Step 1 - proponent identifies the water crossing project and determines if fish and/or fish habitat features exist.

The proponent is responsible for identifying water crossing projects and following the requirements of the applicable version of the Forest Management Planning Manual (FMPM) and this Protocol.

For the purposes of forest management in Ontario, all watercourses will be classified as containing fish and fish habitat, as defined in the Fisheries Act. The types of watercourses that are excluded from the Fisheries Act can be found on the Fisheries and Oceans Canada's projects near water website.

If the proposed project has fish and/or fish habitat features, proceed to step 2.

If the proponent has demonstrated that the project does not have fish and/or fish habitat features proceed to step 8.

Step 2 – proponent identifies whether any federally listed aquatic species at risk are likely to be affected.

The proponent will determine whether aquatic species at risk (i.e. fish and mussels) listed federally as endangered or threatened under schedule 1 of the Species at Risk Act (SARA) are likely present. When determining if species at risk are likely to be impacted by the project, proponents should consider both the immediate footprint and the potential spatial and temporal extent of the possible project impacts relative to the documented presence of species at risk and/or their habitat. SARA prohibitions only apply to species that are identified as endangered or threatened. Species listed as Special Concern should be identified to ensure their life history parameters are considered.

At a minimum, the proponent should:

  1. Consult Department of Fisheries and Oceans' (DFO) aquatic species at risk maps.
  2. Review the most up to date confidential values layer in consultation with the local Ministry of Natural Resources and Forestry (MNRF) work centre for information on ESA-listed aquatic species and their habitat.

If there are no relevant aquatic species at risk likely to be affected by the project, proceed to step 3.

If endangered or threatened SARA-listed aquatic species at risk and/or their habitat is likely to be affected by the project, the proponent will contact DFO and proceed to step 6.

Step 3 – proponent determines whether a water crossing standard can be applied to the water crossing project.

The proponent will determine if a water crossing standard contained in this Protocol can be applied to the water crossing project. This includes confirming that the location of the project and type of water crossing standard is consistent with the approved Forest Management Plan (FMP). When following a water crossing standard, the proponent is required to meet all of the criteria and standards listed in the water crossing standard in the FMP.

If the proponent determines that a water crossing standard can apply, proceed to step 4.

If the proponent determines that a water crossing standard cannot apply, proceed to step 5.

Step 4 – Proponent completes and submits the appropriate sections of the appendix 1 form to the MNRF for inclusion in the annual work schedules (AWS).

The proponent will complete the appropriate sections of the appendix 1 form, for each water crossing proposed for construction and/or removal using a water crossing standard. Appendix 1 forms will be submitted to MNRF with the AWS information, or revision to the AWS information.

In cases where a previously unidentified watercourse is encountered during the construction of a road, a revision to the AWS is deemed to be complete upon receipt by MNRF of appendix 1 as per direction in the FMPM (part D 3.5.4.1). Appendix 1 forms must be submitted to the MNRF prior to commencing the water crossing project and the water crossings are still subject to compliance and enforcement provisions under both the Crown Forest Sustainability Act (CFSA) and the Fisheries Act.

If the project can meet the requisite water crossing standards for the water crossing being proposed, it is not likely to result in the death of fish or harmful alteration, disruption or destruction (HADD) to fish habitat and the proponent can proceed with the submission of the AWS. No further Fisheries Act considerations are required. Proceed to Step 8.

Step 5 – MNRF reviews the proposed water crossing project and determines whether the water crossing project is likely or not likely to result in the death of fish or HADD to fish habitat.

The proponent will complete and submit the appropriate sections of the appendix 1 form to MNRF for review and approval for the construction and/or removal of a proposed water crossing project that could not implement a water crossing standard.

MNRF will complete the appendix 2 form for a proposed water crossing project that requires review and approval in order to evaluate whether a project is likely or not likely to result in the death of fish or HADD to fish habitat. As part of the evaluation and approval process, MNRF may require design modifications and/or additional mitigation measures to ensure the project is not likely to result in the death of fish or HADD to fish habitat. In some cases, site visits may be required to facilitate discussions between MNRF and the proponent regarding these potential design modifications and/or additional mitigation measures.

Where MNRF has determined a proposed water crossing project is not likely to result in the death of fish or HADD to fish habitat, and where an agreement has been reached with the proponent in cases where design modifications and/or additional mitigation measures have been included as a condition of the approval of the project, proceed to step 8.

Where MNRF has determined a proposed water crossing project is likely to result in the death of fish or HADD to fish habitat, and where agreement cannot be reached with the proponent regarding design modifications and/or additional mitigation measures that MNRF deems necessary, proceed to step 6.

