4840 Bank St. Ltd. - Permit for activities to achieve an overall benefit to a species

Description of instrument

The Corporation has submitted a proposal in relation to an overall benefit permit under clause 17(2)(c) of the Endangered Species Act, 2007 (ESA) to kill six (6) Category 2 Butternut trees, and nine (9) Category 3 Butternut trees, as well as damage and destroy up to 3.1 hectares of Butternut habitat in order to develop residential property with 332 residential units in the Idone Lands, Lot 22, Concession 4, Gloucester, City of Ottawa, Ontario.

Other information

The proposal to construct a residential subdivision has the potential to adversely affect Butternut and destroy up 3.1 hectares of Butternut habitat. The proposed permit conditions would provide benefits that exceed the adverse effects on Butternut and their habitat.

Butternut is listed on the Species at Risk in Ontario (SARO) List, in Ontario Regulation 230/08 of the ESA, as Endangered.

Subsection 9(1) of the ESA provides for the protection of endangered, threatened (and extirpated) species on the SARO List.

Habitat protection under subsection 10(1) the ESA applies to Butternut.

The Minister may issue a permit under clause 17(2)(c) of the ESA that authorizes a person to engage in an activity that would otherwise be prohibited by sections 9 or 10 of the ESA if the Minister is of the opinion that.

1. an overall benefit to the species will be achieved within a reasonable time through the conditions of the permit;
2. reasonable alternatives have been considered, including alternatives that would not negatively affect the species, and the best alternative has been adopted; and,
3. reasonable steps to minimize negative effects on individual members of the species are required by conditions of the permit.

Providing an overall benefit to a protected species under the ESA involves undertaking actions to improve circumstances for the species in Ontario. Overall benefit is more than “no net loss” or an exchange of “like for like”. Overall benefit is grounded in the protection and recovery of the species at risk and must include more than mitigation measures or “replacing” what is lost.

Reasonable alternatives are being considered, including alternatives that would not adversely affect Butternut, and may include:

• not proceeding with the proposed development project within areas with Butternut trees;
• altering project design to retain all Butternut trees within the development site; and
• redesigning project footprint to add additional space for development in order to retain Butternut trees within the development site.

The best alternative, which was proposed, includes proceeding with the project development and removing the Butternut trees on site.

The Corporation is working with MNRF staff to explore ways to minimize adverse effects on Butternut, including:

• implementing protective measures to reduce impacts to retainable Butternut habitat on adjacent area, which includes:
  • installing exclusion fencing or boundary definition marks around site boundaries to reduce impacts from construction activities; and
  • using alternate methods, equipment, designs etc. in the vicinity of the site boundaries to prevent impacts to soil and vegetation.

The Corporation is working with MNRF staff to identify proposed actions to achieve an overall benefit for Butternut, including:

• archiving three (3) Butternut trees that demonstrate resistance to the Butternut canker disease
• collecting or acquiring 524 Butternut seeds (equivalent to 131 seedlings) from a suitable seed zone which will then be donated for planting; and
• supporting a Butternut Stewardship Program to plant 1188 Butternut seedlings throughout eastern Ontario over the next two years.

A Government Response Statement published under subsection 11(8) of the ESA exists for Butternut, and will be considered before issuing the permit.

Please note that the posting of this proposal on the Environmental Registry does not imply that a permit will be approved; an overall benefit permit may only be issued where the legal requirements set out in clause 17(2)(c) of the ESA have been satisfied.