Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
Council Agenda - 2025-11-10
Council Meeting Agenda Monday, November 10, 2025, 7:00 p.m. Council Chambers - Hybrid City of Kitchener 200 King Street W, Kitchener, ON N2G 4G7 People interested in participating in this meeting can register online using the delegation registration form at www.kitchener.ca/dele.aq tion or via email at dele.atq ion(a)kitchener.ca. Please refer to the delegation section on the agenda below for registration in-person and electronic participation deadlines. Written comments received will be circulated prior to the meeting and will form part of the public record. The meeting live -stream and archived videos are available at www.kitchener.ca/watchnow *Accessible formats and communication supports are available upon request. If you require assistance to take part in a city meeting or event, please call 519-741-2345 or TTY 1-866-969-9994.* Pages 1. COMMENCEMENT The meeting will begin with a Land Acknowledgement given by the Mayor and the singing of "O Canada." 2. MINUTES FOR APPROVAL Minutes to be accepted as circulated to the Mayor and Councillors (regular meeting held October 20, 2025, and special meetings held October 27, 2025) - Councillor B. loannidis. 3. DISCLOSURE OF PECUNIARY INTEREST AND THE GENERAL NATURE THEREOF Members of Council and members of the City's local boards/committees are required to file a written statement when they have a conflict of interest. If a conflict is declared, please visit www.kitchener.ca/conflict to submit your written form. 4. COMMUNICATIONS REFERRED TO FILE 4.1 Flag / Illumination Request under Policy MUN-FAC-442 4.1.a Illumination - World Prematurity Day - November 17, 2025 4.1.b Illumination - International Day for the Elimination of Violence Against Women - November 25, 2025 4.1.c Flag - Albanian National Independence Day - November 28 - November 30, 2025 4.1.d Flag - National Day of Romania - December 1, 2025 4.1.e Flag - Greek Independence Day - March 20 - 28, 2026 5. PRESENTATIONS 5.1 Award Presentations - Transportation Services 5.1.a Parking Staff Member of the Year, Canadian Parking Association - Karl Gallagher 5.1.b Active Transportation Achievement Award, Transportation Association of Canada - Downtown Cycling Grid 6. DELEGATIONS Pursuant to Council's Procedural By-law, delegations are permitted to address the Committee for a maximum of five (5) minutes. All Delegations where possible are encouraged to register prior to the start of the meeting. For Delegates who are attending in-person, registration is permitted up to the start of the meeting. Delegates who are interested in attending virtually must register by 5:00 p.m. on November 10, 2025, in order to participate electronically. 6.1 Draft Plan of Subdivision Application, 30T-23201, 1700 Strasburg Road & McBrine Drive, 2140221 Ontario Inc., DSD -2025-400, listed as item 7.2.e 6.1.a Brandon Flewwelling and Nicole Charlton, GSP Group 6.1.b Karly Rath 6.1.c Chantal Stieler 6.1.d Mo Markham 6.1.e Dr. Shane Mulligan 6.1.f Charlotte Goguen 6.1.g Ray Angold 6.1.h Greg Michalenko 6.1.i Leon Boreal 6.1.j Yvonne Fernandes 607 Page 2 of 58 6.1.k Dianne Rath 7. REPORTS OF COMMITTEES 7.1 HERITAGE KITCHENER - NOVEMBER 4, 2025 7.1.a Heritage Permit Application HPA-2025-V-020 - Victoria Park Picnic Shelter, DSD -2025-436 That pursuant to Section 42 of the Ontario Heritage Act, Heritage Permit Application HPA-2025-V-020 to permit the demolition of the picnic shelter at the property municipally addressed as 92 David Street/135 Water Street South (35 Dill Street) be approved in accordance with the supplementary information submitted with this application and subject to the following conditions, as outlined in Development Services Department report, DSD -2025-436: 1.That final building permit drawings be reviewed and heritage clearance provided by Heritage Planning staff prior to the issuance of a demolition permit. 7.2 PLANNING AND STRATEGIC INITIATIVES COMMITTEE - OCTOBER 27, 2025 7.2.a Demolition Control Applications, DC25/025/R/AS and DC25/026/R/AS, 15 and 16 Reinhardt Street, DSD -2025-402 That Demolition Control Application DC25/025/R/AS requesting permission to remove an existing Single Detached Dwelling at 15 Reinhardt Street and Demolition Control Application DC25/026/R/AS requesting permission to remove an existing Duplex Dwelling at 16 Reinhardt Street, BE APPROVED, as outlined in Development Services Department report, DSD -2025-402." 7.2.b Demolition Control Application, DC25/024/W/AA - 42 and 32 Windom Road, DSD -2025-439 That Demolition Control Application DC25/024/W/AA requesting permission to remove an existing single detached dwelling located at 32 Windom Road and a single detached dwelling with an additional dwelling unit (attached) located at 42 Windom Road, BE APPROVED, as outlined in Development Services Department report, DSD -2025- 439. 7.2.c Community Engagement Review, COR -2025-435 That staff be directed to update the Community Engagement Policy (GOV-COU-2010), as outlined in Corporate Services Department report, COR -2025-435, to be brought forward through a future Corporate Policy review update report. Page 3 of 58 7.2.d Zoning By-law Amendment Application, ZBA25/016/W/BB, 137 Woodhaven Road, 2394608 Ontario Inc., DSD -2025-370 That the following recommendation be referred to the November 10, 2025, Council Meeting to allow the Ward Councillor, consultant and staff the opportunity to further discuss concerns related to the potential displacement of existing residents and explore support options for affected residents: That Zoning By-law Amendment Application ZBA25/016/W/BB, for the property municipally addressed as 137 Woodhaven Road, requesting to amend Zoning By-law 2019-051 for 2394608 Ontario Inc. be approved in the form shown in the `Proposed By-law' and `Map No. 1', attached to Report DSD - 2025 -370 as Attachments 'Al' and 'A2', BE APPROVED, as outlined in Development Services Department report, DSD - 2025 -370. 7.2.e Draft Plan of Subdivision Application, 30T-23201, 1700 Strasburg Road & McBrine Drive, 2140221 Ontario Inc., DSD -2025-400 That the City of Kitchener, pursuant to Section 51 (31) of the Planning Act R.S.O. 1990, Chapter P 13 as amended, grant draft approval to Plan of Subdivision Application 30T-23201 in the City of Kitchener, for the property municipally addressed as 1700 Strasburg Road and McBrine Drive, for 2140221 Ontario Inc., subject to the draft plan and draft plan conditions attached to Development Services Department report, DSD -2025-400 as Attachment `A'; and, That the Mayor and Clerk be authorized to approve and execute an industrial Subdivision Agreement securing the Draft Plan of Subdivision conditions set out in Report DSD -2025-400, to the satisfaction of the City Solicitor, and that the City Solicitor be directed to register said agreement on title to the Subject Lands identified in Attachment `A' to report DSD -2025-400; and further, That the Updated Urban Design Brief Strasburg Technology Business Park, prepared by GSP Group, dated May 2025, amended September 2025, attached as Attachment `B' to report DSD -2025-400, be endorsed, and that staff be directed to implement this Brief through subdivision conditions and through future Site Plan Applications for individual lots at the discretion of the City's Director of Development and Housing Approvals with significant changes to this Brief to the satisfaction of Council. 7.2.f Enabling 4 Units - 1 Year Check in, DSD -2025-411 Page 4 of 58 That Council endorse the next steps for the Enabling 4 Units - 1 Year Check in, as outlined in Development Services Department report, DSD -2025-411. 8. UNFINISHED BUSINESS 8.1 2026 Council and Committee Calendar, COR -2025-393 35 That the following motion be deferred to the November 10, 2025 Council meeting: "That the 2026 Council and Committee Calendar, as attached as Appendix `A' to Corporate Services Department report COR -2024- 459, be approved; and, That the Mayor in consultation with the Chief Administrative Officer and the Clerk will be delegated the authority to schedule additional Planning and Strategic Initiatives Committee (PSIC) meetings on Council meeting dates, where required, to address legislated Planning Act timelines; and further, That Council be permitted by resolution to reschedule meetings identified on the 2026 calendar where necessary." 9. NEW BUSINESS 9.1 - MAYORAL BUSINESS AND UPDATES - MAYOR B. VRBANOVIC 9.2 Notice of Motion - B. loannidis - Overuse of Salt - Winter Maintenance Councillor B. loannidis has given notice to introduce the following motion for consideration this date: "WHEREAS road salt is a known toxic substance designated under the Canadian Environmental Protection Act because of tangible threats of serious or irreversible environmental and health damage from road salt; and, WHEREAS the Region of Waterloo, in collaboration with local municipalities, is actively attempting to mitigate salt pollution using existing policies, programs and site design measures that would be significantly more effective with supporting Provincial legislation; and, WHEREAS salt levels in Ontario's groundwater aquifers, creeks, rivers, and lakes have increasingly worsened since the 1970s, seriously affecting municipal drinking water sources and aquatic life; and, Page 5 of 58 WHEREAS numerous situation analyses have recommended salt solutions involving liability protection, contractor certification, government approved Best Management Practices (BMPs) and salt management plans; and, WHEREAS increased numbers of slips and falls claims, and other injury/collision claims related to snow and ice, are resulting in salt applicators overusing salt beyond levels considered best practices; and, WHEREAS unlimited contractor liability is making it difficult or expensive for snow and ice management contractors to obtain insurance coverage, resulting in contractors leaving the business, thereby making it difficult for municipalities and private owners to find contractors; and, WHEREAS the Snow and Ice Management Sector (SMS) of Landscape Ontario is working with the Ontario government to institute a limited liability regime for snow and ice management, including enforceable contractor training/certification and government -approved BMPs for salt application; and, WHEREAS many Ontario municipalities have Salt Management Plans, but these often require updating considering improved science and better salt management practices now available; and, WHEREAS the City of Kitchener continues to promote the Region of Waterloo Smart About Salt training wherever the opportunity presents itself; and, WHEREAS the City of Kitchener provides winter maintenance services in accordance with Ontario Regulation 239 (O. Reg. 239) of the Municipal Act (Minimum Maintenance Standards for Municipal Highways); THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED THAT City Council urge the Province of Ontario, and the Attorney General of Ontario, to adopt limited occupier liability legislation that protects property owners, and managers and their contractors, including municipalities, from slip and fall lawsuits, provided that they have taken all reasonable steps to follow Provincial best -management practices for salt use in controlling snow and ice; THEREFORE BE IT FINALLY RESOLVED THAT the City of Kitchener urge the Province of Ontario, and the Attorney General of Ontario, to work urgently with key stakeholders including the Association of Municipalities of Ontario to develop legislation, Page 6 of 58 including enforceable contractor training and a single set of Provincially -endorsed standard best management practices for snow and ice management." 10. QUESTIONS AND ANSWERS 11. STAFF REPORTS 11.1 ADMINISTRATIVE REPORTS 11.1.a Gas Infrastructure Research Project, INS -2025-433 12. BY-LAWS 12.1 THREE READINGS 12.1.a Being a by-law to close part of the public highway known as Nyberg Street, in the City of Kitchener. (By-law 2025-126) 12.1.b Being a by-law to amend Chapter 110 of The City of Kitchener Municipal Code regarding By-law Enforcement. (By-law 2025-127) 12.1.c To further amend By-law No. 2010-190, being a by-law to prohibit unauthorized parking of motor vehicles on private property. (By-law 2025-128) 12.1.d To further amend By-law No. 88-171, being a by-law to designate private roadways as fire routes and to prohibit parking thereon. (By-law 2025-129) 12.1.e To further amend By-law No. 2008-117, being a by-law to authorize certain on -street and off-street parking of vehicles for use by persons with a disability, and the issuing of permits in respect thereof. (By-law 2025-130) 12.1.f To confirm all actions and proceedings of the Council for November 10, 2025. (By-law 2025-132) 12.2 LATE STARTER BY-LAWS TO BE ADDED TO THE AGENDA, PENDING APPROVAL OF THE REPORTS OF THE COMMITTEES 12.2.a Being a By-law to amend By-law 2019-051, as amended, known as the Zoning By-law for the City of Kitchener — 137 Woodhaven Road - 2394608 Ontario Inc. (By-law 2025-131) 99 Page 7 of 58 13. ADJOURNMENT Page 8 of 58 11/6/25,4:25 PM New UW research shows the importance of small wetlands BUY cANACSIAN" advertisin .o-ryaNawg md�*:���nad 'I � p � �k'M�a�dlQr�w dIVi�fa Canada Set-aside o iminiil-niUrn of 25 of �edeml Lid bu.adgiet for Canadian news imedia � . New UW research shows the importance of small wetlands New research out of the University of Waterloo illuminates the importance of small, stand-alone wetlands. These are wetlands that are geographically isolated, meaning that they may sometimes be connected to a downstream waterbody, and oftentimes are not. "The main point that we were trying to make i By Leah Gerber p M,Last updated on May 03, 23 p Posted on Feb 16, 23 3 min read Page 9 of 58 https://www.ob-,erverxtra.com/new-uw-research-shows-the-importance-of-small-wetlands/ 1/9 11/6/25,4:25 PM New UW research shows the importance of small wetlands UW's Nandita Basu and her son Rayan at the Laurelwood storm water management area, a small wetland used for stormwater by the City of Waterloo. Basu says small wetlands in urban areas make a difference for filtering and cleaning pollutants. [Leah Gerber] New research out of the University of Waterloo illuminates the importance of small, stand-alone wetlands. These are wetlands that are geographically isolated, meaning that they may sometimes be connected to a downstream waterbody, and oftentimes are not. "The main point that we were trying to make is that a lot of times when you have these smaller upland wetlands that are not near a coastal area, we don't always think that they are connected to