Transport Committee on Nov. 7th, 2024

[The Chair, Liberal, Peter Schiefke]

I call this meeting to order.

Welcome to meeting number 137 of the Standing Committee on Transport, Infrastructure and Communities.

Before we begin the meeting, I want to remind all in-person participants to read the best practices guidelines on the cards on the table. These measures are in place to protect the health and safety of all participants.

Today's meeting is taking place in a hybrid format.

Pursuant to Standing Order 108(2) and the motion adopted by the committee on Monday, September 18, 2023, the committee is resuming its study on the regulation of recreational boating on Canada's waterways.

All witnesses have completed the required connection tests in advance of the meeting.

Appearing before us today, colleagues, we have, as an individual, Madame Sara Mercier-Blais, research associate at the Université du Québec à Montréal.

We welcome her, as well as her baby, Elliot, who is in the room.

We have, from Norfolk County, Ms. Amy Martin, mayor, by video conference. It's good to have you here with us.

Finally, from the Ontario Provincial Police, we have Sergeant Dave Moffatt, provincial marine coordinator, by video conference, and from the Port Dover Waterfront Preservation Association, we have Margaret Creighton, director. Welcome to you as well.

We will begin with your presentation, Ms. Mercier‑Blais. You have the floor for five minutes.

[Sara Mercier-Blais, Research Associate, Université du Québec à Montréal, As an Individual]

Thank you very much, Mr. Chair.

I'm a research officer at the Yves Prairie research lab. We work primarily on carbon in lakes, but we've also done a great deal of research on lake physics, which includes temperature patterns, contaminant dissipation, gases dissolved in the water, as well as the measurement of turbulence and waves on the surface of lakes.

That is why, in 2014, Memphrémagog Conservation Inc.—whose representative has already testified before this committee—and the Société de conservation du lac Lovering asked us to conduct a study on the effect of wake boat waves on the shores of Lake Memphrémagog and Lake Lovering.

Because that 300-metre distance you've been hearing about since the beginning of your study comes from our own study, I'll take the time to explain where that figure comes from and what it represents.

As part of our study, we set out a rigorous protocol, making sure that the wakes we were creating happened at different specific speeds, at different specific distances from the shore and with varying levels of ballast. I want to be clear that wake boats are the only type of vessel we studied.

Our study was investigating sediment resuspension and surface energy, and not directly investigating shoreline erosion. In the case of both lakes, we concluded that it takes a distance of 300 metres for the energy generated by and contained in waves to be dissipated when they arrive at shore and for the effect to be comparable to that of natural winds. In other words, wake boats must travel at this distance from shore for the effect of the waves they produce to be equivalent to the effect of natural waves on the shore.

Lake Memphremagog and Lake Lovering are very different. Figure 9 in our report shows that turbulence decreases according to distance. That's true for both lakes, but it presents itself quite differently. Regardless, we came up with that same 300-metre distance for the energy in the waves to dissipate and be equivalent to the energy in natural waves.

All of Quebec's lakes appeared following the withdrawal of glaciers. They have the same physical creation process. We can therefore state that these lakes are fairly similar in type.

After our lab study, I was involved in a project at Lake Tremblant. We did not take specific measurements using instruments, in this case, but we characterized the shorelines to determine whether certain areas were at risk of being more or less damaged by waves produced by the boats.

What are the shoreline characteristics that mean that the waves' effect will be more intense—or less—when they land?

First, there is the slope of the shoreline. Obviously, if the shoreline is sloped, wave energy will land at a single point, whereas if the energy touches the shoreline over a long distance, there will be less impact.

Then there's the type of sediment. The wave will not have the same effect on sand or silt as on a rock wall.

There are also riparian buffer strips. The more natural vegetation there is, the better protected the shoreline and the soil will be, which will prevent erosion.

Finally, there is the impact of normal and prevailing winds. When we compare waves from boats, we want to compare them to the natural waves experienced by the lake. For example, there will be very few waves in some bays, compared to areas exposed to the prevailing wind, where the waves will be much stronger. We also have to include storm winds, which are stronger. During storms, there's much more wind, obviously. However, given their short duration, the effect of winds generated by storms is much less significant than the effect of the frequent waves produced by the high number of boats. We took storm winds into account in our study. On the other hand, if more extreme events occur due to climate change, there will obviously be more wind. That said, even if storms are more intense, they rarely last long enough to have a greater impact than the many boat crossings on a lake.

In conclusion, although the two lakes under study were very different, we recommended a similar restriction for vessel passage. In both cases, it requires a distance of 300 metres from shore for the waves arriving at the shore to be comparable in intensity to the natural waves on those lakes. I believe that this 300-metre restriction could apply to a number of other lakes, given that, despite the major difference between the two lakes under study, their shorelines were affected in much the same way by waves produced by wake boats.

