From October 12 to December 11, 2023, Transport Canada held an online consultation to know what Canadians thought about how to manage vessels that anchor long-term on shared waterways. This report summarizes what we heard from the consultation.
On this page
- Our consultation approach
- Feedback grouped by theme
- Next steps
Our consultation approach
In recent years, we’ve learned of vessels that have been anchored long-term on shared waterways in Canada.
To seek comments and feedback, we:
- held an online consultation
- emailed the consultation link to people and organizations on the Canadian Marine Advisory Council’s distribution list
- emailed the consultation link to stakeholders of the Office of Boating Safety, including regional partners
- presented the early consultation findings at meetings of the fall 2023 National Canadian Marine Advisory Council, and
- promoted the consultation on social media
We received 608 survey responses. We also received 274 emails and 10 more emails after the consultation closed. The survey was meant to be anonymous, including written comments, but most commenters self-identified as being permanent or seasonal residents (for example, in cottages) along the Trent-Severn Waterway in Ontario.
We heard from:
- many Ontarians
- a few Canadians from other regions across the country
- non-governmental associations
- marine industry members and businesses
- other federal and provincial government departments, and
- several local authorities
At the same time, we held another online consultation to know what Canadians thought about giving provinces and municipalities a greater role in managing their waterways (in relation to modernizing the Vessel Operation Restriction Regulations). Some comments in that consultation specifically mentioned long-term anchoring. We considered these comments in this report.
Some major themes from the consultation are listed below.
Feedback grouped by theme
Definitions
Different people and organizations used a range of terms to refer to floating structures used for housing.
For consistency, clarity, and brevity, we use the wording "floating accommodations" in this report. This term was defined by the province of Ontario in Regulation 161/17 of the Public Lands Act, which came into force on July 1, 2023. It has recently been used by the federal government in Parks Canada’s Notice of Mooring Restrictions, which came into force on May 1, 2024.
When participants clearly referenced the British Columbia Float Home Standard, we use the term "float homes." When participants used the word "vessel" we refer to how it’s used in the Canada Shipping Act, 2001.
Letter-writing campaign about floating accommodations
We received 424 total responses that were either completely or partially based on a letter-writing campaign. 218 responses were from the survey and another 206 were from emails. The letter-writing campaign called for a national classification of structures known as “float homes” based on the British Columbia Float Home Standard. The form letter asked Transport Canada to define floating structures being used for housing as “float homes” instead of “vessels” as they are currently defined in Canadian law.
General comments
We received 68 emails that were not part of the letter-writing campaign. The concerns, ideas, and recommendations in these emails fit the following themes:
- environmental concerns
- safety concerns
- public interest concerns, and
- other feedback on topics such as regulation, taxation, and abandoned vessels
Participants recommended:
- measures to prevent interference with wildlife and address pollution
- stricter environmental standards and waste removal requirements
- following municipal building codes and standards
- redesignating floating accommodations for better governance
- site-specific regulations for each water body, and
- coordination between government agencies and empowering local governance
Environmental concerns
Negative impact on marine life and the environment
499 out of 608 survey participants agreed that long-term anchoring of vessels raises environmental, safety, or public interest issues. 87 participants disagreed, and 22 participants were unsure. Of those that agreed, 146 participants said their top concern was the negative impact floating accommodations have on marine life and the environment.
Participants suggested:
- anchors may actively destroy habitat and cause increased turbidity (cloudiness) in the water where there are multiple floating accommodations
- long-term shade created by docks and watercraft could cause significant declines in important vegetation
- disturbance of waterway beds, changes to aquatic habitats, and impacts on species at risk may become concerns depending on the nature and location of long-term anchoring, and
- possible danger to the environment and species at risk if floating accommodations are secured in shallow waters that are also breeding grounds for aquatic creatures and shorebirds
Participants also recommended:
- restricting floating accommodations to minimize time spent in a single location and reduce their impact on water quality and fish habitat
- alternatively, the Canadian government could ban the use of these vessels on certain waterways, like the Ontario government has
- one provincial organization recommended limiting the floating accommodations across federal waters, focusing on reducing any negative ecological impacts they might have, and
- floating accommodations shouldn’t be allowed to stay on any waters
- restrictions should be based on safeguarding marine life and limiting sizes to 100 to 200 square feet
Wastewater disposal concerns
106 participants said their biggest worry was how these vessels dispose of wastewater. For example, blackwater from sewage and greywater from household activities.