downstream waters, and we sometimes think that they are not really that important, because they are a small puddle of water someplace and maybe they don't even have water all throughout the year, they have water part of the year," said Nandita Basu, a tier -one Canada Research Chair in Global Water Sustainability and Ecohydrology and a professor of water sustainability and ecohydrology at the University of Waterloo. "I'm not saying that they're never connected, I'm saying their connections are less apparent than the more riverine wetlands or coastal wetlands. And Page 10 of 58 https://www.ob-,erverxtra.com/new-uw-research-shows-the-importance-of-small-wetlands/ 2/9 11/6/25,4:25 PM New UW research shows the importance of small wetlands because their connections are less apparent, a lot of times when you're trying to pave over land, they don't have as much protection." Basu and her team found these isolated wetlands actually outperform connected wetlands when it comes to filtering and cleaning pollutants. When nutrients like nitrogen and phosphorus make their way through the watershed to wetlands, one of the main ways they clean these pollutants is through micro -bacteria that live in them. The micro -bacteria can break nitrogen down quickly, but need the time to be in contact with the nutrient, says Frederick Cheng, a postdoctoral researcher now at Colorado State University who worked with Basu on the research. He said whereas more connected wetlands tend to flush nutrient -laden water to continue to move it through the watershed, these less connected wetlands hold the water and give the bacteria time to digest it. "In isolated wetlands, most of the water leaves through evaporation, so the water leaves and the nitrogen stays in the wetland, so that increases the time that the microbes can then transform the nitrogen," he said. Page 11 of 58 https://www.observerxtra.com/new-uw-research-shows-the-importance-of-small-wetlands/ 3/9 11/6/25,4:25 PM New UW research shows the importance of small wetlands Cheng notes the process is actually pretty fast. "It's just a matter of letting the nitrogen come into contact with the micro -bacteria which tend to live in the soil portion of the wetlands, so it can happen in a matter of hours or days. As long as there's that contact." They studied 30 years of satellite imagery measuring water levels in 3,700 wetlands across the United States, and compared this with pre -established measurements of how much pollution wetlands at these water levels can filter to establish a model comparing connected and isolated wetlands. Basu said that when a small wetland is connected continuously to a downstream water body, it removes about 40 per cent of the nitrogen that comes in. But when the same wetland is disconnected, it removes about 84 per cent. The wetlands in question don't need to be large. In fact, many of the wetlands studied for this research were less than 0.5 hectares, and some smaller than 0.1. Excess nutrients like nitrogen and phosphorous cause algal blooms in the Great Lakes by providing more food for algae. These blooms can be potentially toxic and cause the closure of beaches. In 2014, the water Page 12 of 58 https://www.observerxtra.com/new-uw-research-shows-the-importance-of-small-wetlands/ 4/9 11/6/25,4:25 PM New UW research shows the importance of small wetlands supply for Toledo, Ohio on the coast of Lake Erie was shut off due to toxic algal bloom. Recently, protection for wetlands in Ontario has been reduced, which Basu sees as disconnected from the research showing their importance. "I've been thinking about it quite a lot. And this is true in southern Ontario, where we've already lost over 70 per cent of our wetlands and now we are at risk of losing more. And we argue that we need to do this because we need to build more houses. But the challenge of that is, if you add more people to our landscape, you create more pollution. And so you will need these wetlands even more. We will be taking them away at a time when we need them even more. And that's the dissonance that is really striking." Page 13 of 58 https://www.ob-,erverxtra.com/new-uw-research-shows-the-importance-of-small-wetlands/ 5/9 WATERLOO REGION, Feb 3 2023 — Using high-resolution satellite images and computer modelling, researchers from the University of Waterloo have documented the importance small wetlandsplay in water• and conservation. "What our work showed is that they are actually really important," said ••. . ..• ff . •• • • •• The research results, published in the peer-reviewed journal Environmental Research Letters, show how small wetlands trap large amounts of nitrogen, phosphorus, and other contaminants, protecting nearby rivers and lakes from the pollutants. wetlandsAR CLA CON �MIJES BELOW The research findings contradict new provincial legislation that will make it easier for cities and developers to drain and build on small Ontario. The newprovincial legislationonly . • provincially significant• be protected. . r, on M M M . rem M "mM.M Basu supervised the research. The lead researcher wasFrederick Cheng, who is now a post -doctoral fellow at Colorado State University. They reviewed 30 -years of satellite data for 3,700 wetlands across the Page 14 of 58 • • • - . • IN! . -- f • • Ao'ip"VC:;J..II::: C:;C)N p"Vlh➢V,JI[':S BEIM "As we increase our population we are going to have more pollution, and as we take away these wetlands, which are filters on the landscape, going to increase our algae blooms • beach •said. The small wetlands trap the pollutants, which remain there as the Larger wetlands, which are often connected to rivers and lakes, are 1111111014 1 !!1 �•- ••TMIUM tl IS 113r:� 111111153=1 Page 15 of 58 wetlands are currently left unprotected. "As we are increasing those pressures there is more pollution that is AM KDLIE.: CON HNUES BELOW The Ontario •• of Premier D• • Ford touched •f months• protests with l'• • opens part of the wetlands.development, and other legislation that removed protection for small The destruction of wetlandsalso increases extreme effects of climate change, including flooding, drought and the frequency of storms, say UW researchers. All wetlands act like sponges, providing flood protection by absorbing the vast volume of water that can be suddenly released from rainfall or snowmelt. trapping carbon are just some of the many other environmental Page 16 of 58 From: Greg Michalenko Sent: Thursday, November 6, 2025 11:42 AM To: Mariah Blake <li" airiCial i.11 i,ak @kV tch(; it eii-. a> Subject: Fw: "Study examined species declines in southern Ontario" article report Dear Mariah Blake, I sent in an application yesterday to address the Council meeting on Monday Nov. 10 regarding the proposed industrial land development adjacent to the Huron Natural Area (HNA). Thankyou for your response clarifying that I could not be included because I had already delegated on the same topic at the planning committee meeting held earlier. A major study on the topic of financing biodiversity conservation, that has direct bearing on the HNA issue, has just been published and released on November 2 (see the appended email from Justine Mossman of the Canadian office of the World Wildife Fund that provides a link to the study). This very new information is highly relevant to the HNA situation in Kitchener. Tfhe Government of Canada has signed on to the Kunming -Montreal Global Biodiversity Frameworkwhich newly obligates that official action is taken kto protect biodiversity. In addition, coincidentally, the study area selected (called the lake Lake Simcoe Rideau Ecoregion) includes and specifically mentions Kitchener and surrounding area. would like to address Council strictly regarding the study's implications - which are legal, environmental and financial - for the City of Kitchener's overall natural area conservation strategies. Here are some explanatory citations from the introduction of the article: "1. Stemming biodiversity loss requires greater investment in conservation and more efficient use of available resources. Prioritizing conservation actions that yield the most bioidiversity benefits for the least cost can maximize return on iinvestment. We ... identified actions to secure the greatest number of species groups of conservation concern for the [least cost ... in one of Canada's biodiversity crisis ecoregions. "Implementing all proposed strategies would yield the greatest biodiversity benefits. The habitat protection and rrestoration strategies also deliver direct carbon benfits. It is also equally important to make the most of currently available resources by maximizing the return on investmwenr by prioritizing actions that yield the greatest conservation benefit for a given investment level, or that achieve a predetermined conservation goal for the least cost:" Page 17 of 58 I propose that a decision on the proposed land development adjacent to the HNA be delayed until Planning has examined and reported on the implications to Kitchener of the new Federal agreement on biodiversity and the relevance of the results of this study. Thank you for your consideration. Please pass onto Planning the link to this new study, Greg Michalenko Page 18 of 58 RiKeived:26K.i'rclr2024 I Ac(epaled: 23Septerw)n)e�,2025 DCA 10.1002/2688-83197`0143 Nature requires investm�ent: Appllyi:ng priorlity threat m biodiversity and climate t�a anagement tio support i I rgeits Abbey E�. Camaclaanya lyer 2 � Chris Lianigi 2 1 Emily GileS2 I Beatrice Frank 2 Katherine 1. Alambo 3 1 Jennifer LamioureuixL I Sa,rah Match:ett5 I Tyler M1ller6 D.RyanNorris70 � M�aryAnnC.Perron8 RobynH.M.Rumney9 1� Frederick W. Schueler'O � LauraTimmis" CaitheriniePaquiette 2 1 VictoriaHemmingl 2 1 JamesSnideir TaraG.Martin 'Conservation Decr5ion,, Lab, Depirtment, of Fore stand Can�,ervafirrn Sciences, Faculty of Fmesti'y, Univeasity of Briflsh Columbl'a, V,�,incouvei, Brjti�,h Coh,jnibia, Canada; 'WWF-Can,'xJa, Toronto, OnUrio, Cam'Wx 'Ottawa Riverkeej.te. , OttawA, Onta0o, Canada� 'RideAu VMI��y Conswvadon Authodl 'y, M8mAick, (:7nOrio, Cc)nadaHshegles, and Oceans CaAnad5i, Budington, Ontano, CanadL�; "BrLH-,e Pf_fF'flosUkA Nafiorran F18R* I Fathoin Fve NIbonal Madne, Park, 'Del�rvartrw-iei,00lfintegrative B[oa ogy,lJt)avei-f,,ityofG�,,ielph,(",�ielpi3Oitiri€),Can,,.adis �"Sit I Rwrencle, Rivei nsUtute' corrlwesil' 01,10110, Canada; 'Wlcfflfe Coiriservation 15ocievy Canadra, roronto, oRitario, "'Fri4gile Inhif'-ritance, Oxford Staftn, (DnOrlo, Canada and "Credk VaHey Conservation, Mik-,sissauga, Ontario, (,,anada Correspondence Abbey E, Carnaciang au Fund4ig Informition Naturall SLhmces and Ervin talose a i ch Clounci I of C a inada, mint/ Award Nurnber: RGHN-2019-04535; Reid and lama Car ter; Liber i rra'iir in Con5ei vatlorr, Patrick and Oirbara Keenan r oundation Handflng EdltorAajna Liu Abstract 1. Steminiing biodiversity loss requires greater investment in conservation and more efficient Use of available resOUrces. Prioritizing conservation actions that yield the most biodiversity benefit for the least cost can he,llp rnaximize return on, in- vestment. Actions that have co-beinefits for other objectives, such as, cHi nate change mitigation, can also help mobilize additional funds for conservation. 2, We used Priority Threat Management to identify actions to secure the greatest number of species groups of conservation concern for the least cost in the Lake Siimcoe-Rideau) ecoregion, Ontario—one of Canada's biodliversity crisis ecore- gions. We also estimated the cairbon sequestration benefits, of actions related to land protection and restoration, 3. We found that without additional investment in conservation, 13 of 16 species, groups were expected to have <5. 0% probability of: persistence in this ecoregion by 2050. Implementing all proposed strategies would yield the greatest bilodi- versity benefits and secure 12 of the 16 species groups with �60% Probability of persistence,, at a cost of CA$113mMilon per year over 27yealrs, In comparison, investing CA$9,7 million per year in llandowner steward'shiip, habitat protection and restoration, and regeneration strategies couild secure 10 species, groups and improve the probability of persistence, of one additional) ;group from 3,9% to 55%, 4. The habitat protection and restoration strategies. also Miver direct carbon ben- efits of around 11.2 Mt in total avoided 2 emissions and 1376 Mt CO2 in total - - - - - -- - - - -- - - - - - - - - - - - -- - - - - - - - -. - - - - - - - - - - - -- - - - - - -_ - - - -- - - - - - - - - - -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -- - - - - - - - - - - -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -- - - - - -- - - -- his -his is an open access article under the tennis of the Creative Commons AM 1bufion-NonComrrreicW License, which pormit'.