[The Chair, Liberal, Peter Schiefke]

Thank you very much, Ms. Mercier‑Blais.

I also want to thank you for taking the time to join us with your family.

Next we have Mayor Martin.

Mayor Martin, the floor is yours for your opening remarks. You have five minutes.

[Amy Martin, Mayor, Norfolk County]

Thank you very much.

I appreciate the invite from MP Lewis to attend today. I apologize that my screen is so dark. The sun is coming down in Ontario and I'm losing daylight.

Good afternoon. My name is Amy Martin. I'm the mayor of Norfolk County, and I'm pleased to be here representing our community and speaking with you about the importance of marinas and access to waterways.

Norfolk County is uniquely positioned 45 minutes southwest of Hamilton, along the shores of Lake Erie in Ontario. We are a rural, mid-sized, single-tier municipality. It is home to 73,000 residents and is about 1,600 square kilometres of land mass, 185 kilometres of it on the shoreline of Lake Erie.

Agriculture, industrial innovation and tourism are the main drivers of the economy, with a large focus on seasonal tourism to the waterfront. Even though Norfolk County owns very little beachfront property, key to the tourism industry is that we leverage the waterfront communities and amenities we have in order to build out a viable tourism industry based on our natural features.

Of the over 185 kilometres of Lake Erie shoreline in Norfolk County, only 14.2 kilometres are publicly accessible, and of that area, 4.7 kilometres are owned by the county. We have marinas along that shoreline, with more than 13 in the area, two of which are publicly owned by Norfolk County and managed by the municipality. The others are private enterprises.

I'd like to take a couple of moments to chat with you about the publicly owned assets.

The Port Rowan Harbour Marina was a federal asset until the former township and then municipality took it over in 1970. It's home to about 40 seasonal docking slips, two transient slips and 38 water leases, and it's about 10.89 acres in size. The asset is used as much more than a marina. It's a waterfront park. It's home to countless community events, and it's woven into the fabric of this small harbourfront community.

Twenty-nine per cent of Port Rowan Harbour Marina boaters are from out of the county. The marina is currently run as a passive marina, with minimal staff resources being spent there. Slips can range from $793 to $881, but it's worth noting that, currently, the marina does not turn a profit to keep up with its capital requirements at present.

Port Dover is the second community I'd like to touch on. It's home to the second municipally owned marina, which is about 69 acres of property and consists of a breakwater system, service wharf structures, a floating dock and a launching ramp. It came to Norfolk County in 2007 through the federal recreational harbour divestiture program. The federal government owns lands in close proximity, and the marina is beside a federal-commercial fish basin that has a land lease for the federal harbour master.

The marina is home to 458 boat slips, with 55% of boaters coming from outside of Norfolk County. It's worth noting that 150 of those boats are too large or too deep to go elsewhere, so a properly dredged space is needed to accommodate them. Ninety boats are sailboats, with about 180 sailors in the marina. It's also home to the Port Dover sailing school, a not-for-profit, volunteer-driven organization that's been running for 15 years. It gives youth opportunities to be comfortable with the lake. It started with 50 kids, and in 2024, the summer program finished with 150.

The boat slips in the Port Dover Harbour Marina can range from $77 to $91 per square foot. Just for some information, Lake Erie is a great boating lake, but the average boat size is about 22 feet, just to manage the waves and the wind. Roughly, a used 22-foot boat is selling for $20,000, and that's a conservative figure.

From recent discussions, I've averaged out that sailors spend around $2,000 in annual maintenance on a boat; $2,600 to $3,200 can be spent on seasonal dry dockage and storage fees; and $3,000 a year can be spent on boat supplies, and much more—upwards of $10,000—if maintenance is required. While all of these estimates are conservative, if we ballpark that the average boat owner spends $5,000 a year before operating costs, there's a contribution of $2.6 million to the boating economy just from Norfolk County's two publicly owned marinas. This also has far-reaching impacts across Ontario and Canada. All that said, the numbers can change, but the point is that a significant amount of money is being spent on the boating and marine industry.

We have weekly racing regattas and other regattas that occur through a variety of clubs, including the Port Dover Yacht Club, whose members are not part of the municipally owned asset. These events can include anywhere from six to 50 boats, with crews of four or more, which head out every single week on the lake, with maybe 200 sailors participating.