Participants suggested:
- floating accommodations pose environmental risks from wastewater and unencapsulated foam debris
- large, retrofitted shipping containers and live-aboard vessels pose ecological risks in certain parts of the Trent-Severn waterway
- one commenter said floating accommodations could dump wastewater into a local bay and clog up waterways, explaining that they had already experienced an increase in toxic algae blooms locally last year, and
- one commenter was concerned that proper discharge of floating accommodations’ septic tanks would be very expensive, and that inhabitants would choose to dump their wastewater into waterways
- they were also concerned that garbage would be thrown overboard
Participants also recommended:
- live-aboard vessels must hold greywater until it can be properly disposed of on land, and
- considering restrictions in areas from which municipalities draw drinking water due to the unknown cumulative impacts of wastewater released from floating accommodations
Safety concerns
Unsafe conditions for navigation
We heard from 40 participants who said long-term anchoring of vessels makes navigation unsafe for other vessels.
Participants suggested:
- floating structures may create a navigation hazard
- where several structures are close together, anglers and other recreational boaters could experience significantly decreased water and shoreline accessibility and navigability, which could increase safety concerns
- one commenter said that navigation at night would be a nightmare if the lakes had numerous vessels anchored long-term, and
- clustering of these homes around channels, especially in areas with high boat traffic, would create navigation obstacles
Unsafe vessels
17 participants said their main concern was that these vessels were unsafe. Participants mentioned concerns about proper building and construction safety measures not being taken, safety standards not being met, and concerns about the safety of those living aboard vessels (for example, access to emergency services).
Participants suggested:
- floating accommodations are ill-equipped with navigable safety lights, proper safety measures, safe septic and greywater certifications, and building materials
- floating accommodations need to be reclassified to allow municipalities and provinces to manage building permits, building codes, environmental standards, mooring locations, municipal taxation and provide proper safety measures for the people living on them and the environment
- under the current regulations, there is no assurance that floating accommodations carry third-party liability insurance or keep any safety gear on board, and
- it’s difficult to hold owners accountable for environmental damage to historically significant and sensitive waterways
Participants also recommended:
- providing emergency services should be an important consideration, and
- a national standard would allow the regulation of long-term anchorage of floating accommodations according to municipal building codes and allow proper safety for the people living in them and their environment
Public interest concerns
A smaller number of participants raised issues related to the public interest. 29 participants said that vessels anchored long-term block access to public areas. 12 said that they block access to private property. 8 said that floating accommodations were unattractive to look at.
Participants suggested:
- prioritizing ecological health and access of shared aquatic resources
- blocking public access to lakes and rivers could become a problem, and
- some vessels anchoring long-term are unsightly
Feedback unrelated to environmental, safety, or public interest concerns
87 survey participants said that long-term anchoring of vessels does not raise environmental, safety, or public interest issues. These participants shared different perspectives. Some participants raised issues about the lack of or inconsistency in oversight and enforcement at different levels. They were concerned about the possibility of restrictions on anchoring long-term. Other participants supported vessels anchoring long-term.