-, use, tfi�.Adbtfflon anti i elproduc Lion inany ineclium, pfovicled the odghwd work is popeu� y cited and is not used for cornnierciaN purposes, CO 2025 1 hAuthor(s). &.oh.),gicrd Soh)flons and EWdence published by Jol"in Wflk,',,y & Sons, Ltd on behalt of Bpitish Ecofticall Socwety, EcoBohd Evid2025;&00143, http50/doi,org/10,1002/2688 8319,70143 wil(,.,yonldnelibr,ary.coipi/jocti-npaqoll&rof 58 2 of 14lihstrsi CAMACLANG � I M, R Iden ........................................................... ;l,pu j,Ec6lo gical $61utions andEvi , ce ------------------------------------------------- pcitentW sequestration, respectlively, over the long-term, thus sup�porting allign- ment with climate change mitigation targets and defivering co -benefits that may further justify investment, 5. Practical impfication, IBy estiniating the costs an:d demonstrating the expected benefits and potential carbon co-beriefits of conservation actions, Priority Threat Management can help maximize return on investment and identify actions that aiddress trultiple envlironnneintall crises. K E�YWO RD S biodlveirsity conservation, carbon co -benefits, cornplenientarityconservation priori fization, cost-effectiveness, nature, based climate sulcations„ return on investment, species at risk inadequate fUndhlg' , for corrservatioin action has been linked to species iniperflnient and repeated failures to me et global bio- diversity targets under the Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD) QMcKinriey, 2002; Waldron et al., 2013). Left Uncl"wcked, the continued loss of biodiversity can arnpkfy the interacting ef- fects of climate change and other anthropogenic threats. leaaefdngt to, abrupt and irreversible ecosystern changes ( lurner of alk, 20201). It is, therefore, a ri:ticall that we intensify our efforts to hAt and re, verse laiodiversity loss. To this end, the KUFIFflirlp,,-Monkreal GLobal BicKflversity Frainework (GBF) outfineS A Set Of arlbifiOUS goals and corresponding biodliversity conservatic.)n targets. '11, he GBF also includes targets to nicibilize financial neasounces through varlous mechanisrns, including enhancing the effectiveness zinc) efficiency of use of those resotirr.es and optin'dzing co-L�erreflts to address the biodiversity and cflirnALe cirises shrmitaneCILASly (Corivention on Biological Dlverssity, 2022). As as signatory to the C811.), Canada is responsible for iniple- rnenting the GBF within its borders by developing a narional bio diversity strategy and action plan and securing sufficient funds for iinplettlentallon. Since 2018, the federal govc-irninent has inobili7ed roughly CAMbillion in investments to support hio diversity and cliniate goals (Environment and Ornate Change Canada, 2024). However, acicfitloriai financial resources will still need to be se(Ured to close Canada's biodi'versity finance gap, estirnated at around US$15-20bilfion per year (Rafly Assets, & Nature Conservaincy of Canada, 2020) or abOUt $20-27billion per year in 2019 Canachan dollars. It is also equaLIV Important to inake the niost of currently available resources by niaximizing the return on investment—that is, by prioritizing actions that yield the greatest conservation benefitfor a given investme=nt level or that achieve a precfetern)ined conservation goal for the least cost (Boyd et al., 2015; MUrdoch et al., 2007). Conservatian return on finvestrnent can be irnprovert by taking action at the regional scale (Kennedy et alk, 201:16), thus benefiting rnUlfiple species or ecosysterns sirnulltaneoi.isly, and by prioritizing acticuls that nlaxin'd2p, biodiversity benefits across as given regiwl ff.,)r the least cost (Presley & Bottrifl, 20019). In particular, accounting for the cornplmnLntarity of actions car, help rninintize costs by reduc, lng duplication of effart a,j(t h0p ensure that betlefits of actions are sl-,kread across the suite of target hic')diversity featUres in the reg Oil of interest (Charles et ah., 2015• Moillanen, 20 8). Considering file potential co -benefits of conservation actions, such as ti'lose related to clitriate change inifigation (Shin et al- 2022) or hurnan well-beinig (Blicharska et at„ 2019), can filirther mixirnizethe overall benefits to society arid the envIrcinnnerit. A variety of the science tools and franieworks are ava0- able to help identify conservation actions that inaxlnlize tile - return on hivestnient (Herntining et al., 21;)22), One example- is PriorityThreat Management (PTIM), as decision anaiysis fratnework developed to idertify c.ost-effective and corriplementary sets of ,actions to nianage and recover multipk.,species or other hio di- versify features simultaneously across broadl regions (Carwardine et A- 2012, 2019). It is a parUcipatory process that brings together diverse groups of experts in the ecology arld irnanageinent of spe, cies of conservation concern. fa TM also allows for the integration of unultiple types of clata, including elripidcafly clerived data and expert knowIledge obtairted through as strUCLUred elicitation pro, tocol (Martin et al., 201.2), The applica6on, of PTM in Canada (e.g. CarnaclLiailg el al., 2021; Kehop elf al., 2021, Martin et al., 2018) arid elsewhere (e.g. Carwardifine et aL, 20,12; Chad6s et al., 2011.5; Firn et aL, 2015; Lee et al,, 2024 Utan-6 et al,, 20,20) clernonstrates its broad apl�djcability and is leacfinpv to posihve oi.Acornes for blodi- versity thr(jUgh increased investirrient it) piriorlty actions and doc, urnented irnprove�nenfs in species recovery (Legge et al.' 2011, 2023; Serneniuk, 2018). Here, we applied PTM to the Lake Sfincoe Rideau ecoregion in Ontario, Canada to frlentify nianagenient strategies that woidd se- cure the greatest nun)[her of species groups of conservation concern in the reglon Moir the Least cost, We also estimate the potenfial co " benefits of proposed strategics for climate change whifigation. ph e airn Was to filf0i'M the developnient of a conservation prospeCtLe, that COUld be a.sed to coordinate actions and establish collaborations arnong different conservation actors in the region, and aid in secur- ing SUfficient Investnient In conservation Action. The Lake Sirncoe Rldeau ecoregion (Figure 1) is highiy piroduc, Live and Modiverse and encornpasses Enost of Ontario's Lild(JUP Page 20 of 58 �0 0 CAMACLANG 3014 Jogical, Solutions and Evidence ---------------- FlIGURE I The Lake Sinncoe-Rldeau ecoregliori (Ontario Pirovinc:W Ecoregion 6E) Of Southern Ontario, Canada. Data layeirsEcoregion 6E Ontairic, Gecil'hd), Ontario MinisIry of NatUral Resources and Forestry. EcoRegioo [Data sett. 2023. Land Inforimation Oiritario, httPS://ge0hIUb. ldo.gov.oii.ca/clatasets/lio:�:Ecoregion/abO,LnL. Umd Ulse Classes -Agri ClUitu re and Agri, Food Canada. Anmma Space-&'BulCrop dnverqoryfor Canada, 2020 [DMa set). 2020. Agroclimate, Geornatics and Earth Observation Divisic)n, Science and Technolog ,y Braraclr; https://open. c-ipiadzi,c,ai/d,it,a/en/d,it,gset/32546f7tr)-55(-,2-481,e-b300-83frI 6054b95, alvar habitats and nE�arlly 30 natural heritage areas with Signif cant biologicc,d or ec:ologiral importance (Crins et al., 2009^ see, also Supporting Information: Appendix B), This, ecoregion is the. sec- ond most' densely ljopuWed in Ontario amd also orw of Canada's conservatiori, crisis ecoreg ions (Krans & Helr)b, 2020) d1je to high developin'ient pressure and risk of habitat conversion, CIiim,.-,tte change is also expected to greatly irnpact the re&n by mid to iaVa century (2050-2080) (01irriale Risk Institute, 2023). A 21021 report by dine Auditor General of Onrario conclucled ffiat the provincial government is, faiiing to protect species at risk, SUggeStiflg that P(_)PL.dAfi0IIIS Will COI[IfinUe to decline (Office of the Auditor General of Ontario„ 20211. In recent years, the Ontado government also decreased funding for species at risk and dismantled many I^! iodiversity-focused iegislative frarrwworks and programs, result ing in a reduc.'ed abiflty in act at a pace and scale recpilred for spe- cies recovery (Bethilenfaivy & 011ve, 2021; Mitchell et A., 2021). Given the scale and Urgency of conservafian issues in Ontario, there is, a need to act strategically and colkaboratively to ensure Chat avaHable rTISOUrces are Invested in actioris with the greatest benefits for bifjdiversjty and the recovery of species of conserva, ficin concern in the, region, 2A 1 Expert elicitation To identify inanageinents strabe&s thiar wouW hep secure the per sistence of the greatest nurriber of species of conservation concern for the leaM cost in the I ake Simicoe- Rideau ecoregion, a total of 145 prospective experts --individuals with knowledge of or practical experience witi"i the ecology and management of die species of con- servatlion coincern in the ecoregion were . invited to participate hi the PTM process. Of those invited, 28 experts agreed to pairticii-mte. E'xperts were from government agencies, conservation authorities, First Nations, conservation non-profit organizations, industry and research institutions. Experts participated in a series of five online workshops and a two,day in, person workMiop held between May 2022 and Jalwairy 2023. With the h0p of several workshop facifitators, experts dis cussed and refined t1he spatial extert (Fjgure 1), agreed on a 27 -year fime horizo,n (i.e. to 2050) as the tei'nporal scope of the study, Iden, fified 133 species ofcoir servadon concern in the region (SUpporting Infort'natom Table A'I), assessed key threats to those species and Page 21 of 58 t0 3 rD 0 rD 0 W 0 02 = 5 a rD 0 0- 3 Su M n '< 0 0 CL rD so W C) N0 a) - CO rD C. rD 2 U, 0' > 00 vs rD 7F 0 C 0 M rD ID CL 0 ET rD rD r W W 0 2: D rD < 0 rj rD r,) n MV! o• 3 LA 3M 0 ID (D MNM CL CL 0 4144 1 4 11hortsir CAMACLANG � I M, U t JEcblogical Solutio and Evidence ........................ developed a list of actions to implerment over the tirrie horizon that would address threats and improve the probability of persistence of diose species, Experts were histructed to 4)ClUde only actions that were snot: already expected to occur and C011tiM.re over the Gine Pari zeas Experts identified a totaf (if 48 actions (Supporting Inforn'lation: Table A4 w[flch were organized into eight broad management strat egies, with the criteria that each strategy could be irnplernented independendy of any 0thE9strategy. Exf.aerts also identified six cornloirlations of two Or rnore individual strategies that inay have synergistic effects when iniplemented together (S9 S14); along with a hinal C01IIIII'dination that inClUded all individual strategies (S15), this resulted in a total o,f seven combined strategies (Tablle 1). Experts were then asked no provide esflimates of the annual costs, in 2022 Canadian clollars, of planning arid implenrlenting the proposed actions (Table L; Supporting Information: Table A2; Appendix B), Costs were converted to present values Using the rec oininnonded social discount rate of 3% ('Treasury Board of Canada Secretariat, 2022)- F or each action, experts were also asked to pro- vide estirnates of the p.)robability that it wllIl be irnplerneriU.A assurn- ing thal sufficierit funds will Ise available (i.e. probability of uptake or the sorilal ancl pofibcal feasibRity), and the probability that it will be successful if irnplernented (i.e. technicat feasibility). These two estimate's were rnuitiplied to obtain as value for the feasibility of the action. We CaICUIalted the overall feasibility of a strategy as Lh -0, av, erage feasibifity across alf the actions w4hin that strategy, and tire overall feasibility of a cornbined strategy as the average feasibility of all die indivildmal strategies that miake up that combination, To sjwiplify the elicitation of benefits, species wt°„re grouped into 16 9)ecies groul)s based on similarities in responses to threats and rrianageniert achons (Supporting Ilnforrrnatiom TaUe Al). A rnodl- fied Delphi structured eIllicitation, protocol (Carwardine et al., 2012; Heir ming et aL, 2018) was used to obtain exl-,wirt estinnates of the probability Of fUnctional persistence lin tine region inn 2050 for each Sj)eCieS grOLIJ:). We defined I'LIHICH011al persistence as having viable, self-sustaining fmptflations that continue to perform til"reir eco— logical fUrICHOrt QCanraclarlg et al,, 2021° Chades et al., 20115; FIrn et al., 2015), where a probabifity oil” C) equates to a zero Chance of persistence and I equates to as 100,% chance of persistence. For (,mch value, the rnost likely estirriate (Le best g�.mss), as we: ll as the estirnalte under the most pessirnistic scenario (i.e. lowest plausible estimate) and the most of,'ktimishc sor,nario (Le, highest [Amisible es- tfinate; were eficiled. For each species group, experts were first asked to provide their individUall estimates of the probabilityof persistence under the base- line or counterfactual scenario—that is, the future wIthmit ainy of the strategies considered in the anatysis. Ongoing biodiversity protec- doins ancl conservation actions were considered brisiness as-irsuail' and foram part of the baseline scenario, along with poteritial threats and preSSUI-eS within and beyond the study region over the given time horj7,on that Could impact the species of conservation concern within the region, Such as developinent pressures and irnpacs of (Arnalto, change. To iriforn) the developmerft of the baseline scenario, experts were asked to identify and CHSCUSS C'Urrent and ainticillIaled (,-_ojrjse7q-VafiC)d-j initiatives as weil as ongoing and future threats to hio- clivershty in the regienn (SLq,)portlng Information: Appendix B(, With reference to future conditions under the baseline scenario, experts were the in asked to provide their irdivktual estimates of the probabilfity of persistence with eadi individual strategy arid conribi nation strategy, as sunflng that all the actions within a given strategy are lrnphernented successfuNy, The f3enefit of a strategy was esti- mated as the diffemnce between the: prcibability of persistence with the strategy and the probability under the baseline scenario. We at,. gregated the indiVildW.11 expert estimates using the ariffinlefiC Fnean and used the rnean value for SUbsecluent analyses. See. Supporting Inforniatiory Appendix B for moire details abOUt expert eficitat]01'n process, Of tine 28 experts, 24 aftencled two or niore workshop sessk.ms. Nine exlperts attended the in,person workshop to provide estinrates of the cost and feasibility cif actions, while 16 experts provided indi vidual estirnates of the conservatiori jeriefits of the proposed marr- agernent strategies, 2.2 1 Cost- effectivenes,s'nor complementarorty analysis We used estirriates under the rnost Ilikeiy scenario to eValUalte the cost effectiveness and the cornplernectarity of management strafe- gies. We calcJatecl the expected benefitof each, nianagerriF,--nif strat egy as ffie sunirned trenetit cafe the strategy across species grm,j[,)s weighted hy this, estimated feasibifty of the strategy. We therede- rived: a cost- ef fec tiveness (CE) score by drvk1h-ig the expected )en- efit by the total cost of the strategy. To assess the c:oimpllernentarlity tin the beinefits of rianagenre-'rit strategies, we assuirned that species groups that achieve a proba- - I bility of persistence eClUal to or greater than a particular threshMd value to be 'seCUIV. We set this threshold value to 60%, based on the range of estimates for the expected probabiNty of persiMence under the proposed managHnient strategies and the preference of experts for higher probabdifies of persistence. We identified the op th-nal sets of comiiAernentary inanage rnent strategies that could rn,aK- in(rize ffie number of species grot,rps secured while minirnizing r, the cost by solving the rrAeger linear prograrnirring proLflern for a range of budgets (Chades et alk, 20145), The solutions identified are panto Optimal soit,itions, representing trade,offs wherein greater benefits car) only be achieved by increasing costs (ClbacU-,,s et ad., 2015d RUAa & "w iecekl 2005). When the br,idget is fixed, the SCIL16011 to irnplement is typically detertnined by the budget constraint. Flowever, if the budget is fiex- ible or is, yet to be secured, a chojcee roust be cradle on who ch of the sokitions should be, adopted. To help Inforr'n, this choice, we peir, formol an additimial analy-sis to determine which sels of strakegres could rnaxjrrrhze both the nurriber of species groups secured