Port Dover is also home to a stopover in the annual interclub sailing event that started in 1957, when sailors from the U.S. decided to stop over in Port Dover—among other areas—for a few nights to race and enjoy the community. We can't estimate what the economic spinoffs are, but we do know that this event brings repeat visitors outside of the chartered racing event. The partner clubs are the Buffalo Yacht Club, the Erie Yacht Club and Port Dover. They also make stops to Port Colborne, the Point Abino summer station and the Buffalo Canoe Club. Those visitors are coming from Ashtabula, Ohio; Erie, Pennsylvania; Buffalo, New York; Dunkirk, New York and so on.

It's worth noting that a lot of boaters will find safe harbour in Long Point or will stay in the marina and use their boat as a floating summer cottage, technically. This creates unknown impacts in the rental market—the short-term rental market and Airbnb—in a tourism community.

The boating community has so many variables, from the size of the gas tank to the price of dockage and storage, but we know there are significant impacts on the economy in a direct economic development way and from a tourism perspective. One thing I'd like to touch on is the commercial boating industry—

[The Chair, Liberal, Peter Schiefke]

Unfortunately, Ms. Martin, I'll have to ask you to wrap it up. You're already a minute and 20 seconds over. Perhaps you can—

[Amy Martin]

Oh my goodness. Okay. I will wrap it up.

[The Chair, Liberal, Peter Schiefke]

That's okay. I just want to be fair to members.

I'm sure you'll have a lot of time to add on during questions. I'll give you an extra 15 seconds if you have a salient point.

[Amy Martin]

Yes. I'll wrap it up. I appreciate that.

Port Dover once had the largest freshwater fishing fleet, and there are lots of commercial and industrial impacts on the waterways, the marina and so on. Within an hour and a half, you can be among 110 million Americans in an industrial and commercial market.

I'm happy to answer any questions. Thank you for the extra time.

[The Chair, Liberal, Peter Schiefke]

Thank you very much, Mayor Martin.

Next we'll go to Sergeant Moffatt.

Sergeant Moffatt, you have five minutes for your opening remarks. The floor is yours.

[Sergeant Dave Moffatt, Provincial Marine Coordinator, Ontario Provincial Police]

Good afternoon. My name is Dave Moffatt. I'm the provincial marine coordinator for the Ontario Provincial Police. I would like to thank the Standing Committee on Transport, Infrastructure and Communities for this opportunity to speak to you regarding marine safety and security across the country.

I've been an OPP member for 29 years, and a marine enforcement officer and marine instructor for 24 years. I am one of the executive chairs of the Canadian enforcement marine advisers, or CEMA, which consists of over 70 marine enforcement officers across the country. In my current role as the provincial marine coordinator, I oversee everything marine within the OPP and communicate with Transport Canada regarding legislation—ideally to make marine transportation and recreational boating safer in OPP jurisdictional waterways—through my work with CEMA across the country.

I have five quick matters I'd like to address today.

Firstly, the OPP has worked diligently to inform Transport Canada about the need for legislation on the mandatory wearing of life jackets for vessels six metres and under due to Ontario's 87% fatality rate among boaters not wearing life jackets or PFDs. The OPP has authored resolutions, passed by the Ontario Association of Chiefs of Police and the Canadian Association of Chiefs of Police, supporting this issue. Legislation on the mandatory wearing of life jackets would decrease boating fatality rates across Canada.

Secondly, the OPP is in conversation with Transport Canada to enhance enforcement officers' authorities on the water. This conversation includes “blue light” authority to stop vessels when they are signalled by police, and to suspend vessel operator licences. This suspension would occur when an operator is charged with impaired operation due to alcohol or drugs, or when an operator registers a warning on an approved screening device when tested for alcohol consumption. Currently, there is no suspension authority for this. Essentially, an operator can drive their vessel after a police interaction and subsequently after a suspension of their Ontario motor vehicle driver's licence.

Thirdly, Transport Canada's marine safety inspectors, or MSIs, have a large responsibility to inspect commercial vessels across the country. They work within small reinforcement organizations to inspect vessels in their areas of responsibility, which equates to a small number of commercial vessel inspections in totality. Enforcement officers are busy day to day ensuring waterways are safe for everyone using them through education or the enforcement of legislation. This is why I bring it up today. There needs to be shared, compatible participation between the recreational vessel and commercial vessel communities to ensure a safe environment on the water.

The Contraventions Act allows enforcement officers to charge a violator using a federal act like the Canada Shipping Act, 2001, by means of a provincial offence notice. This is essentially a ticket. The charge stays with a criminal court, where it needs to be. It goes to our provincial traffic court system. Charges through the Contraventions Act can only be issued for offences identified in the contraventions regulations. These regulations are heavily geared towards the recreational vessel community. About 95% to 97% of them are for the recreational community, not the small commercial vessel community. Therefore, there is little to no proactive small commercial vessel enforcement done because of the lack of small commercial vessel charges available through the contraventions regulations.

