melts or rain falls, reducing stormwater runoff that enters municipal storm sewers.

Municipalities also have an important role for managing surface runoff in rural areas. They, along with landowners, have responsibility for municipal drains that drain and convey surface runoff under the Drainage Act. Tile drains, which are important to agricultural productivity, collect and convey surface runoff to natural waterways directly or indirectly via municipal drains. Surface runoff from municipal roads are also conveyed and release to natural waterways. The cumulative drainage of the vast rural areas and rapid conveyance contributes to downstream urban (fluvial) flooding risk.

In emergencies, municipalities undertake first response activities and are responsible for recovery efforts in their jurisdiction.

5.3.7 Conservation Authorities

Conservation authorities are public sector bodies established by municipalities through the Conservation Authorities Act (see Section 5.2.2. above) that deliver programs and services, and regulate development and activities set out in regulations within their jurisdiction through a permitting process if the development may impact the control of natural hazards, including riverine and shoreline flooding, or if activities interfere with a watercourse or wetland. Conservation authorities also have a delegated role from the MNRF in reviewing municipal planning documents and applications under the Planning Act for consistency with the natural hazard policies in the PPS, including how the development may impact the control of natural hazards. These responsibilities include policy interpretation and the transfer of data, information and science to municipalities. The delineation of hazard areas through mapping and supporting hydrologic/hydraulic studies provides important information and science to support these delegated responsibilities. Regulatory mapping may be updated by a conservation authority from time to time, sometimes when municipalities update their official plans and their floodplain mapping or, as a requirement of a permit application, a proponent may be required to update authority regulatory mapping.

Where they have been established, conservation authorities are delegated with the responsibility for flood forecasting and warning. Where no CA exists, the local MNRF district is responsible. Supporting both CAs and MNRF districts is the MNRF’s Surface Water Monitoring Centre, whose main function is to monitor water flows and levels, assess conditions across the province, and provide communications and ongoing knowledge of the provincial flood potential. The scope and complexity of a flood forecasting and warning program for a particular jurisdiction is contingent on a variety of considerations, including the level of risk within flood-prone areas. Some conservation authorities may operate and maintain an additional network of streamflow, snowpack, rain gauges and climate stations throughout their geographical jurisdictions that can also serve as data inputs to their hydrologic models to address the specific needs within their jurisdiction.

5.3.8 The federal government

Water management and flood hazard management more specifically are not referenced in the Canadian Constitution Act. Provincial water management authority is derived from the authority to legislate over property and civil rights, over matters of local and private nature, over local works and over natural resources. Some federal departments such as Natural Resources Canada (NRCan) also have a role in flooding and other natural hazards. NRCan monitors natural hazards (including flooding and landslides) and provides information about hazards events, as well as information to help Canadians understand and prepare for natural hazards, and to reduce the losses from hazards events. NRCan develops and distributes geospatial data, topographic and geoscience maps, images and scientific publications associated with flooding and landslides. (See also the discussion on remote sensing in Section 5.3.1.3.)

Public Safety Canada administers the Disaster Financial Assistance Arrangements (DFAA) program, which reimburses provincial and territorial governments for eligible disaster response and recovery costs.

With flooding being the single largest draw on DFAA, NRCan initiated the Federal Flood Mapping Guidelines Series (in partnership with Public Safety Canada) to provide critical support to areas in Canada that didn’t necessarily have robust guidance related to floodplain mapping. While well intentioned, this initiative has added to confusion in Ontario, with practitioners not necessarily understanding that Ontario’s existing guides take precedence.

Public Safety Canada also provides funding for cost-shared projects related to the management of flooding and other natural hazards through programs like the National Disaster Mitigation Program (NDMP) and Infrastructure Canada provides funding through the Disaster Mitigation and Adaptation Fund (DMAF). Flood-related infrastructure projects may also be eligible for funding under the Investing in Canada Infrastructure Program (ICIP) under the Green stream administered jointly by Infrastructure Canada and Ontario.

5.3.9 Other agencies

5.3.9.1 International Joint Commission

Canada and the United States are parties to the Boundary Waters Treaty of 1909 (the Treaty), under which the International Joint Commission (IJC) is created. Under the Treaty, IJC has the jurisdiction over cases involving the use, obstruction or diversion of boundary waters shared between Canada and the U.S. For instance, the regulation of water flow through the Moses-Saunders Dam on the St. Lawrence River fall under the jurisdiction of the IJC.