with at least 60% probability of per arid ttr5e number of groups ttruat COLIN gairi at least 15% probability of persistence above the baseline for the least cost, Page 22 of 58 rn 00 Co 00 U, �0 3 rD 0 rD 0 a 3 0 02 a rD 0 0- 0 0 03 CL rD so W C) rIj O00 - 00 2 IP CO w 4 rD 0 > 00 ID sT rD 7F 0 W ;; 0 M N rD CL 0 M rD r W a, 0 07 Z rD < rD r,) nE o• 3 LA 3rD 0 ID 33 (D to H M W CL CL 0 CAMACLANG 5014 Jogical, Sdlutlons and Evidence ---------------- I i Q OV Qfl rg CN 1r Ul "D r, 01) 10"1 0 cl 1 14" 0, .n N E M N, to CO D M co m m cn 14�,1� 0 �11) N OD Ol 0 00 m It. 0 q, 0 4 c5 w4 c,)' c6 ,0 -, 0 " m ~O o4, Lr01, 0 r, CXC U") 0, ll1 lll 1-, � 1" llq 4 N M r! .q ,q N ti n g p, rl CO q m ", H " C14 0 0 IC. 10 o ui Ln 4: u� Lq tr� 0:) �rl Ol 114 00 rl J� lll� IN 10 It 10 It �11 1�0 co M N N, 14 CO w N *N• K,) N N, CV V) rq 1"H � Page 23 of 58 75 E Q) W, M z Cd. M, M E ti n- 0 Oj t v C C C14 m 00 vi w c E W, + 4, �E 1>1 �4- 'T %T r, co V� 'LA �rA V� Vt VI �1,5 E + + + + ,Dcbn w > M �11 'a E J, 1j) aj D -J E CN Cl ix) 03 u) ul V) V) U-1 Lr "1 0 5, I,6 v6 Cn yr Pn in < Page 23 of 58 6 o f 1 4 1100mi CAMACLANC� HI M, R Iden ........................................................... ;l,pu j,Ec6lo gical $61utions andEvi ce ------------------------------------------------- m 9 20- 2 a_ c V D D M U F A A. T r t' M 0 fj 'S Q, C� Species Group Strategy S15 Sil Bas"Ane F 1,GURE 2 Expected: probabilityof persistericeof species groups in the Lake Simcoe,Rideau ecoregion over 27years undcr the Baseline scenario(busineas; assua[) arid With iliallpiementati,jr1of eitherFtrategySll (coo nbinationofS2, S4 and S7)orSl.5 (coml-AnaficinofaH strategies, S I -,S8), See Supporting Iriforn,iatiory Appendix B for a detailed cles(Ap- fion of the cost,effecfivelless and the complerrientarity ainalysis, as well as the methods, and resirilts of uncertainty analyses ffiat ex- plored the potentiM el'IfETt Of variability in been estimates and cost discounting rates on the outputs of the corripleirnentarity analysis. To examine how rnanagernent strategies align with clinrate change mitigation prioritles, we estirnated the potential carbon co -benefits of managerneint a( lions. Here, We USe, ffie tlerin co-berlefits' to refer to additional or ancillary benefits that strategies ailned alt one objec tive-in thLs case, maxirnizing biocliversity benetits while ininnimizing ffie Cost-li"rigl"t have for other obpecflves (IPCC, 2�014). In this sermi', hiodliversity benefits were the primary consideration in ideinfifying optimal sets of complementary strategies; carbon co -benefits were estirnated to provide, additional information that coulld be use'd to help justify or leverage acditk)1_11,�.11 ft"IdiPig for conservaticmi. Thus, we focused on actions that are likely to have direct benefits for cli- mate chango n'dfigation, such, a5 avoided CO2 ernissions frorn 1"Whitat protection arid cmg-terrn seqUestration reSLilfing from restoration ,activities (Drever et al., 2021 Di mcanson et A,, 202!3), and for which we could derive reasonable quantitative estirnates that is, actions with quarititative targets that ccluld be mapped spatially, and for which data on, carbon storage values were avaiiable, For habitat protection, we calculated potential avoided CO eirl,rdssions from ftltUre lailld use conversior) USirig as national carbon dataset (Bothe et al., 2022), lea the case of restoration, we adapted the approach, Used in Currie et al, (2023) to esfiniate the net restoraNe Carbon for target restoration areas, withi Ngher priority applied towards areas used by specie,, of conservation concern considered in the PTM. For a detailed description of the carban CO-I)Emehts analysis and results for specific actions, see Supporting Inton-natiom AplpendN C. 3 � RESULTS Under the baseline stRnarlo, 15 of the 16 species grOUJA In the re_, Bion were expected to have less than 60% probability of functional persistence by 2050 (Figure 2), In contrast, if ad strategies we,re to be implemented (r e.. 515), aIll but ffie cisco species group were predicted, to have greater than 50% probal.Ality of persistence arid 12 species groups were expected to have a probability of persistence of 60% or higher (Fig Ure 2). None of the species groups were expected to reach a 70% probabifify of persistence, although tl'i�p working landscapes species group conies close with to 69% probability of persistence under strategy 415 (Table 2), Of the lr.rdividu.caal strategies, restoration and regerrieration (S7) or)Wd secure the most species groups (four groups) up to the 60% threshold, while landowner stewardship (52) was predicted to se, rure three species gr0LA[:)S (Mable 2). Overall, S7 and S2 had the high est expected benefits relative to the oaseHne for all but four species grOUPS (Avar, riverine, turile and bat species groups . he as wan spe� ties group was expected to beiriefit most fromi legi-Matiorl and pol, icy (S3) or l'.mAectling habitat (S4), whHe riverine, arid turtIle specles Page 24 of 58 t0 q- 0 3 rD 0 0 rn W 0 02 = 5 CL I 0 0- z 0 z 0 03 CL 5,C). rD so W C) r1j O O0 00 CO rD N > 00 rD 7F 0 C 0 fD rD rD CL 0 rD rD r W W 0 2: D N < 0 rj rD r,) n E o• 3 LA 3rD 0 fD I'D fl) CL CL 0 CAMACLANG 'M 7ofI4 Jogical, Sdlutlons and Evi,den, ce ---------------- TA B I E, 2 Expected probability of persistence (%) of species groups In the,Lake Sinlcoe-Ricleau ecoregion over 27years under die Baseline scenado no addihonal rnanagc'!rrent) and under each individual and combination strategy, Individual s ruat gies> ombination strategies Base- Specles, groups line 51 52 $3 54 S5 AWar species 40 42 49 51, 50 '10 Ar t1f cia I stru( lure 18 48 60 53 49 48 dependent species 52 60 59 62 55 59 Bats 38 39 46 43 43 38 Forest species 45 54 59 55 55 47 Mxed forest species 48 56 55 54 55 52 Ciscoes 39 39 39 42 40 40 Mussels 47 48 53 51 50 52 Naturalized open habitat 48 53 60 56 57 51 species 51 54 54 53 55 53 Oak savannah species 44 56 54 54 52 44 Rjpariaro species 4 8 50 53 54 56 48 Riverine specles, 46 48 52 52 51 56 Sandy species 50 56 58 57 0 50 Snakes and Hzard, 51 54 5/ 57 58 62 Turtles 39 45 48 48 48 56 "upland species 46 50 53 54 56 50 Workinp landscapes species 61 6,1 68 64 62 61 No. of groups secured to 1. 1 3 1 2 2 z60% 52 45 56 51 55 49 NoW Highlighted cells indicate probabilities c4 persiMence 58 of 60% or greater. groups were both expected to benefit most f ro rn McIfite- sate cross - Ings (S5). For bents, invasive species and disease rnanagement (S6) were expected to be t1le ITIOSt belnefitial indMdUall Strategy. Oft ie.combined strategies, the cornbinationof all strategies(S15) had the highest expected berwf it across alspecies groups ( Yable 1) and was expected to secure the most species groups (Table 3�) but was also estimated to be the n'mst expensive to innplement. with an estfinated present 'VdiLle, (PV') cost of $2.1billion over 27years or $1.13million per year in annualized valLAes {Table 1). Combination strategy S11—ai cornbln,-ition of $2, $4 and S7wasesUrnated to be $300million cheaper (or $16.3nAllon per year cheaper) than S15, had the second highest expected benefit (Table 1) and COUld secure up to 1.0 species groups (I'able 3). The single most cosi,effective inclividuai strategy was legisiation and policy (S3), followed by hunnan-wildlife rnanagement (SI) and industry,targeted policy and practices (S8,) (Table 1). The high cost, effectiveness scores for these three strategies were largely driven by their costs—at $27, $29 and $58nifllion, respectively, the 3r strategies were estimated to be the least expensive to implement. However, ffioy were expected to have low tri nwde'.rabr, exi',wcted benefit across all species groullps (Table 1) and were not expected to S6 S7 58 S9 $10 S11 $12 $13 S14 S15 43 18 4'/ 49 58 63 5'? 49 59 64, 48 59 52 60 59 62 55 59 61 63 48 43 40 43 46 49 46 44 47 54 54 62 58 62 64 66 59 62 63 66 51 58 55 59 60 62 58 60 60 63 42 39 41 40 40 40 43 40 45 46 54 51 54 54 53 55 53 53 58 60 54 59 57 59 63 65 59 60 61 66 50 57 50 54 55 57 51 57 57 6(3 51 59 52 57 59 60 55 57 56 62 50 53 52 55 52 54 5 3 51 54 58 55 64 56 61. 63 65 59 62 59 65 54, 62 56 63 59 61 5? 59 58 63 44 52 45 56 51 55 49 51 50 58 50 57 52 57 59 61 57 55 58 63 62 66 65 65 65 67 64 65 68, 69 1 4 1 5 5 10 1 5 5 12 secure any adcAtional species grmips to -,--60% probability of per_";iS_ fence beyond what would already be considered seCUre Under the baseline sc�eriairio (Table 2). IIn addition, there are likely idclitiomM cost,,, for implennenbrig prq)osed: legislalion and poficy changes in strategy S3 that were not accounted for in ti ie cost estimates due to the high degree Of Uncertalinty regarding those costs. The con)PIennentarity analysis identified the best Sets, of strat- egies for 'SeClUring' the, rnost species, grOLAPS to at least a 60% prob- ability of persistence tor different levels of invesInnent. For lower evels at investrnmit, 55 wouicl be the q)Urnall strategy at a cost of $5 million per year over 27years it 3). securing the srtakes and lizards grOUP in addition to the working landscapes species group that was, expected to reniain, secine under the baseline scenado (Table 3�), Given a slightly higher budget of $5.5nAlion per year, l,iowevei-,itwc)Luldljeoptirrialtoinvest' instea,dir)S2(FigLure3),whi(-I� would secure the artificial struc t ure- d epen dent and the naturallized open habitat species groups in addition to the woOdng landscapes s1pecies group (Table 3), With higher levels of hwestrnent, S11 would help secure 10 species grotq-us at a cost of $97irnillion per year over 27years flgure 3). Securing additional species groups, up to 12 species grOLIPS cainprising 100 out of 133 species of conservation concern (Table 3), would reqWre invesfing $113 million per year to innplernent S,15 (Figure 3). Most of the IPareto opthnal solutions that could irnaximize the nwriiber of species groups secured: for ffie least cost were also Page 25 of 58 �o 0 3 rD 0 0 W a an 0 02 = 5 a rD 0 0- z 0 z rp 0 03 CL rD so W C) r'j N0 a) - 00 00 U, 0 4 U, 0 > 00 LI. rD 7F 0 a) 0 M rD a0 ET rD rD r 0 i5 3 rD < 0 rj rD r,) n E o• 3 LA 3rD 0 ID (D I 3 MNM CL CL 0 8 of 14 1100mi CAMACLANG H I M, R Iden ........................................................... gical $61utions and.Evx , ce ------------------------------------------------- FA B L l- 3 Species groups that could be secure with e6fto probaNity of persistence over 27years rinder, the Baseline srenario and under each optirnal set of manage[nent strategies. Species groups in group h i r t I er 8 Rive rine species 19 Ck,coes 2 Mussels, to Oak savam-),afi species 2 Ripadan species 3 Alvan species 8 Welland species 18 Sandy 5pec ies B,ats 4 MNed forest species 6 Foret species 19 Artificial structure- dependert 3 species NatUraHzed open 1'NablM;1t 12 species Snakes and fizards 9 Working landscapes species 3 Number of species groups secured Annualized cost (miflion CAD) Optimal strategies Baseline scenario S5 $2 $14 S5 +$144 7-r a14 sit S15 Nol!e. Total costs have been discounted to present valueF, at a rate of 3% and ar,11Uflized to derive an average cost 1.)eryear. as 14 3 Q 1 0 12 4A a 11 2 of 7 6 4 E M 3 Z 2 I 52: Larmdawner.5i�avramdsip S& MUM. .00--j"g. S 14 3 lmlWry 6 3o 60 go in Annualized cost (million CAD) F'l G U R, E 3 Plareto front fin dirating the nLflnber of species groups that coulld he secured to at least a 60% probability of persistence by different Pareto olptinial S01UH011S (represente(J L�y the black dots along the line). Highlighted SOlUtions indicate strate&s that were, also opfinial when niaxinrizing the ruirriber of specues groups thiat would experience -1.5% ben(--ifit, Annualized costs arc, hased on the fatal costs dl, countfA by a rate of 3%. expected to niaxii-nize the number of species gioupas ghat gain >15% in probability of persistence (Figure 3; Supporting Informatiorr: Appendix B). lin partJcular, a.inder S11, the turde species grOUJ) bad an expected probability of persistence of 55%, which is below the 60% threshold brut stile represents as gain of 16% rplafive to the baseline scenario Crable 2). Sirnflarly, although, neither the turtle nor bat species grOUPS were expected to achieve, a 60% probability of persistence Under conibinatbri strategy S15, the expected bene -fits ort S1r 5 f(n- both groups were >15% (Table 2), Fhe uncertainty analysis also revealed that most of the Pam -t(), opHirrial solutions identified based on the most likely estimates woi,flcl also be considered Pareto optirnal under the most ofAirnistic and 'nosL pessfirnisfic scHnarios. This suggests that the, Uncertainty In estinriates did not have a great effect on the results (Supporting Informatiom ApIpendix B), Or tire 48 actions ccnisidered in this PTM assessment, only seven actions had direct and quantifiable carbon benefits, Of these, suf- ficient information to calCLdate carbon co-bene.fits, was availat)ie for onlly four ac,O)rm: (1y protecting 10% of the Pt -ore ion, (S4); (2y restor- Ing T% of shoreline area (57); (3) restoring WkW of wedand and 25 krri2, of area connecting wetlands (S7); and (4) restoring 1200kn-i,""' of forest kiransificm zones (S7). We found that protecting habitat (S4) has direct carbon co-benetits ffluiva1ent to 11,2 Mt of ,avoided CO., ernissiorrs Mika restoration mid regener-afic"r (W) has direct. carbon co -benefits eqUiValf.lrilt to '1.57.6 Mt of CO2 seqtiestrabori (Table 4; Supporting Inif ormatlion° Appendix Q, Page 26 of 58 �0 0 V I/ V 1 2 3 5 6 7 10 12 010 4,8 5,5 M2 15,0 22:.tt 97A 1114 Nol!e. Total costs have been discounted to present valueF, at a rate of 3% and ar,11Uflized to derive an average cost 1.)eryear. as 14 3 Q 1 0 12 4A a 11 2 of 7 6 4 E M 3 Z 2 I 52: Larmdawner.5i�avramdsip S& MUM. .00--j"g. S 14 3 lmlWry 6 3o 60 go in Annualized cost (million CAD) F'l G U R, E 3 Plareto front fin dirating the nLflnber of species groups that coulld he secured to at least a 60% probability of persistence by different Pareto olptinial S01UH011S (represente(J L�y the black dots along the line). Highlighted SOlUtions indicate strate&s that were, also opfinial when niaxinrizing the ruirriber of specues groups thiat would experience -1.5% ben(--ifit, Annualized costs arc, hased on the fatal costs dl, countfA by a rate of 3%. expected to niaxii-nize the number of species gioupas ghat gain >15% in probability of persistence (Figure 3; Supporting Informatiorr: Appendix B). lin partJcular, a.inder S11, the turde species grOUJ) bad an expected probability of persistence of 55%, which is below the 60% threshold brut stile represents as gain of 16% rplafive to the baseline scenario Crable 2). Sirnflarly, although, neither the turtle