To ensure small commercial vessel compliance on our waterways, why not use us, the patrolling and enforcement officers, who are the eyes and ears of Transport Canada, and not just the MSIs? Have the officers educate people and enforce small commercial vessel legislation proactively, especially when an accused is present on a stopped vessel. Currently, enforcement officers have to pass the file on to an MSI for a follow-up investigation, which can be very problematic, as an accused has to be located at a later time and sometimes cannot be located. An update to the contraventions regulations to include small commercial vessels is needed.

Fourthly, as a provincial marine coordinator, I rely on collision statistics to anticipate what issues need to be addressed on our waterways provincially. Due to the lack of mandated collision reporting in Canada for recreational vessels, we cannot learn the issues involving these collisions in a timely manner. A report comes out by TC, but that's seldom, and it's usually very outdated by about three to four years. I believe we need recreational collision reporting for vessels in order to learn about what is happening on our waterways annually.

My last point, which I know you've heard about, is about the flare disposal program that Transport Canada did not fund this year. As you know, vessels are required to carry flares on board depending on their size, the size of the waterway and their proximity to land. Flares expire four years after the manufacture date, and when they expire, boaters have no way to dispose of them. Operators resort to disposing the flares improperly by putting them in landfills, setting them off illegally or leaving them in a corner of the garage and basement for years, which can lead to a fire or an explosion. Funding needs to be returned so that there's a proper and safe way for Canadian boaters to dispose of their flares.

Thank you very much for the opportunity and the time.

[The Chair, Liberal, Peter Schiefke]

Thank you very much, Sergeant Moffatt.

Members have been advised that you need to leave at 5:30. We're going to respect your time and try to direct questions to you at the outset.

[Sgt Dave Moffatt]

Thank you.

[The Chair, Liberal, Peter Schiefke]

Next for opening remarks, we'll go to Ms. Creighton.

Ms. Creighton, the floor is yours. You have five minutes.

[Margaret Creighton, Director, Port Dover Waterfront Preservation Association]

Thank you, Chair and all committee members.

My name is Margaret Creighton. I'm a director of the Port Dover Waterfront Preservation Association.

In April 2007, the federal government transferred ownership of the Port Dover Harbour Marina to Norfolk County as part of the recreational harbour divestiture program. Through the transfer, the citizens of Norfolk County gained a tremendously valuable asset. Over the years, our association has advocated to keep the marina as a publicly owned and operated facility. This is so the public may enjoy recreational boating and retain both physical and visual access to the waterfront.

Port Dover is a community with a vibrant marine heritage. We have an active commercial fishery, along with the Port Dover Harbour Marina. Both of these draw in local and tourist dollars and drive our economy.

There are 458 slips in the marina, along with 11 transient slips. They provide recreational boaters with public waterfront access to Long Point Bay. In addition, the Port Dover Yacht Club and Sailing School, which has occupied the marina for more than 15 years, teaches boating safety and sailing skills to students of all ages and abilities. Our association would like to see the marina remain a public asset to protect the public's ability to pursue recreational boating on Long Point Bay.

Port Dover is one of three safe harbours on the north shore of Lake Erie. The Canadian Coast Guard, stationed at the marina, plays a major role in search and rescue operations to keep boaters safe. Lake Erie, as the shallowest of the Great Lakes, has a tendency to produce unpredictable conditions that can result in strong winds and waves over 20 feet high. The vital role of the Canadian Coast Guard cannot be overemphasized.

Recreational boaters' access to the Port Dover Harbour and marina is critical for safe passage. Over time, when sediment builds up, dredging becomes absolutely necessary. The funding for dredging should continue to be both a municipal and federal responsibility.

The following issues are relevant to the Port Dover Harbour Marina, as well as the majority of marinas across Canada.

The first is the PCOC. As previously mentioned, at the present time, Transport Canada does not require a pleasure craft operator card for individuals who rent boats or jet skis. Rental businesses provide a temporary boating licence to those who do not have a PCOC. Given the high speeds that powerboats and jet skis can travel at, it would be most prudent if operators were well aware of safe boating rules on the water. The requirement of a PCOC would help reduce the potential for tragedies on our waterways.

Next is distress flares. Again, this was previously mentioned, but in September, Bill Jerry, commander of CanBoat Port Dover, sent a letter to Transport Canada advocating for the reinstatement of funding under the boating safety contribution program for the distress flare collection and disposal program. This program was previously administered through the Canadian Power and Sales Squadrons, now called CanBoat/NautiSavoir, across Canada. There is no other Canada-wide program, and there are only a few local disposal options left.