Ontario works closely with the IJC and federal, state and provincial governments to ensure Great Lakes regulation strategies account for sustainable water resources management. While Ontario is not responsible for managing outflows from the Great Lakes, the Province does have responsibilities for lands, tourism, land use planning, water use and natural hazard management (erosion, flooding), all of which are affected by water levels and flows.

The MNRF advises the International Joint Commission through IJC Boards of Control and short-term task forces and studies.

5.3.9.2 Ottawa River Regulation Planning Board

In 1983, Canada, Quebec and Ontario approved the Agreement Respecting Ottawa River Basin Regulation. Under its terms, a board was constituted to plan and recommend regulation policies and criteria leading to integrated management of the 13 principal reservoirs of the basin, taking into account flood protection, hydroelectric power production and other interests. Supported by a Regulating Committee composed of the four agencies that own and operate the reservoirs and Secretariat, the Ottawa River Regulation Planning Board endeavours to ensure that the integrated management of the reservoirs provides as much protection as possible (the generating stations on the main stem of the Ottawa River were not designed for flood protection) against flooding along the Ottawa River and its tributaries, and along its channels in the Montréal region. The term "integrated management" means that the four principal dam operators in the basin operate their facilities with knowledge of what the other operators are doing and the consequences of operational decisions elsewhere in the Ottawa River basin.

The Board consists of seven members, each with an alternate, who represent Canada (three members), Ontario (two members), and Quebec (two members). The two Ontario agencies represented include the MNRF (co-chair of the board) and Ontario Power Generation (OPG).

On the Ottawa River, the responsibility and authority to manage dams in accordance with established operating plans rest with dam owners (e.g. Hydro-Québec, Ontario Power Generation and the federal government through Public Services and Procurement Canada). The Ministry’s application of the Lakes and Rivers Improvement Act on existing Ottawa River facilities is limited to reviews and approval of repairs/upgrades per associated work permits.

5.3.9.3 Ontario Power Generation

Ontario Power Generation (OPG) has been of member of the Ottawa River Regulation Planning Board (ORRPB) since its inception and is a full member of the Ottawa River Regulating Committee (ORRC) of the ORRPB. As part of the Regulating Committee, OPG collaborates with other operators of principal reservoirs to optimize the use of the storage they manage in view of reducing the river flows downstream, thereby minimizing flooding. In the spring, OPG and other operators follow river condition forecasts provided through the Regulating Committee very closely in order to make appropriate decisions at their facilities.

As agreed by Canada, Ontario and Quebec, the Board is the administrative and policy branch of the organization and the Regulating Committee and Secretariat are the operational arms. The purpose of the ORRPB and ORRC is to ensure integrated management, or the collaborative management, of the 13 principal reservoirs of the Ottawa River to minimize the impact of flooding and droughts along the Ottawa River. The original language in the ORRPB/ORRC agreement from the early 1980s states that the goal of the integrated management is to “provide protection against flooding.” The term “protection” is a misnomer, as the location of existing reservoirs and their physical storage capacity does not provide the ability to fully protect against flooding. Integrated management on the Ottawa River does not prevent the impact of flooding, but reduces the impact of flooding to the greatest extent possible given physical constraints.

Integrated management does not mean that the ORRPB or ORRC dictate or control flows in the river. Instead, the ORRPB mandate is to ensure that all operators are sharing information and forecasts when making decisions and that all decisions are made with the full knowledge of what other operators are doing. Being involved in the management of the principal reservoirs in the Ottawa River basin, OPG communicates and exchanges information at least daily with other members of the Regulating Committee (Hydro-Québec, Québec and Canada) throughout the spring flood season to assess together current and forecast river conditions, and what actions may be required to minimize flood impacts.

The daily process starts with the ORRC members examining the current water level and flow conditions at their facilities and submitting hydrometric data and initial reservoir release decisions. Hydro-Quebec produces a hydrological forecast of inflows along the river, which is shared with the Secretariat and ORRC members. This information is used as input to the reservoir routing model for forecasting flows and levels throughout the river system to aid ORRC members in planning operations (i.e. storage/discharge decisions). Members of the ORRC review the results and discuss the current operational strategy on a conference call. If at this time OPG decides it best to modify their reservoir operation strategy, they will inform the ORRC and the reservoir routing model will be modified to examine the impact of the change in this decision. This process will occur until a final strategy is established. At all times, OPG is responsible for the operation and strategy relating to its facilities. The ORRPB/ORRS/ORRC structure ensures that the operators’ decisions are transparent, consistent and share a common understanding of the watershed conditions with other members.