nor bat species grOUPS were expected to achieve, a 60% probability of persistence Under conibinatbri strategy S15, the expected bene -fits ort S1r 5 f(n- both groups were >15% (Table 2), Fhe uncertainty analysis also revealed that most of the Pam -t(), opHirrial solutions identified based on the most likely estimates woi,flcl also be considered Pareto optirnal under the most ofAirnistic and 'nosL pessfirnisfic scHnarios. This suggests that the, Uncertainty In estinriates did not have a great effect on the results (Supporting Informatiom ApIpendix B), Or tire 48 actions ccnisidered in this PTM assessment, only seven actions had direct and quantifiable carbon benefits, Of these, suf- ficient information to calCLdate carbon co-bene.fits, was availat)ie for onlly four ac,O)rm: (1y protecting 10% of the Pt -ore ion, (S4); (2y restor- Ing T% of shoreline area (57); (3) restoring WkW of wedand and 25 krri2, of area connecting wetlands (S7); and (4) restoring 1200kn-i,""' of forest kiransificm zones (S7). We found that protecting habitat (S4) has direct carbon co-benetits ffluiva1ent to 11,2 Mt of ,avoided CO., ernissiorrs Mika restoration mid regener-afic"r (W) has direct. carbon co -benefits eqUiValf.lrilt to '1.57.6 Mt of CO2 seqtiestrabori (Table 4; Supporting Inif ormatlion° Appendix Q, Page 26 of 58 �0 0 CAMACLANG 9014 Jogical, Sdlutlons and Evidence ---------------- 4 � DISCUSSION 00 7D Our analysis, reveated that without Acwitional investiment in conser, co 00 r- 4n 21 vation, 13 species gratifis, or 11.4 out of the 133 species of conserva- u� D W flon concern, in the Lake SirTicoe RideaU ocoregion, will have <50% probabiHty of persisting with viable, stiff sustaining populations that Ln U continue to perfon-ni t1h6r ecologic.all function (ii.e. func-tional persiis- 0 tence) by 2050 (hflgUre 2), investing $97aill1fion, per yeair over 27years 0 :E m 2 V CNl in the combination of iandowner stewardship, protecting habitat and 0 M.D. Cl) Ln r'n r, restoration and regeneration �trategies (i.e. S11.) could he_ se(Lflre & rD CL q- rro o 10 species grOUPS (88 species,) with �60% probability of persistence, 0 3 whHe h-wiplemenfing the cornbinafion of all proposed M.Magenient rD strate&s (i,e, S15) for $113million per year could secure 12 species 0Zzz 0groups u 4100 species) (FigUre 2; .babble3) aimed However, even with this level (if investment, rione of the species 3 0 0 W� z grOUt.)5 were expected to have 70% probability of persistence. T he 2. 9- !- low estimates of the probability of persisternce reflect the I'dgh level on .0 U of threats in the area and are cornparable to those for the Fraser River- Estuary, British Calhimbia, Canada (Kehoe et at., 2021)-a n 0 0- D Z area also characterized WI, by high hLAMfootp6nt (Hiii-sh-Peirson 0 0 U et a[., 2022) and hig1h levels of threat frorn conripeting demands for space and resources (Kraus & Hebb, 2020), 'The low expected 0 03 76 ZEE M ri probabilities of persistence may allsc), be indicative of the inhen,-mt 2. CL S. 0. difficulty ii�i recovering species that ire already at a high risk of ex- rD :j E7 P firiction, and the current la,ck 0 effective i-rianagenient options that Cr E5 D 5 .0 A adequately addiress the impact of key histarical arid ongoing threats F- m m to these species gromps� For exarnple, the I -,mar stiatus and low po- CO 00 tenhal for rcTovei i attribUted -y of ffie cisco species group has bm rD X to historical overexploitation and more recent threats of habitat 2 degradation and irltrOdUCed spe�jes (COSEWK, 2003; 'isheries and Oceans Cariada, 2012p. Similady, the fOUr hat species are endan, > IV 0 tiered due to the threat of white syndirorne, a ralpidly spreading rD infectious disease for which"r prevention anal treafrinent has proven 7F 0 �6 E 0,aflenging (Cheng, et A,, 20�21; Grider et al., 2022). For' tUrtle and rDsv u� m to u� t c�, than main tlireatOre tt-w irripacts clo riverine spees of urban velop- 0 < M a t "'i N mHA and agriculturaf activities, star" h as habitat loss and alteration '< 0 mr V r11100 m r< N N m N (e.g, Ogden's Porridweed, COSEWIC, 2007), changes to war- teCILKAlity CLID 1<ET a I D CZ (e.g, Redside Dace, Ra,pids Clubtafl, COSEWIC, 2017, 2018) and hy- 5 rD rD r drologicah flow (e,g. Black Redhorse, COSEWlC, 2015), and barriers m to movernent (e.g. Aiiiwrican Eell, Spotted I-Urtle�; COSEWIC, 2012, 0 'u E 41 E In 0 X) 0 20111,1. Recovery of these species groulmlo a(~A0% probability of per- m111rr a r,-� ur� N slistence will rely on the SlUccessful ingation of these threats, whIch wU will prove to he challengirig given the high population density and ct < rD r,) - W 0 W development pressures in this region. 0 0 z E LA rD C;ra 8, .0 8 Z E Uncertainties simroundwig the poU,?MW impacts of recent poHcy rD ,Mt Vi 4w 1A " EC"Md= 0 4m mid legislative changes in Ontario could also have influenced estil 0 rD m I'd a C 0 CN "n rz u -0 -p mates of the expected; probabifify of persistence of species grmilps, ID (D 76 .2 0 Beginning In 2019, the Ontario provincial government introduced M '-I,' FZ 0 A 11v -W z z E, 0- m W 0� 3� 0 Px 2 sigifficant chringes to the Endangered Species Act (ESA), which rL r) L% led to the delisting at many species at rislk and the weakening of 0 CL previoushy strong protc.,ctioiris under this legislation (Belfillenfailivy & 0 Oliv4r-,,, 2021; Olive & Pentori, 2018). ln 2022, the provincial govern, to 3) nent introduced Bill 23, thc 'More Hornes Built Faster Act', which Page 27 of 58 10 of 14 CAMACLANG rI M, ppt .1,tcological Wutions and tvidence ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- rn ad e SLJb 5 tanl,-j I chariges to environrilent a I Handl biadivers it y protec - tions in Ontario. Experts rwtedl that these changes will likely lead to ftfl`ffier exacerbation of environmental chaHenges and greater diffiCUlty in hillAernenfillig conservation actlions, with wide-iranging irnplicatic'm for Nodiversity. These recent changes to ervironniental and conservation pol icy were also met with controversy (Jones, 2022; SpearChief- Morris, 2022), fuelled partly by Canada's c4ilonial legacy and the provincial govern ril en Cs largely UnSuccessfui efforts to engage meal-ifilgfUllY and, work with incligenous g,TCAJPS oil envirolirrental pcificy and conservation initlatives (Mciritushi, 2023). lndigENIOUS groups in flie region were invited to engage with and participate in th(v PTM asse5sirient; however, many expressed reluctance to par- ticipate 41 the process, fi-I part due to the la:ck ofclarity regarding the views hetcl by participating experts froln government agencies about IndigenoL6-led conservahon, In addition, there was insufficient tin and fLinding for this StUdy to support a nvore inclusive process as has been suc-cesstully done recendy in as sinliLarelicitation lirocess for die Central Coast of Britislh Columbia (Admils et al., 2023,). For co�nser- Vati011! to be SUccessful and grounded in, jtAt approaches, it is neves, sary to ensure that there is engagement, consent arid coflaboration with the First Nations and M61:is corninurilties iii the region (Seddon et and., 2021). Tfw limited represc"itation of Indigenous values, and perspectives in this PTM pro(ess means that species. threats or ac, tions may have been overlooked and excAuded from the analysis, po- tentially leading to incomplete conclusions about cost-effectiveness and compleirientirity, Therefore, when considering the iniplerneil- tation of the proposed strategies, it is miclal to mc,aningfully en- gage and work with Indigenous groups in ffie region (Townsend et al.DD201), through processes that are lmAusive, traunia-informecl and grounded in die principles of respect arld recil_nrocity (Adailris, ek A, 2023)Thi,,, outcomes from this P_VM Iproce.ss can serve as as valuable starting point for cmiversations with Indigenous connniu- nifies, to gather feedback and work together to determine the gaps in die ,analysis, Hie potential [napacts of the proposed strateglies on CUn'1lT1L1r0ti*?S and ways to fedUCe, thr- barriers to IndigerIOUS ParliC ipation in the P FM process. lideAly, these discussions w1if form the liasis of a second iteration at the FHT M process that is mare incillsive, with More expficft consideration of IndigellOUS values ancl objec- tives, and LI'mit work to strengthen rellations in the region. The complenientarity alialysis idenfifled iniultiple Parcrto optirrial solutions, representhig the trade-off between, iiiaxin4zirig bener, fit and ininirilizing costs, Withcmt strict constraint,., an the Fminiber of specicas groups, that niust be secured or on the total budget, die choice of whicti, Pareto optinnal solution to adopt will depend on the values and preferences of those involved in rnakirig the deci- 5irm. This decisirm nlay also be, inNuenced by other rorisiderations, SUCh as co,benefits for other objectives and avalilabillity of oppor- tunities to generate or leverage additional funcling. For exaniple, a 50111fiOln that also contributes to other targets, such as protected area and restoration targets of the GBF or iiahom.,O chrriate change inifigation targets, cotfld further increase the total bei efiLs gailied and Ihelpn SeCUrf., additional funding mid resO1L1r(.E`S for conservation action. In this PIN assessrinent, prah-,,°cdng habitat (S4) and resto- ration and regeneration (.S"/) included actions with pote^untial carbon co,benefRs of IL21VIt CO,, eqUiValelit in avoided P1115issions and 137�61ML CO,2 endissions equivak-mt in sequestered carbon, respec- fivHly (Supporting information: Appendix C) and flAUS COUld lie con- sudered as nature -based cliniate solutions. While these vanitues were based only on a glibset of actions in diase 5firategjes for which we were able to derive quantitative estirnalies, the l.,,)oteritial carbon co benefits of S4 and S7 corriblned COUld, over die, long terin, snake up for all of Oritario's gree nhoilise gas ernissioris in 2021 (Einvironine�lt and Urnate Change Canasta, 2023). ChOOShig a SOILIti011 that i 1, clu des one or both strategies WOUld help support aligimient with Ornate chainge niffigation targets, Doing so can help justify invest- rnent and improve the likelihood of securing adclitioliEd handing far implernferriation. We note, how( -Ver, that OLir estirriaLes were de, rived fi-cmi maps of existing carbon stocks (Currie ek• alk, 2023�Sothe et al., 2022) based on several simplifyil'ig tISSUIlliptions and did not accolint for changes in stored carbon over time dlue to natural or anthropogenic processes. Pre estimates therefore represent the rnaxililuim potential carbon benefit that could be gained by iinipte rnenting those actions, A more cornpreheinsIve carbari accounting, in accorclance with aCCepted standards, along with independent ver ification and certification will be needed to secim-e additionM fund - !rig througli market niecharrisms, such as voluntary carboll rilarkets (Kreibich, 2024• Sadilknian el: al., 2022). Sorne alctioris considered In the P,TM may also have carbon co,. benefits that we were unah4e to quantify due to the lack of available clatal on carbon storage in certain habitats such as sand clunes, cm- in- , cifficierit understarding of the pathways through which the action car) yield carbon (.1'o -benefits. Furffier rcmearch and niodelling, of the, caLlSal medlianisinis finking the actions to their carbon benefits will be nee dcK]l to estimate the carbon co -benefits of these actions. For others, the rriain barrier to the quantification of carbon co benefits was the lack of specificity regarding where, wl"ien and how die ac, tion wild be implemented; carbon co-twriefits could potentially be esthinated for these actions NICE- the -Se [Jetaik heave bePil fUlly'Sli)e',Ci fiend, for example, during the planning stage prior to hiriplelinentation. Many of the actions suggested by experts may also have co - benefits for other environtinentA and social ob)ectjves ror instance. water (JUallity COUld be irnparoveet directly by in iplienienti rig waste- water treatment (S2) or water allocation (Bain) actions (Suttle, 201A), Tire iniplemeii,tation, of actions, on urban areas (S7) or in recreatiotml activity hotspots (S6) can contribute to brig term urban regenera hon, recreation and overall hurnan and cultural well-being (Cofle'ony & Shwartz, 2(119), Finally, co -benefits sari be generated through the creation of jobs (G(5mez Martin et al., 2020; Rayrnond et A, 2017). QuarAltative pre-assessrnents of co-berlefits can he datadntensiv,(.,a and may be hi5practical in mmy cases (Mofina elf al., 2024) and de, velcipmenk of frameworks alld Methods for assessment are grr-.?aUy needed (Onimer et al.. 2022). Where possible, however, demon- strating and quantiryirlg these co -benefits and any potential dis berlefits will allow'therm to be explicitly incorporated into formal decision sclence frarneworks, SUCh as IrlUlti,criteria clpcision analysis Page 28 of 58 rn 00 00 00 U, �O q- 0 3 rD 0 rD 0 0 0 0 z 0 z fD ,< 0 03 2. CL S. 0. rD is o W C) rJ NJ O a) CO C. rD 0 U, 0 > 00 rD 7F 0 a) U2 0 M rD rD CL 0 ET rD rD r w a, 0 070 rD < 0 rj rD r,) n MV! o• 3 LA 3rD 0 fD 33 (D M CL CL 0 iaas CA I MACt I AN I Gi 11 1 =Wow i E nice ,L111111of, 14 , I � I colo�,ical Solutions, and Evide, (Chige-Vorsatz 0 aL, 2014), and thu�, improve the [kei of Uptake and SUCCeSOUI irlIP10411PrItation arid further support 0-je business case, for financing biodiversity conservation. Our analysis revealed that consideriatAe additional invest- rin e n t .$2.1 billion over 27 years is 1'etlLdred to SafegUard [he fU, Lure of species of conservaticm concern to thc Lake Sfincae Ridei-w ecaregion, Ontark_). By estitnating the cwtsi and expected benefits of different COMbinationis of strategies, P can help niaxinilze the return an investment and make the bushies,, case for conservaton, whicha car) lead to increased investment and positive outcornes for biodivers'dty. identifying and firyiplemerifing actions with co benefits for cliniMe change mitigation c."