Many boaters are carrying the pyrotechnic distress flares required by Transport Canada and older flares that are now expired and potentially dangerous. Some of these toxic flares are ending up in landfills, while others are being lit on land. It is imperative that Transport Canada take action on this issue.

On education, our local CanBoat Port Dover still does courtesy safety equipment checks of vessels by request. A safety day may be held next year, which would include these checks. It would be of great benefit if Transport Canada produced up-to-date videos on mandated safety equipment and how to handle emergencies on the water. Perhaps CanBoat and Transport Canada could work collaboratively on this.

Our recommendations are as follows: maintain a strong presence at Canadian Coast Guard stations across Canada; support safety on our waterways by requiring boat and jet ski renters to have a PCOC; reinstate the funding under the boating safety contribution program for the distress flare collection and disposal program; work with CanBoat to produce safety equipment videos and videos demonstrating how to handle on-water emergencies; work with municipal and private marinas to ensure that recreational boating and safety on the water are being promoted; and finally, encourage and protect the public's physical and visual access to our waterways while promoting recreational boating.

Thank you for the opportunity to speak.

[The Chair, Liberal, Peter Schiefke]

Thank you, Ms. Creighton.

We'll begin our line of questioning today with Dr. Lewis.

Dr. Lewis, the floor is yours.

[Philip Lawrence, Conservative, Northumberland—Peterborough South, ON]

Actually, we're going over to Mel.

[The Chair, Liberal, Peter Schiefke]

Okay, we'll go to you, Mr. Arnold. You have the floor for six minutes, please.

[Mel Arnold, Conservative, North Okanagan—Shuswap, BC]

Thank you, Mr. Chair. It's a pleasure to be here.

In full disclosure, I spent 26 years in the small boat repair business and 15 years prior to that building boats, so I'm quite familiar with recreational boating, at least in my part of the world, North Okanagan—Shuswap in British Columbia.

Mr. Moffatt, before you have to leave, can you describe how you coordinate with departments such as DFO or the Ministry of Natural Resources in patrols on the water? In my area, I find those enforcement agencies often have to pool resources to do patrols. Is it a similar situation in Ontario?

[Sgt Dave Moffatt]

First, as far as the DFO, office of boating safety and the MNR go, we do all the training for the MNR. We train every single one of their officers to obtain their commercial licence. That is a very strong relationship we have.

As far as the patrols go, yes, we share patrols all over the province. The relationship that each detachment has with its local MNR officer is a very strong one. There are some things that MNR officers do that we don't do and vice versa. We want to be a very proactive police force, as the MNR does, to deal with all the issues across the province.

Yes, we do have a very strong relationship.

[Mel Arnold, Conservative, North Okanagan—Shuswap, BC]

Do each of those departments have sufficient resources for doing their work, or do they find efficiencies? Do they only have the ability to do patrols because they can pool resources?

[Sgt Dave Moffatt]

All of our water detachments, as we call them, have vessels and have marine officers. However, do we have enough people out there? We absolutely do not.

You can look at the size of these water bodies and the number of water bodies that each detachment has. For instance, in the Muskokas, the number of water bodies they have is huge, as is the number of people who expect to see the police on their lake. We only have a small marine presence on the big three—Lake Rosseau, Lake Joseph and Lake Muskoka—and, of course, on the 22 to 28 smaller lakes in the area.

We need more officers. We need more boats. We need better boats. We need funding for sure. When we have those difficulties, we rely on our partners to have joint patrols. The MNR works alone.

[Mel Arnold, Conservative, North Okanagan—Shuswap, BC]

It sounds like the situation is very similar to the Shuswap and the Okanagan, where officers have to pool their resources to do efficient patrols.

Next I want to switch to Ms. Creighton.

You were suggesting that renters should be required to possess pleasure craft operator cards. Can you tell me, to your knowledge, how long it takes to study for and obtain a PCOC?

[Margaret Creighton]

I'm not sure exactly how long the online testing takes. It's been many years since I took that test. The book that Transport Canada put out about safe boating was the resource I used way back when, and I hope that it's still around. That is a really good resource for all boaters.

You're asking me directly how long it would take to study and then do the test. Is that correct?

[Mel Arnold, Conservative, North Okanagan—Shuswap, BC]

That's correct.

[Margaret Creighton]

Well, I think it would be up to the individual. If they have any on-water boating experience, the test will be a lot easier, I would think.

The other issue is the integrity involved in taking the test—if it's done by the person who's getting a PCOC or if there's someone helping them out while they're doing the test.