Niagara’s conservation authority needs residents to report wrongdoing; why are they kept in the dark after doing so?

The Niagara Peninsula Conservation Authority relies on residents to act as its eyes and ears, reporting possible violations that could threaten protected wetlands, ravines and flood-prone areas across Niagara Region, Hamilton and Haldimand.

For several citizens in St. Catharines, that partnership is starting to feel one-sided.

Hidden behind the Petro-Canada gas station on Glenridge Avenue, the landowner has carried out landscaping work along the back of the property that has alarmed nearby residents. Witnesses say trees were cut down and heavy machinery was used to bulldoze right to the edge of a protected ravine. Mountains of soil and debris have been pushed down the slope—work they believed to be in clear violation of NPCA regulations.

Images shared with The Pointer show large amounts of soil and concrete slabs have been pushed down the slope in an area protected by the Niagara Peninsula Conservation Authority.

(Submitted)

Multiple residents say they reported the activity to the NPCA through its hotline and email system, but never received any reply or update. 

“We’ve tried over and over again and got nothing,” one resident, who wished not to be named for fear of reprisal, said. “At this point, it feels like they just don’t care.” 

Frustrated by the lack of engagement, two residents reached out to The Pointer.

Upon inspection, it is evident that considerable activity has taken place on the site, with debris deposited into the ravine through which Dick’s Creek flows. NPCA policy outlines the need to protect valleylands and slopes from any work that could lead to erosion or destabilization, and therefore these slopes are regulated, meaning that to carry out such work, a permit must be granted by the NPCA.

Along with Dick’s Creek, which runs through the ravine behind the Petro Canada,  the banks and slopes that lead down to the water are protected by the conservation authority, meaning a permit is required to carry out work in these areas.

(Google Maps/NPCA)

When contacted by The Pointer, the NPCA confirmed that it received complaints about the site and that no permit was issued for the work, which the agency described as an unauthorized activity now under active investigation.

“Once the complaint was received, it was validated, risk assessed and investigated,” agency officials said in a written response. “While we understand the desire for more detailed information, this is an open compliance matter and NPCA cannot provide any additional details.”

Residents have told The Pointer that despite repeated attempts to communicate with the NPCA, they never received a response. According to them their complaints were never even acknowledged as being received. They point out that the landowner has continued the illegal work but the lack of action from the NPCA has left them discouraged. They no longer bother reporting new activity because “it doesn’t make a difference.”

Liz Benneian, Chair of the Biodiversity and Climate Action Collective Niagara, says this perceived lack of action by residents can have sweeping consequences for a process meant to protect Niagara’s vulnerable ecosystems. 

"We are losing more critical habitat every day in Niagara. The Region’s citizens need to be assured that those increasingly rare natural spaces that we have, especially along our few remaining wildlife corridors like creeks and ravines, are going to be rigorously protected,” she said. "What is the point of having a complaint process if people who observe what they believe are damages being caused to natural areas and file a complaint, are never notified that the complaint has been received, let alone looked into? Being kept in the dark leaves citizens feeling ignored and unlikely to report further offences, and allows offenders to keep offending."

The NPCA confirmed that citizens will not receive updates once their complaint is logged.

“Our process does not allow us to provide updates to complainants or other third parties during an active investigation,” NPCA officials explained. “This is to preserve the integrity of the investigative process and because complainants themselves may become witnesses should the matter proceed to court.”

The agency says complainants are given “clear guidance” at the time of submission about when they can expect communication — and when they cannot — through its online forms, voicemail, or email system.

Residents and advocates argue this is a poor policy, and undermines public confidence.

"We have had too many instances of dumping, tree cutting and reckless damage caused to natural spaces in Niagara,” Benneian noted. “People need to know protected spaces under the NPCA’s purview are being defended and that those who damage those spaces are being prosecuted."

The NPCA’s 2021-2031 Strategic Plan outlines the conservation authority’s mission as creating “common ground for conservation-inspired action and accountability to nature.” Residents feel the mechanisms meant to hold offenders accountable for harming Niagara’s natural spaces are broken.

(NPCA)

The NPCA maintains that it “deeply values and relies on community awareness” to identify unauthorized work or development that could impact floodplains, wetlands, and other sensitive areas.”

Officials insist their hands are tied once a file becomes an active investigation.

“We are limited in what we can share due to privacy considerations and potential legal implications,” NPCA officials said. “Unless a complainant is required to serve as a witness, they remain a bystander to the legislated process designed to achieve compliance. This does not mean that complaints are not taken seriously.”

Benneian is not convinced. 

"Simply telling complainants that their complaint has been received could not possibly put any future legal case against the offender in jeopardy. If a complete lack of communication is the current policy of the NPCA, it should be revised immediately."

Piles of dirt, gravel and rock sit piled next to a protected ravine in St. Catharines.

(Submitted)

Asked whether NPCA leadership has considered the potential loss of public confidence caused by its “no-contact” approach, the authority said it “appreciates hearing this perspective” but defended its process as necessary to protect the integrity of investigations.

“Opening communications too widely could risk impeding the investigation or affecting the outcome,” NPCA officials said. “The goal is always to resolve the compliance matter thoroughly and effectively.”

The agency pointed to internal statistics suggesting that public participation remains strong despite frustrations. Since 2021, NPCA says complaints have increased by 26 percent, and reports submitted through its TIPS email and voicemail now make up 44 percent of all complaints received.

Officials said this data demonstrates that “residents are continuing to use the system to report concerns,” even as formal investigations remain confidential.

The numbers offer little comfort to residents who have watched unpermitted work continue for months while waiting for answers.

According to NPCA, when a complaint is received it triggers a formal process that includes validation, risk assessment and investigation by a compliance officer. Active offences are monitored until they are resolved, which can take anywhere from a few days to several years depending on the complexity.

“When options for voluntary compliance are not possible, or landowners are unwilling to work with NPCA on a resolution, progressive enforcement actions including court proceedings may be required,” the agency said.

With no information shared during the process, residents often have no way to know if enforcement is happening at all — fueling perceptions of inaction and deepening mistrust between the public and the agency. 

The NPCA’s enforcement team is responsible for protecting thousands of hectares of environmentally sensitive land under the Conservation Authorities Act. The provincial legislation—which has been significantly weakened under the PC government— gives conservation authorities the power to regulate activities that could affect wetlands, floodplains and erosion-prone slopes.

The system relies heavily on community vigilance. Residents often spot unpermitted work long before staff can, reporting violations that might otherwise go unnoticed.

That partnership, residents say, only works if the public believes their efforts matter.

“People stop reporting because they never hear back,” one complainant, who wished not to be named, told The Pointer. “Why spend your time helping if they don’t even let you know your complaint has been received?”

Despite the criticism, NPCA officials say the agency remains committed to public engagement and urges residents to continue submitting complaints through its website, [email protected], or the enforcement hotline.

“Citizen reports are critical to our mandate, and we encourage residents to continue bringing forward any concerns,” officials said. “Every complaint is thoroughly reviewed and addressed according to established process(es).”

For frustrated residents, though, that promise rings hollow without proof of action or communication. As one resident remarked to The Pointer,

"It’s hard to keep faith in a system that tells you to speak up — then never speaks back."

Email: [email protected]

At a time when vital public information is needed by everyone, The Pointer has taken down our paywall on all stories to ensure every resident of Brampton, Mississauga and Niagara has access to the facts. For those who are able, we encourage you to consider a subscription. This will help us report on important public interest issues the community needs to know about now more than ever. You can register for a 30-day free trial HERE. Thereafter, The Pointer will charge $10 a month and you can cancel any time right on the website. Thank you