- otheir envirioniriental or social objec tives can further ITIaXiMize the return un investirnent lira conservation actions, help secure addifloriall funding for impiennentation and con- tribute to Cariada's effr0s to rneet its coryintitirrients to, the C131ID's Global Biodiversity Frartiework. AUTHOR CONTIRIBUTIONS Abbey E, Carnaciang and Tara G, Martin h0fied develop the data collection rnethods and analysis Used In this study. Eirnfly Giles was responsible for recruiting expert participants arid, organizing work shops, and Aranya Iver C0f1dLKted liteiratLH-e reviews, prepared elici, taction materials and r-m-iducted data analysis, Abbey E. Carnaclang also provided technical advice and assistance with workshop organi- zation and data analysis. Abbey E. Cairnaclaing, Aranya lyras, Emily Giles, Beatrice i anci Catherine Pacturette facilitated expert elicitation workshops. ChHs Liang conducted the carbon co-berlefits, with assistance and advice froom Victoria Hernirring, Abbey E, Caniaclarrig and fara 6, Martin, Kad-wrine 11, Alani Jennifer LWITOUr'eUX, Sarah Matchett, Tyler Milier, D. Ryan Norris, Mary Ann C. Pf,7^rron, Robyn H. M. Runiney, frederick W, Schueler and Laura Th'ttins contributed data used in thiS Str.Mly. All authors contributed to writing and reviewing the nianuscript, R�W 0 �Ajp�Zk � We wiMi to ffiank all the experts who participate d in the workshops and contrilbuted their knowledge, and ideas to this project, i well ais J. Currie, D. Jal"W5, I. Mistry and C. Hedley for their assistance in pre- paring and facilitating the ext crt Oicitation workshops, This prc)ject was funded by The Patrick and Bm,ba,ra Keenan Foundation and was a:iso supported by the Liber Erna Chair irr Conservation and a Natural Sr,Jences arid Enginepring Research COLHICil of Canada Discovery Grant (NSERC RGPIN-2019-04535) to T,G,M, and the generos- ity of Reid and Laura Carter. The expert eficiLation MethOd Used in this study was approved by the University of British Colurril-Aai's Behavimiral Researdi Eflilcis Board (11)# H22-01 774;, CONFLICT OF INTEREST STATEMENT The autl'icrrs declare that they have ry.iconflictsof interest. DATA AVAILABILl"T"Y S I'AT'E M E N T f1he an01-rYr11i7ed surninary data elicited from experts, along with the code for both PTM and carbon u) benefits, analysls, are avail, able front litLps:Hdoi.org/10.5281/zei-noda.17247132 (Camaclaing et al., 2025). Input spatial data used for the carbon co,benefilts anal, ysiswere derived from PLAACly available sources isted hi Supporting Inforniatiom Appendix C. ORCID Abbey E. Ctyrnockrng https://iDrcid.org/000O 00011-7334-3483 D. Ryan Norris littps'://oircild.org/00tDO 0003 4874,1425 Tura G. Mariiii'k/",'), hit tp,s://orc id.org/0000.000'1 7165.9'0'12 Adams, M. S., TLIJ100, V, J, D., Hemphill, J., Penn, B., Anderson, L. T., Davis, K., Ave-ry-Gornin, S., Harris. A., & Mwlin, T. G. (2023). aprrroaiches for curnulative ciffects aissessments, peorAe andNatitirie, 5(2 , 431-445� I"ittps://doior-y'.„/1.O1002'/patl,13,10447 Bethke rtfalvy, A,, & UNe, A, (2021), Recent amenchnii,uIrrts to the Endangered Species Act and art uncertain future for species at risk: a ease study of Ointario's Magara region. Facets, 6, 1168-1183. li,ttps:l/(,Io[.or,g/10.1139/facets-2020-0074 13ficharska, M., 5rinithers, R. J,, Mikushiski, G., Ribnnback, P., Harrison, R A, Nils seen, W & Wi 1 (2019). Blodiversity's Win- Mlii to swstiinalWe dev0(,.,jpmunt, Notme SuM4rnobility, 2( 1 '2 l, 1083-4093, htfps://clo.org/10.1038/s4l893,019-0411-9 l."loyd, L, Epanchin Niell, R_ & SiikamJldj, (2015). Conservation planning; A review of return on investment inaiysis. ReWew of Enviroruirental 1-conornics mid Poi`icy. 9(1), 23, 42, httl:)�s://cloLc),rg/I.O.I.O9:3/reep/ reu014 N,stde, J, M. 1201 1I, Streamflow resjiiun�,e to headwakr rir,4orestation in The Gainaraska River basin, southern C7nta6o, Canada. Hydroi),agicM Processes, 25(19I, 3030-3041, li,ttps:/Jdod.org/10.1002/liyp.8,061 Caniaclang, A., Liang, C., & Iyer, A, (2025Southern Ontario Prior4y Threat Mana,q,enmrit: Data and analysis [Data set]. Zenodo. https://d0i.org/ ;10.5'2f3'1/zee odo.17247132 CarrraWng, A, F:,, Currifa, Ji., Giles, [,, Forbes, G, J_ r: dge, C. B,, Monk, W A., Nocera, 1..J., Stewart -Robertson, G, Browne, C,, O'Malley, Z, (1, SrOder, L,S', Martin, I. C, (2021), Prioritizing threat across terrestrial and frediwater reahi-og for- 5pecles conservatifirl and recovery. Conservation 5dence and Practlice, 3(2), e300. Iittps:// doLorg/10.1 11.1/c sp2300 Carwardine, J,, Matin, T. (3- Firn, J., Reyes, R. P., Nicol, S,, Reesoll, A., Grantham, H, S., Stratford, D., Kehoe, L,, & Chade.s, I. (2019). Priorlty _rhreat Mainagernent for biodiversity conservation: A Jr,.,ind- book. Journai` of Applied Ecoto8y, 56(2), 481-490. hittps:://doi.org/10. 1111/1365-2664.13268 Carwa,rdine, J., O'Connor, T., Legge, S., Mackey, B., Possingharn, i-11, P,, cam Martin, G, (2012), PrioritiAng threat management for biodiver, s,ity corrserwitlon, Conservation Leftem 5(3), 1.96-204. hittpSWdoi, org/1(7.1111./j,1755,263X.21)12.0(�)228.x Chad("n, L, Nicol, S. van teeuwcm, S,, Waiters, 13, r1rn, J_ Reeson, A_ Martin, I-, G., & Carwardine, J. (2015). Benefits of integrating conii- plernentarity into priority threat rnanage mieril, Covservation Biology, 29(2), 525-536. http5://doLorg/10.1111/cobi.1241.3 Cheng, T. L., Reichard, J. D., Coleman, J. T. H., Weller, T. J,, Thogroartin, W. E., Reichert, 13, E,, Bennett, A. B., Broders, H, G. (.arnpbelll, J_ Etchison, K_ Fe4er, 1). J., Geboy, R., Hernberger, T., Herzog, C., Hicks, A. C. Houghton, S., Hurnber, J. Kath, J. A., King, R. A,, Frick, W.F,(2021J, an Idlicn-nating bats in North Anicrica, (-'imsetvotion ll.30kogy, 35(5�, 1586-1597. pittpi//doLoirg/10.1111,tt!obr.13739 Page 29 of 58 rn 00 00 00 U, �10 3 rD 0 (D rD 0 W 0 02 = 5 a rD fD n ,< 0 03 CL rD so W C) rj r1j O O0 00 rD co rD 4 2 rD 0 > 00 rD 7F 0 C 0 rD CL 0 rD rD W 0 Z rD < 0 rj rD r,) n MV! o• 3 LA 3!D 0 ID 33 (D fDN fD W rL n CL 0 12 of 14 CAMACAN n I M .1,Ecological W',tions and tvidence ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Climate, Risk institute, (21023). Ontm,io provincitif c6mate chcmge hnpm-t assessment technicni report. Report prejaeved by the Chinate Risk Institute, Diflon Consuftk,ug, ESSA Jeclmologies Lid,, Kennecly Consulting and Seteira Stielbert for the Ontario Ministry of the Environn-ent, Conservation and Parks. Bittps://www,oraairio.ca/ Collpony, A., & Shwartz, A. (2019). Beyond assurning co -benefits in nature,based soicirions: A hurnan centered approoch to optirnize social and ecologkal outromes for advancing urtldn plannIing, StjstodmobifiiIy. 11(18), A9221, hitpsJ/doi.org/10.3390/ su'l 1184924 Convention or) Bi(AogicM DiverSslty. (2022), Oec�,qOn adopted by the confe,renre of the Partie, fo the Convention on OioosicaP Diversify 15/41. KL[nnniing- Montreal Global Biodiversity FrDirnework. (CB D/' COP/II 5/4), httpsWwww.cbd,IInt/gbf/ COSEWIC, (2003). COSEWfCass essment and u,ridcite status report on the Shortiaw Cisco Coregonus zerrithicus, (p. viii + 19 pp). Committee on theStatus of Endangered W[Ifflifi:., in Carimia. COSIEWIC. (2007). COSEWfC ossessnrent onid status report on the Oaden's Por'idwc,�edPotmiTogetonogdei tiiir° Crp7airffi.(,p.vI i 19pia).Committee on the Status of Endangered Wikfife in Canaciaa COSEWIC. (2012), COSEWICaqsf,,5stnerit aitdstafu5 reporR or) theAn'Terk-an E0 Angufflo rosOota rPr Canodo, (p, xii + 109 pt)), cf,)rnnfltte�e on the Status of Endangered Wildlife in Canada. COSIEWIC, (2014). COSEWiC assessment anct status report on the Spotted frin'tle CfomnysSuttofa hi, Conoda, Np. xiv 4 74 up). (ommittee on Ow Status of Endangered Wildlife in Canada. COSEVVIC. (2015), C:COSE Wdrff ra a e,s piicarap arO sfnnus rep,t on the Block (p, xii + 50 pp),colmnittee on the Status of Endangered Wildfifie in Canada, COSEWIC, (2017P, COSFWif' a.sse,�srirerft and " Latus repmt o'r the Aledside r63pp).Comillitteeon the Stattis of E'ndangered Wllfflife iia Canada, COSEWIC. (2018). COSEWC risseqsmerit and status report on the Rapids dubtaif Pimp w9ornph ti�, qumlrfcoor on (1). xii + 18 pi)), Committee on the StotL6 of Endangered Wfldfife in Canada. Crins, W. J., Grayrrr. A,, 1-thfig, P. W. C., & Wester, M. C. (2009). The eco- systems of Orifmio, Part Na Ecozones and ecoregions, )"1 c c h nicall Report SIB TER IMA TR -011. Ontario Ministry of Natural Rescm-ffce,,, [nventcwy, Monitoring and Assessine,,n( Se0ion. fittps://www.oait,ar oxa/page,/ecosysterm ootario Currie, L Merrr[t,'W., [Jang, C- Sothe, C, Bealty, C. R., Shackefford, N., Hirsh Pearson, K, Gonsarvc), A,, & Snider, 1, (2023). Prioritizing ecooglcai restorstion of converted W -ds in Canada by spatially integrating organic carbon storage and biodiversIty benefits. Conservation Science and Praciice, 5(6), e12924. httpW/doi.org/I0. 1111 /c Dre,veir, C. R., Cook -Patton, S. C., Akhter, F, IBaodieti, IR H., Chmura, G. L., Davidson, S. J,, Des.jardins, R. I_ Dyk, A., Farpimie, f. E,, FeRows, M,, Filewod, 3-, ldessing,f ewis, M,, Jayasundai,6, $,, Keetoin,'W, S,, Kroeger, T. Lai,k, T J., I E,, Leavitt, S. M., LeClerc, K -E., ... II W, A, (2021), Natural dirnate solutions Loi Cmada. Scic!rrco Advances, 7123), eab(16034, r)LIncanson, L, Liang, M., I eitoid, V., Armston, I. KrMma Moorthy, S. K, Diibayah, R. Costed oat S- Enquis(, 13. 1, Fatoyiribu, I,— GoOz, S, I,, Gf"niza lei." R(")Oich, M- Merow, C,, RofA)rdanz, R R— Tabf,or, K, & Zvoleff, A, (2023). The effectiveness of globarl protected areas for climate change mitigation. Nature Commurricotions, 14(1), 2908. littp5://doi.org/10.1038,/-,41467-023-380`/`3-9 Environiment and Clirnate Change Canada. (2023). Canadian Erivinanruent,M SusicAinobifify fndfcators. C�reerihouse iris ernissio ns. Environrnent and Oirnate Clh,ange Canada, cVi:iiiate-cl,iange/services/eiivironiiiiental-indicaitoirs/greenho,tise-gas- ernissions,hON Envh,onment and (Jimale Change Carimia, (2024), Concida's 2030 Nature Strategy: HM6og nand reversing bocfiversity Joss in Canada. Environment and Oinate Change Canada, httpsWvvwvv,(,,anada, ca/en/eiiviroiii-neiit-cl:in-nate-c�iai,ige/seirvices/]Diodivermty/canada,- 20:30 nature,strategy.fituil Finn, J. Maggini, R., Chades, L, NicoL S,, Walters, B., Reeson, A,, Martin. T G., Pc)ssjnghairn, H. P., Pichancourt, J. -B., Ponce -Reyes, R., & Carwardiine, J, (2015), priority threat nriariagernent of iimasive On', imals to protect biodiversity urider climate change. Gobat Change Biology, 21(l 14, 391.7-3930. https:/,/doi.oirg/lo1,111/gc.b,13034 Fislhe!ries and Oceans Canada, (2012), kecovery.Wategy fcw the SlmjIn 0,s e Clsco (CowqOJIU5 reighmdi) b,T Cmiada, (Species at Risk Act Recovery Strategy Series, I vi * 16 p 1p)IF isheries tinct Ocearis Ca i iada, (56n,mz mol,Un, F., Giorelarm, R,, Pagano, A_ vao d(i Keur, P_ & MJriei Costa, M (2020) Using an system thinking approach to assess the contribUtIon of nature based solutions to sustainalbde develc)pirnent goAs, Science of Ore TbU4 Envirormient, 138, 139693, httpO/dol, orF,/10.1016/j.sc[toteinv.2020.1:39693 Grider, J., Thogrinarfin, W. E., Grant, E. H. C., Bernard, R. F., & Russeli, R. E. (2(D2'2). Early treattnenL of white riose syndrorne is necessary to stop population decline. Journaf of App ffed Ecology, 59(10), 2531- 2541. fit tpsWdoi org/10.1111/13x55-2664.14254 HemrnIing, V., Burgrrian, M, A., Hama, A, M- McBride, M, R, & WhAle, 8, C . (2018), A praciical gUide to, strtictt,ired expert eficItafirm tvmng the IDEA prolacol, Ndctkvochhi Ecology ond Evc4ut0n, 9, 1,69--180, littp5://doi.org/10.1111/2041-21OX.1285/ Hemming, V., Carnaclang, A. E., Adarns, M. S , Burgimain, M., Carbeck, K., C.airwaFt1iine, J,, Chadem, I., Chalifour, L,, Converse, S, J., Davidson, L. N. K., Garrard, G. E., Finn, R., Fleri, J, R., Huard, J., Mayfield, H. J. Marlden, E, M- Naujokai(is, Lc-mis, I., Pos,,,inglonn, 11,1. 1p, Runipff, , L., ,, Martin, L G, g202)), An Introduction to dc�c:JsJon ,,ciemcc," for conservation. Conservation 1301ogy, 36(1), e13868. https:!//doi.o,rg/ 10,1111/cobLI3868 Hirsh -Pearson, K. JOinson, C, J., Schuster, R , Wheate, R. ILh'' & Venter. (), (2022), Canada's huinan footlprinl reveals large intact areas jux taposed agiinst areis tinder immense anthropogenic pressure. Focets, /, 398 419, 0063 IPCC. (2014). Chmate chcmSe 2014: Mitigabon of chmate change. Contril-wtion of working grOUP Ili to the fifth assessment report of the intergovernmental panel on clirnate change (0, EJenhofer, R. Pichs-MadrUgD, Y. Sar krona, E. Firahani, S. Kadner, K. Seyboth, A, Adler, I. Wvum. S. Brurmer, R Eickemeier, B. Kriernmin, J, S, Schldrymr, C, von Ste(how, T, ZwickO, & L C, Minx, Fads.). Cambridge University Press. https:l/www.ip)cc.ch/relDort`/ ar5/wg3,/ Jones, R. 1'.(2022). Ford government frjr�ge,,al-i(,,v,,idwit[iC.,reer�b.qt deved- opnient plan despite "Ibroad opposition" in PUbfic consultation. CBC News. littps://www.cbc.ca/iiews/c-anacla/tororito/greenbelt-oak- ridges-iiioraiiie-regLilatio�rii,-1.6692337 Kehoe, L. J., Lund, J., ChafifOUir, L., Asadian, Y., Balke, E., Boyd, S., Carkon D- Casey, J. M., Connors, B., Cryer, N_ Drever, M. C_ Hirich, S,� I ev[ngs, Mac,Duffee, M.. McGregor, H., Richardson, ),, Scott, D, C., Stewart, ID., Vennesand, R. G., .. Kartjn, T. G. (2021). Conservation in heavily udmrilzed biodiverse regions re(p.dres ur- gent rilanagemon[anti on aiNd atterntion to governanc+a, Conservation 5cience cmd Practice, 3(2), e310, d)tlpas.//doi.oi,g/10.111,1/cq)2.31.0 Kennedy, C, K, Miteva, D, A., 13rawtrrgarten, I " Ildawllhoine, P. L, Sochi, K,, PoLisky, S., OaOeal', T R. Uhlhorn, F', M_ & Kiese(ker, V (2016), Bigger is better: improved nature conservation timd economic retUrns from laindscape-level imitigation. Science Advances, 2(7), e1501021. httlius://clai.arg/10.1126/sci:aidv.15,01021 Kraus, D., & Hebb, A. (2020). Southern Canica's crisis ecoregions: Identifying the most significant and threatened places for bicidi- vorsity coriservation. ModiversUy (Prd ConservaiOn, 29(1,3), 3573- 3590. I)ttps://do,j,orgl10,10O7/s1O531-020-02038-x KreibiO. N, (2024'loward Oobal net zenx'The voiuntary carbon rnarket un H,, quest to lind JLs place in the post -Park climate regiime. Widey Page 30 of 58 �O q- 0 3 0 rD 0 W 0 02 = 5. a rD 0 0- z z fD n ,< 0 03 CL rD so C) r1j o 00 2 T CO w 4 0 0 > 00 rD 7F 0 rD 0 M CLrD 0 ET rD rD W a, 0 07 D rD W Z-' ct rj < 0 rD r,) n 0 3 3rD 0 ID (D M rL r') CL 0 CA I MACt I AN I G 11 11 p, I i I , "I'l""I'll""I'll'll""I'll""I'll",'ll""I'll""I'll",'ll""I"ll,'ll""I'll""I'll",I 5 1 =w i E nce -,L1 13 1 of 1 14 colo�,ical Solutions, and Evide, nterdNOXAnary kevie wsa C'4rirate Change, 1515), e892. hUpW/dol, arg/10.1002/wcc.892 .1.. Shaw, J. H P., C-1-rown, S. L., Convey, I Gilbert. N., Hughes, K. A., Mclvf)F, E.. Robinson, S, A., Ropert-Coudert, Y., Bergstrofri, 11. M., Biersina, E. W Christiana, C,, Cowan, D, A,, Frenat, Y-Jenouvrier, S-, _ Chad6s, I. i2022). Threat management priorities for conserving Antarctic friodiversity. PtoS Hioioqy, 20(12) e:3001921.. littlpsWdoi.org/1.0, 1371/journal.pblo,3001921. Legge, S., Dielenberg, J., & Woinar4d, J. 12023, September 8). 