Oversight, enforcement, and restrictions
Participants suggested:
- improved boater education, awareness, oversight and enforcement of the existing laws and regulations is needed most
- fines and more restrictions do not address the issue, and
- regulating long-term anchoring could negatively impact local tourism and industry
- boaters’ rights could be taken away
- it could cost people jobs in areas that will be affected by biased municipal authorities
Participants recommended:
- every vessel should be registered, have the proper equipment, be insured and the owner/operator have the proper licence
- enforcement should be through a dedicated enforcement team with the powers to seize or detain vessels that do not comply
- there must be collaboration with stakeholders to look for quick, cost-effective, and practical solutions before proposing regulatory restrictions
- resources should be added to help standardize local consultations
- there must be an evidence-based process for designing restrictions that allows for equal consultation
Other concerns
135 participants who agreed there are concerns about long-term anchoring of vessels named “other” issues of concern. 84 of these said that all or many of the issues presented in the consultation were their biggest concern. 51 participants highlighted other issues, such as using tax-payer services like utilities without contributing to local taxes, the risk of abandoned and derelict vessels, and using long-term anchoring of floating accommodations as permanent housing.
Participants suggested:
- permanently anchoring an accessory structure to extend the residential uses of an island property intensifies residential uses in the area
- this negatively impacts water quality and draws on municipal and regional services (such as solid waste removal and emergency response services) but provides no municipal tax base
- registration and insurance should be required for vessels anchored long-term to relieve taxpayer burden on environmental clean-up costs, uninsured liabilities, and removal of abandoned vessels, and
- redesignating floating accommodations, docks, and permanent mooring buoys as something other than “vessels” would allow governments to manage the increasing threats presented by such structures
Positive support
Some participants suggested:
- long-term anchoring provides an opportunity to embrace an alternative way of life and support diversity in communities on the water
- supporting long-term anchoring reinforces strong communities on the water and encourages this community to support a healthy marine environment
- floating accommodations that are solid and built properly can be both safe and environmentally friendly, and
- the number of floating accommodations is insignificant and could be a practical solution to the housing crisis
Restrictions on long-term anchoring
477 participants told us they supported restrictions on long-term anchoring. 95 did not support restrictions, 29 people were unsure, and 7 people chose to skip the question.
Time limits
When asked if there should be time limits for anchoring, 455 participants said yes, 17 said no, and 6 were unsure. 130 people skipped this question.
Out of 608 participants, 184 said the time limit should be three days or less. 97 participants said it should be four to seven days. 84 participants provided “other” input on time limits:
- many suggested zero days of anchoring
- a few participants said one day or overnight, and
- a few said the time limit depended on factors like the intended use of the vessel, the size of the wastewater tank, the size of the craft, and the anchoring location
71 participants said the time limit should be anywhere from more than one week to about a month. 172 participants skipped this question.
Locations and seasons
The boating season in Canada varies depending on the region and local climate. In most parts of Canada, the boating season usually runs from spring (around late April or early May) until fall (usually October). During this time, the weather is milder, and waterways are free from ice.
We asked participants if time limits on long-term anchoring would depend on location or season. 440 participants were almost evenly divided: 222 said no, 197 said yes, and 21 people were unsure. 168 people did not answer this question.
432 responses said restrictions should include banning long-term anchoring in some locations. 21 said no, and 15 people were unsure. 140 people did not answer this question.
When asked whether restrictions should apply to specific bodies of water, 408 thought restrictions should apply to lakes and 401 thought they should apply to rivers. 333 people thought restrictions should apply to coastal waters. 191 people did not answer this question.
443 participants said restrictions on long-term anchoring should apply throughout the entire boating season. 13 disagreed, while 5 people were unsure. 147 people skipped this question.
When asked if restrictions should apply during particular seasons, participants overwhelmingly agreed that restrictions should apply during the boating season. Of the 450 people who responded to this question, 440 said summer, 416 said spring, 412 said fall, and 337 said winter. 158 people skipped this question.
Participants suggested:
- residents should pick locations and anchoring time limits
- proximity to existing cottages, certain wildlife areas and regular monitoring is essential
- the distance the floating accommodations need to move is important
- if they must move their anchor only 10-30 metres, they could stay in the same spot indefinitely
- distinction between vessels and floating accommodations is needed, and
- floating accommodations should have to anchor at a marina or other area set up for long-term anchoring
Next steps
We will consider the comments we received through this consultation. We will work to determine a proper response to this issue and others suggested by participants.