Step 6 – Proponent forwards water crossing project proposal to DFO for review with a copy to MNRF for information purposes.

In cases where MNRF and the proponent cannot reach agreement regarding the details of the proposed project relative to whether a project is likely or not likely to result in the death of fish or HADD to fish habitat, including any design modifications and/or mitigation measures deemed necessary by MNRF, the proponent will forward the proposed project to DFO for review.

This step also applies in cases where a SARA listed species are affected.

The proponent will submit copies of the project's appendix 1 and 2 forms, a DFO request for review form, and any necessary supporting documentation to DFO for their review. A copy of the above forms and supporting information will also be sent to the appropriate MNRF office for information only.

Proceed to step 7.

Step 7 – DFO reviews for Fisheries Act and SARA concerns and issues approval and/or SARA permit to the proponent and notifies MNRF.

DFO will review the details of the proposed project to determine whether they support MNRF's assessment relative to whether a project is likely to result in the death of fish or HADD to fish habitat. DFO may contact the appropriate MNRF office to attain relevant information associated with the proposed project and its location, as well as requesting additional project details from the proponent in the event that they determine there is insufficient information to make a decision. The proponent will then provide DFO with the requested information should they decide to continue pursuing approval for the project.

DFO review will determine if the project will or will not require a Fisheries Act authorization and/or a SARA permit and will notify MNRF and the proponent in writing. DFO will engage in discussions with the proponent regarding potential conditions of approval or SARA permit requirements that would enable the project to proceed.

If DFO determines that the project is likely to result in the death of fish or HADD to fish habitat, DFO will notify the proponent and MNRF accordingly.

Proceed to step 8.

Step 8 – MNRF ensures consistency with the approved FMP and will include the project with, or as a revision to, the AWS.

Once the necessary water crossing forms, and where applicable Fisheries Act authorizations and/or SARA permits have been completed and received for higher risk water crossings, MNRF may conduct a final review to ensure consistency with the approved FMP. The water crossing project(s) will then be submitted with, or as a revision to, the AWS. Proceed to step 9.

Step 9 – Proponent proceeds with the water crossing project following all necessary requirements.

The proponent may proceed with water crossing projects that have been submitted with, or as a revision to, the AWS.

Step 10 – Proponent submits final water crossing project completion notification to MNRF with FMP annual report.

Following the completion of the of the water crossing project, the proponent will notify the MNRF of the precise location of the crossing, the details of the crossing type that was constructed and/or removed, and any potential issues that were experienced during the construction and/or removal of the crossing or that might be expected throughout the use and maintenance of the site.

The reporting and monitoring requirements for water crossings are outlined in the FMPM and Forest Information Manual (FIM).

The proponent is also required to notify the MNRF as to the status of forest operations (including at start-up, if temporarily suspending, and at completion) as per timelines outlined in the procedures of the forest compliance handbook.

If a Fisheries Act authorization and/or SARA permit has been issued, the proponent is responsible for ensuring all reporting requirements are submitted directly to DFO as outlined in the DFO document.

Figure 1 - Decision framework for the review and approval of forestry water crossings.

Decision tree illustrating the Decision Framework for the Review and Approval of Forestry Water Crossings.

Adapted from figure.

  • Proponent identifies project
    • 1. Do fish and/or fish habitat features exist?
      Proponent determines
      • Yes
        • Go to 2.
      • No
        • No further Fisheries Act considerations are required.
        • Go to 8.
    • 2. Are federally listed aquatic species at risk likely to be affected?
      Proponent determines
      • Yes-SARA
        • Go to 6.
      • No
        • Go to 3.
    • 3. Can a Water Crossing Standard be applied?
      Proponent determines
      • Yes
        • Go to 4.
      • No
        • Go to 5.
    • 4. Proponent completes and submits appropriate sections of Appendix 1 form to the MNRF for inclusion in the AWS.
      • Go to 8.
    • 5. Is the project likely or not likely to result in the death of fish or HADD to fish habitat?
      MNRF determines 
      • Yes
        • Go to 6.
      • No
        • Go to 8.
    • 6. Proponent forwards project to DFO for review with a copy to MNRF for information
      • Go to 7.
    • 7. DFO reviews for Fisheries Act and SARA concerns and issues approval and/or SARA permit to the Proponent and notifies MNRF.
      • Go to 8.
    • 8. MNRF ensures consistency with the approved FMP and will include the project with, or as a revision to, the AWS.
      • Go to 9.
    • 9. Proponent proceeds with the project following all necessary requirements.
      • Go to 10.
    • 10. Proponent submits final project completion notification to MNRF with FMP annual report.