10 Year feral cat IpW) lirings u,; a s[ep closer to properly protecting enclan, gored wildlife, rhe Conversation, lit t pWitheconversat lonxorri/l 0 - year -feral -cat- plan brillgS LIS a -step- closer- to - 1) roperly- protecting -endangered-wildfife-212976 1. e g ge, S_ K e i i i i ed V, M, S_ Li a yd, R„ M r p hy, 5. A. & f� k- e r, A, (2 W 1.) Rapid recovery of rnarnmal fauna in the central Kimberley, northern Australia, following the removal of introdUcecl herbivores. Austad Ecofo,gy, 3647�, 791--799. [i,ttps°://cloi.org/10.1111/j.1442-9993, 2010.02218.x Martin, T G., Burgrrw.m, M. A,, Fidler, F., Kuhnert, P. M. Low -Choy, S,, Mcbride, M,, & Mengersen, K, (2012), Eliching expert: knowledge in conservaton scierice, ConsefvMiori BhAog.y, 26(1.), 29-38, littps:// dol.org/10.111 1./j,1523-1.739,201 1_01806,x Martin, T. G., Kehoe, L., Mariyka Pringle, C, CII I., Wilson, S., Bloom, R. G., Davis, S, K., Fisher, R., Keith, I., Mehl, K., Diaz, B. P., Wayland, tvlE,, Wellicorrie, T, I., Zinurwr, K. P & 5irnit1h, P� A, (2018), Prioritizing recovery funding to maximize conservation of endan- gered species. Coriservatim') Letters, 11(6), e12604, h t tps1/doi.or&/ 10111 1/coin],12604 McIntosh, E. (2023i. Ontario is Ignoring interinil advice that SUpported Indj9eJ10LJ,,0ed cunt ,ervaflon, The Narwhol. fit, tps://t he narwhaLca,/ ontario-iridigenouira-conservait,ion-recomia-riendatio,iis/ McKinney, I.. (2002). Effects Cl naflonal conservation speiidfirig and arnount of protected arena on species threat rates. Conservation Siology, 16(2'), 539, 5,13, littj)0/doi.org/'10.1 04 6/j, 1523 1.r' 39.20 2.00441.x' Mitchell, B., SII D,, & Watson, N, (2021.). Ontario conservation authorities - Erd, evolve, interlude or epiphany? Cancrdpun Water Re,,(,)iP'evs AjuryuA / Revue Conadienne Des Res.,;oirces Hydriqlws, 46(3), 139-152. h,ttps://dol.org/10.1080/07011784.2021.1930585 MaiLanen, A, (2008), Generalized (,onripIenienlrarfily and rin,',ilplAng of the coric("qAS of Systernatic Co rise rvation, Planning, Cow,'ervatiorr Biology, 22(6), 1655-165& Malmo, R,, (1-ostello, C_ & Kaffiru,., [), (2024), Sharing and expamfing the co-beinefits of conservation. EcMogicoEconomics, 218, 108113, 1-ittps://doC i.org/10.1016/i.ecoleccati.20124.10,8113 Murdoch, W,, Polasky, S,, Wilson, K. A., Possingharn, H. P_ Kareiva, P., & Shaw, R. 12007), Maximizing return on investinent in conserva- tion, ffioh)gicM ConservatiorI, 139(3-4), 375-388. littp,s://doi.org/ 1,0.1,016/j,biocoin,2007,07.011 Office of LI'm Auditor General of Ontario, X2021), Protechn,8 mid recoverhi,; species at risk. Office of the Auditor Gener,A of Ontario, daas //wwwaCiditor,(,)n,c,�/er,r/coriteriit./rq.)or ttopi:t-s/er,)viu,ojiryaeriLhi:rnp#2021 0Ijvf-.!, A,, & Penton, G. (2018)Species at risk in OntarioAn examina floe of environrinental riori governn'wntaf orgarflzatJons, Canadian GeQsrapines 160.ogwihI[es Crmadiprines, 62(d), 562"574, httpsWdc)i. org/10,1111/cag.12483 0mirner, 1, Bucchignani, E., Leo, L. S., Kailas, M. Vranie., S_ Debele- S., Kumar. P,, 0oke, H. L,. & Di Salbatino, S. Q022). QUj.WjfifYiI)9 40 1I and disberiefits of nature based sofi.itions targeting disas- ter risk reduction. Risk Reduction, 75, 102966, li,ttps://(Joi.org/1,0.101,6/j.nijdrr.202'2.102966 Pressey, R. L., to Bottrill, M. C, (2009), Approaches to landscape- and ,,eascape,scalk! conservation pia ming. Convergence, contrasts And challenges, ()fyx, 43(4), 11644/5fittps�sa//doLorg/10.101�//S003C) 605309990500 Rally Assetaa, & Naiure Ccinservancy of Cwiacia. i2020), Financing coas4,r, vation: How conservation financing cotdd be used to protect Carrada"s coiisei-vatio,n-h,ow-caiiservation-fiiiancing-coLrid-b,e-cised-to-prote ct-carnacbs-ecosysterns/ Rayrnond, C, M , Franizeskaki, N , Kabisch, N., II P,, Elrefl, M.. Nita, M, R. Geneletti, D, & Calfaisietra, C. (2017). A framework for assess- ing and implementing the co,benefits of nature,basecf solutions in Cir ban area�,. Enviformierit(4 Sck.'oce & PtMcy, 71, 15-24, IAtps1/doi, org/1.0.1016/j.envsci.201`/"`,O"/"OOB Rtizilka, S,, & Wiecelk, M. M. (2005), Approx4nation methods in MLAItiolbjec- tive prograrruning, Jourimf of Op0mization fheory mrd Apptications, 126(3), 473 501, l'itl,psr//doi.org/lO.'100//slO957,00,5-5494-4 Sadilknian, J., Duncanson, S., Saric, D., Brinker, C_ Pachololk, S., & Mflier, L., (2022), The evolution crf ("anada'5 carbon markets and their role in energy transifiorLAiberta LawReview, 60(2), 329-362, Seddon, N., Smith, A., Smith, P,, Key, L, ChRlsson, A., Girardin, C., II J., Sirivastava, S., & Turner, B, (2021), Getting the rilessage right ori nature-baseci scdutions, to climate change, Gfobcd Chan8e BioJoqy, 27(8 , 1518-1546, https., /doi.org/10.1111/gcb.15513 Secimniuk, 1, (2018, September), roo expensive to save? Why rhe be"'St way to protect endangered g.recies cm.,dd mean IeU:inp sorne g(. Tire Globe mirl MaH, article -too - expensive -to-save- new -ap proach -to -protec ting -enda n geired-species/ Shin, Y,-.,),, Midgley, G. F_ Archer, E. R, M., Arneth, k, Barna S' U K. X, Chan, L., Hashimoto, S., Hoegh-('iUldberg, 0., hisarov, G., Leadley, P,, Levin, L. A., Ngo, Hi. T, I'midil, R., Pires, A. Fo F, P&tner, 1-1:,,0,, Rogers, A. D., Sclhola a, R, J_ Sett('0e, L, & SIniffi, P. (2022), Ac tions to halt biodiversity loss generally benefit the climate. GiobM Change Siology, 26(9), 28/16, 287,1. dit.tps://doi,org/10.1111./gcb.161012 Sothe, C,, Gorsamo, k Arabian, J,, Kurz, W. A,, Finkelstein, S. A " & Snider, .J, (2022), 11 soil (. arlxin storage in tern estriai ecosystems of Carracia. GobM giogeochemical Cycles, 36(2), e2021.GB007213. g'ittl�ias://doi.org/1,0,1029/�2021GBOO721,3 SpearChief-Morris, J. (2022), Chiefs of Ontario want cleveiopment- friendly More Homes Built Faster Act repealed. The MwwhaL Townsend, J., Moola, F., & Craig, M, -K. (2020). Indigenous peoples are Critical (a the success al nature,based sokrtions to climate change, Faceis, 5(l), 551 - 556, diLtps://doi,erg/10,1139/facets-201,9-0058 fireasury Board of Canada Secretariat, (2022iCanada's const benefit oriMyq' guide for reguhilory proposahs, http0/wwwx:anada,ca/ eii/governi-pierit/system/l-,iws/dcvelopiiig,iiniII)rs)ving-federap- regu lations/reqU inern ent s-clevelopi n:g- ma nag i ng- revi ew I ng-regu I atiiDns/guidelines-tools/ciDst-b,eneflt-anialysis-guide-regtAlatory -proposals.1itnd Turner, M. G., Calder, W. 1, Cumming, G. S., Hughes, T. P., Jentsch A , aDeau, S. I.- [,enton, T. M., Shurnar'�, B, N,, 1I M. R,� L Ratajczak, Z,, WHIIiarns, J. W, Williarns, A, P, & Cairpeniter, S, R, (2020). Climate change, ecosysterns and abrupt change. Scifence priorities, Sdence,, 375 1794k, 20190105, 0105 Orge-Vorsatz, D,, III S, T_ Drjbwdi, N, K'., & Ler,(xq, IF- (2014), Measuring the cci,beriefits of (lirnale, change Iniligation, AmWd Re0ew ol Environrnerit and Resources, 39,549-582, https://diiai.org/ 10.1146/ininLirev-enviiron-031312-125456 Ultanfl. N, W. F., W[rawan, 1. G, P, Firn, J., Kelialkis-an, A. N, K,, Kusclyana, 1, P. G. A., Nicol, S., & Carwardine, J. (2020). Prioritizing rinanigernent strategies to achieve inultiple i-artcornes In a globally significallit Indonesian protected area, Cmtwrvoticm SfJen(e and Practice, 2(6), e1 o-7. https:Hdoi.�org/10,1111/csp2.157 Waldron, A,, Meriers, A, 0,, MHer, D, C., Nibbelink, N., Redding, D., Kuhn, r, S_ Roberts, J, 'l',, & (Jitl leinan,,, L, (2013), Ta,'vgeflng global conservation funding to Iii -nit imirnediate bicscfiversity declines. Page 31 of 58 �o q- 0 3 rD 0 rD 0 W 0 0 rD 0 0- fDn '< 0 03 2. CL S. 2. rD so C) N0 a) - 00 2 T CO w 4 2 rD > 00 ID as 7F 0 C rD U2 0 fD 3 rD rD n0 ET =r 'D rD r W a, 0 2: Z rD < 0 rj rD r,) n Y! o• 3 LA 3rD 0 ID (D3 = fD CL CL 0 14 of 14 CAMACLANG r I M, plw .1Ecological Wutions and tvidence ,. -------------. of Me Ncqiorpot Acodeuiy of 56encei of the Uni�ed 5tutes of AmMca, 110(29), 12144-12148. fittps://doi.org/10.1073/lDlia5. How to cite this article., Carnaclang, A. E., lyer, A., Liang, C., 1221370110 Giles, E., Frank, B,, Alanfl)o, K L, Laimoureux, J,, Match0t, S., SUPPORTING, IINIFORMATION Additional supporting information can be found oinbne in file Supporting Information section �at the end of this article, Appendix A, DM tables,. Appendix B. PTM detailed methods and adcfitionM reslLfts. Appendix C Carbon co,benefils c,)f manag.E.11-flent strategics. Wier, T'., Norris, D, R- Perron, M. A. C., Rurnney, R, H, M- Schueler, F. W., Tinuns, L, Paquette, C., Hemmirrig, V, S(dder, J., & Martin, T. G, (2025). NaWre reqUjres investment: Applying priarily threat managearient to support biodiversity and climate targets. EcMegkal SoWbons and Evi,dence, 6, 00141 fit tps://doLorg/10,1002/2688 - 8319,70143 Page 32 of 58 00 00 00 00 ul �0 3 rD 0 0 W 0 02 = D a rD 0 0- 3 N0 z M '< 0 0 CL rD so W C) N0 M - 00 Co fD U, ul 0' > 00 rD 7F 0 0 M rD ID CL 0 O rD r W W 0 2: D rD < rD pj n 0 3 3 0 ID 33 (D M CL O CL Written Submission • 1 would like to speak of regeneration, healing, of the subject lands. • Becoming a welcome species. How life begets life... becoming part of the healing team • Positive tipping points, biodiversity begets biodiversity • The importance of creating more of these safe havens for organisms, during these times of climate change and massive biodiversity loss. • Social norms, social contracts that help support collective action. • HNA is a beautiful example of this. Our video demonstrates this... Creating a culture of care, a culture of generosity. Chantal Stieler Page 33 of 58 From: Tom Clancy Sent: Friday, November 7, 2025 11:13 AM To: 'Tom Galloway' Cc: 'Frank Glew'; Joshua Shea <,Jlos° Lia.She a alkliti.cllhn(.�i,i c ir.r >; Andrew Pinnell arett Stevenson < (, airett.Ste eirisonj 'I klitcheir eir,ca> Subject: RE: HNA report Well said and well timed comments. I concur and endorse your comments as many future issues have been laid out for some time. These actions would enhance what is already utilized as an outstanding special open space within the city of Kitchener. Hopefully Activa concurs and works willingly with staff toward that result. Well done Tom. Tom c. From: Tom Galloway Sent: Friday, November 7, 2025 10:31 AM To: 6l1I(-,OLliiIII � ?Ikjtc neii ieir°.ca Cc: Tom Clancy; Frank Glew; Joshua Shea <Wtcshua.SLiekliftc� >; Andrew Pinnell < ir:(tir(�,,w.lPliirinellllll e.t lklitc;heirieir,.(-Ia>: Garett Stevenson <tw ai; ,°ett. ateveirisoiriCt lklit,c;l:eir'ieir.ca> Subject: HNA report I want to add my support to this report. As you know I have a long history with the HNA both as a school trustee and City Councillor. I am very pleased that another 10 critical acres is being added to the project. Back in the day we knew that certain lands needed to be purchased and certain lands would come through the development process as in this case. Thank you to staff for their efforts in securing these critical lands for the HNA. However, full land acquisition for the HNA is not yet complete. Three remaining parcels, I believe all in Activa ownership, need to be acquired through development processes currently underway. I anticipate there will be similar outcomes in these situations as in this current one. Tom Galloway Page 34 of 58 Staff Report l IKgc.;i' r� R Corporate Services Department www.kitchener.ca REPORT TO: Finance and Corporate Services Committee DATE OF MEETING: October 27, 2025 SUBMITTED BY: Dianna Saunderson, Manager, Council and Committee Services / Deputy Clerk, 519-904-1410 PREPARED BY: Dianna Saunderson, Manager, Council and Committee Services / Deputy Clerk, 519-904-1410 WARD(S) INVOLVED: N/A DATE OF REPORT: September 10, 2025 REPORT NO.: COR -2025-393 SUBJECT: 2026 Council and Committee Schedule RECOMMENDATION: That the 2026 Council and Committee Calendar, as attached as Appendix `A' to Corporate Services Department report COR -2024-459, be approved; and, That the Mayor in consultation with the Chief Administrative Officer and the Clerk will be delegated the authority to schedule additional Planning and Strategic Initiatives Committee (PSIC) meetings on Council meeting dates, where required, to address legislated Planning Act timelines; and further, That Council be permitted by resolution to reschedule meetings identified on the 2026 calendar where necessary. REPORT HIGHLIGHTS: • The purpose of this report is to establish the Council and Committee Schedule for 2026. • This report supports the delivery of core services. BACKGROUND: Each year, a schedule of Council and Standing Committee meetings is adopted. Meetings are scheduled on rotating Mondays and generally include a one-week recess between Standing Committee and Council. This break provides Council with additional time to consider agenda items and connect with constituents on matters of public interest while also providing an opportunity for staff to gather further information as requested by Committee. Where possible, the 2026 schedule also takes into consideration the Region of Waterloo's Council and Committee meetings. The schedule also considers factors that Council has historically taken into account when scheduling meetings, such as all Statutory Holidays, March Break, a summer break in July, conferences such as Federation of Canadian Municipalities (FCM), Association of Municipalities of Ontario (AMO) and Association of Municipal Clerks and Treasurers of Ontario (AMCTO). *** This information is available in accessible formats upon request. *** Please call 519-741-2345 or TTY 1-866-969-9994 for assistance. Page 35 of 58 REPORT: The proposed 2026 calendar, attached as Appendix `A', was developed based on the factors outlined above, and also incorporates the following list of Holidays, March Break, and municipal conferences: • New Year's Day: Thursday, January 1, 2026 • Family Day: Monday, February 16, 2026 • Good Friday: Friday, April 3, 2026 • Easter Monday: Monday, April 6, 2026 • Victoria Day: Monday, May 18, 2026 • Canada Day: Wednesday, July 1, 2026 • Civic Holiday: Monday, August 3, 2026 • Labour Day: Monday, September 7, 2026 • Thanksgiving Day: Monday, October 12, 2026 • Remembrance Day: Wednesday, November 11, 2026 • Christmas Day: Friday, December 25, 2026 • Boxing Day: Monday, December 28, 2026 (Observed) The calendar also takes feedback from City business units including Planning, Engineering, Procurement, and Financial Planning and Reporting. Additionally, the schedule and staff recommendation continue to take into consideration the timelines of Planning Act Bill 109, More Homes for Everyone Act, 2022 came into effect in April 2022. Bill 109 is a first step response to the Ontario Housing Affordability Task Force Report, which have the following approval requirements: Application Type Approval Requirement Zoning By-law Amendment Decision within 90 days Official Plan Amendment & Decision within 120 days Zoning By-law Amendment (combined) Finally, because 2026 is an election year, the schedule limits the number of meetings after Nomination Day in order to minimize exposure to restrictions on a Council as outlined in Section 275, Restricted Acts After Nomination Day, Municipal Act, 2001, but will still allow for one cycle of Standing Committee and Council meetings in order to attend to Council business. As in previous election years, no meetings will be scheduled for the month of October leading to Election Day. STRATEGIC PLAN ALIGNMENT: This report supports the delivery of core services. FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS: Capital Budget — The recommendation has no impact on the Capital Budget. Operating Budget — The recommendation has no impact on the Operating Budget. Page 36 of 58 COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT: INFORM — This report has been posted to the City's website with the agenda in advance of the council / committee meeting. PREVIOUS REPORTS/AUTHORITIES: There are no previous reports/authorities related to this matter. APPROVED BY: Victoria Raab, General Manager, Corporate Services ATTACHMENTS: Attachment A - Proposed 2025 Council and Standing Committee Schedule Page 37 of 58 JANUARY Mo Su Su Mo Tu We Th Fr Sa 5 2 1 2 5 2 3 4 7 6 7 8 9 10 11 C 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 SaC`. 27 28 29 30 31 APRIL Mo Su Mo Tu We Th Fr Sa 3 4 5 2 1 2 5 4 5 8 7 8 9 10 11 12 C 14 15 16 17 18 19 22 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 mmmmmmm Mml Su Mo I Tu I We Th I Fr I Sa 1 S 3 4 5 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 31 Su Mo I Tu I We Th I Fr I Sa 1 S 3 4 5 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 Z 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 E 27 28129 25 30 31 EDCOUNCIL] COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE HOLIDAYS / STATUTORY LIEU DAY ED ELECTION DAY MARCH BREAK (Mar16-20) AMO CONFERENCE (Aug 16-19) CITY OF KITCHENER 2026 MEETING SCHEDULE FEBRUARY Su Mo Tu We Th Fr Sa 1 S 3 4 5 6 7 8 !� 10 11 12 13 14 15 11 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 MAY Su Mo Tu We Th Fr Sa .■■■■■M 2 3 4 1 2 3 S 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 20 19 20 21 22 23 24 26 26 27 28 29 30 31 24 25 26 27 mmmmmmm ®wwww�� Mo Tu I We Th I Fr I Sa .■■■■■M 2 3 4 5 6 7 ©IMENEM 9 10 Z 12 13 14 15 1 mmmmm 18 19 20 21 Ommmm®® 23 24 25 26 27 28 ®©®m®mE 1 5"' 23 24 25 26 27 mmmmmmm Mml 30 Su Mo Tu I We Th I Fr I Sa 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Z 12 13 14 15 1 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 1 5"' 23 24 25 26 27 ❑$ COUNCIL / STRAT SESSION ISTANDING COMMITTEE 1:1INAUGERATION DAY FCM CONFERENCE (June 4-7) AC All Council Meeting (Region) MARCH Su Mo Tu We Th Fr Sa 1 C 3 4 5 6 7 8 ` 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 24 25 26 27 28 29 S61 31 19 20 21 22 Su Mo I Tu JUNE Th I Fr I Sa Su Mo Tu We Th Fr Sa 6 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 Mml 30 Su Mo I Tu I We Th I Fr I Sa ■■0©©0© 1 2 3 4 5 6 8 9 10 11 12 13 5 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 mmmmmmm 29 30 wwwwwww ■■0©©0© Mmmmmm® ® mmmmm mmmmmmm mmmmmmm COUNCIL / AUDIT COMMITTEE ❑AMCTO (Jun 7-10) Page 38 of 58 Staff Report Infrastructure Services Department www.kitchener.ca REPORT TO: Committee of the Whole DATE OF MEETING: November 10, 2025 SUBMITTED BY: Greg St. Louis, Director, Gas & Water Utilities, 519-783-8792 PREPARED BY: Khaled Abu-Eseifan, Manager, Gas Supply and Engineering, 519-783- 7953 WARD(S) INVOLVED: Ward(s) DATE OF REPORT: October 9, 2025 REPORT NO.: INS -2025-433 SUBJECT: Research Agreement with University of Waterloo RECOMMENDATION: That the Sponsored Research Agreement between University of Waterloo and City of Kitchener as proposed in report INS -2025-433 Attachment A be approved; and, That the General Manager Infrastructure Services be authorized to execute said agreement, to the satisfaction of the City Solicitor. REPORT HIGHLIGHTS: • The purpose of this report is to provide recommendation to approve a research agreement between University of Waterloo and City of Kitchener to create a digital twin model and study the condition of gas infrastructure. • The key finding of this report is that the research agreement with University of Waterloo would support Kitchener Utilities in understanding gas infrastructure requirements under different demand scenarios. It will also support condition assessment efforts to address gas aging infrastructure issues. • The financial implications are the total of two hundred thousand dollars ($200,000. CDN) in direct contributions over the period of four years plus a further three hundred thousand ($300,000 CDN) of in-kind support. • This report supports the delivery of core services. BACKGROUND: Over the last couple of years, Kitchener Utilities (KU) started investigating methodologies to assess gas infrastructure condition. Some of KU gas pipelines are reaching their design life and KU has limited tools to understand the conditions of these pipelines and plan for future replacement requirements. KU is also developing energy transition strategy which would impact customer growth and demands. This amplified the need for modeling tools to understand the impact of different future scenarios on the gas pressures and flows within the pipelines and the implications on the future of the distribution system. *** This information is available in accessible formats upon request. *** Please call 519-741-2345 or TTY 1-866-969-9994 for assistance. Page 39 of 58 KU has been discussing with the University of Waterloo Engineering and Math faculties about various areas of interest. They both agreed to sign a research agreement to fund and conduct research on some of these topics. This research agreement is first of its kind between the City and the University. Council approval through delegated authority is required to approve the agreement. REPORT: The Sponsored Research Agreement between University of Waterloo and City of Kitchener can be seen in Attachment A. The agreement defines deliverables in three research pillars: Research Pillar 1: Gas pipe network digital twin This research pillar is aimed at developing core simulation software capabilities to 1. build a digital twin of the city's pipe network, 2. simulate changes to the network under different growth scenarios, and 3. provide optimal sensor placement to develop predictive models. Research Pillar 2. Growth modelling and optimization This research pillar aims to model future gas demand under different scenarios of residential, commercial, and industrial development, and potential gas -electrical grid energy integration. Research Pillar 3. Maintenance assessment modelling This research pillar aims to investigate two critical areas: 1. investigate how to model corrosion in metal pipes and degradation in plastic pipes. The outcomes of these studies will inform future modelling activities to improve the simulation software in Pillar 1. and, 2. evaluate current data from sensors and other modalities for their predictive capacity and evaluate the potential of new and existing sensors for improving predictive capabilities. The research will be conducted by a minimum of three graduate or post doctoral students. The city will directly fund the project by two hundred thousand ($200,000 CDN) over four years period with additional three hundred thousand ($300,000 CDN) of in-kind contribution. The in-kind contributions represent staff time dedicated to the project over the period of four years. The University will match these funds through other government grants. The agreement in attachment A has been reviewed by the City's internal legal services. A delegated authority to the General Manager Infrastructure Services is required to approve the agreement. STRATEGIC PLAN ALIGNMENT: This report supports the delivery of core services. FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS: Capital Budget — The agreement impact natural gas capital budget by $50,000 annually for 4 years. The total impact is $200,000. Operating Budget — The agreement has no impact on the Operating Budget. The in-kind contributions representing staff time will be managed through efficiency and re -assignment of tasks. Page 40 of 58 COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT: INFORM — This report has been posted to the City's website with the agenda in advance of the council / committee meeting. PREVIOUS REPORTS/AUTHORITIES: There are no previous reports/authorities related to this matter. APPROVED BY: Denise McGoldrick, General Manager Infrastructure Services ATTACHMENTS: Attachment A — Sponsored Research Agreement SRA#105892 Page 41 of 58 SPONSORED RESEARCH AGREEMENT SRA#105892 Optimized infrastructure planning through simulation and Al driven gas pipe -network digital twin growth scenario prediction research program Between University of Waterloo Office of Research Research Partnerships 200 University Avenue West Waterloo, Ontario N2L 3G1 (hereinafter referred to as the "University") and City of Kitchener 200 King Street West, Kitchener, Ontario N2G 4G7 (hereinafter referred to as the "Client") WHEREAS the University and the Client wish to enter into this agreement to define the performance of the research as set forth in Schedule "A" and the terms and conditions for the Client's participation in the research as set forth in Schedule "A"; NOW THEREFORE in consideration of the premises and the mutual covenants, terms, conditions and agreements contained herein, and other good and valuable consideration, the sufficiency of which is hereby acknowledged, the parties hereto agree as follows: ARTICLE 1 — DEFINITIONS 1.1 "Agreement" means this Sponsored Research Agreement including all attached schedules, as the same may be supplemented, amended, restated or replaced in writing from time to time; 1.2 "Background Intellectual Property" means proprietary and/or Confidential Information of the University, the University Research Personnel and Students, or the Client which is disclosed to the other for the purpose of the Research Plan; 1.3 "Client Confidential Information" means Confidential Information of the Client which has been disclosed by the Client to the University, but not including the Research Results; 1.4 "Confidential Information" means the specific terms and conditions set forth in this Agreement, the Research Results, and any information, which is disclog6M%12 of 58 2 one party to the other party for the purpose of the Research Plan provided that tangible materials are clearly marked as "Confidential" and any information provided orally or visually is identified as confidential at the time of disclosure, but shall not include information that: (a) is or becomes generally available to the public other than as a result of any act by a receiving party to this Agreement; (b) is rightfully received from a third party without similar restriction or without breach of this Agreement; (c) a receiving party is able to demonstrate, in writing, was known to it on a non -confidential basis; or (d) was independently developed by a receiving party without the use of any of the Confidential Information. 1.5 "Creators" means any University Research Personnel and Students who make a creative contribution to the Research Results; 1.6 "Field of Use" has the meaning set forth in Section 7.3; 1.7 "Principal Investigator" has the meaning set forth in Section 2.2; 1.8 "Research Personnel and Student Agreement" has the meaning set forth in Section 2.3; 1.9 "Research Plan" has the meaning set forth in Section 2.1. 1.10 "Research Results" means the technical information, know-how, copyrights, models, specifications, prototypes or inventions, whether patentable or unpatentable, developed in performance of the Research Plan; 1.11 "University Research Personnel and Students" means University researchers, including, but not limited to, the Principal Investigator, students, post doctoral fellows, research associates, who participate in the Research Plan. ARTICLE 2 - OBJECTIVES 2.1 The University shall work with the Client to perform, or procure the performance of, the research plan as set forth in Schedule "A" (the "Research Plan") upon the terms and conditions hereinafter set forth. 2.2 The principal investigator(s) of the Research Plan shall be Professor David Del Rey Fernandez of the University's Department of Applied Mathematics (the "Principal Investigator"), and the Principal Investigator shall be responsible for the technical content of the Research Plan. 2.3 The University shall ensure that each University Research Personnel and Student shall sign a Research Personnel and Student Agreement as set forth in Schedule "B" prior to working on the Research Plan. 2.4 Notwithstanding Section 2.1 hereof, the Client and the University agree that until such time as all regulatory requirements have been obtained, inclus e U of 58 necessary approvals of any regulatory or research ethics board concerne , no 3 work requiring such regulatory or ethics approvals shall commence (excepting any preliminary preparations which are not restricted by such requirements). For greater certainty, any delay in obtaining such approvals shall not be considered a default or breach by either the Client or the University. 2.5 The Client and the University acknowledge that some research, particularly that in the natural sciences and engineering, may be subject to export control laws and regulations of Canada or the U.S. For example, transmitting the results of, or information about, certain research may require first obtaining an export permit or other authorization. Certain research may also be subject to regulation by the Controlled Goods Directorate (CGD) of Public Services and Procurement Canada (PSPC), in accordance with the Defence Production Act (DPA) and the Controlled Goods Regulations (CGR). Information may be obtained from the CGD Website at: https://www.tpsgc-pwgsc.gc.ca/pmc-cgp/index-eng.htmi. 2.6 The Client shall use reasonable efforts to determine whether or not the Research Plan contains or may result in, items subject to these laws and regulations mentioned in s. 2.5 above (a "Controlled Item"). In the event that a Controlled Item is identified in the Research Plan, then the Client and the University shall comply with all applicable Canadian and U.S. export control laws and regulations. In the event that the Client wishes to include a Controlled Item into the Research Plan at any time during the term of this Agreement, then the Client and the University agree as follows: (a) the Client shall promptly notify the University of the Controlled Item's classification prior to any shipment or transmission to the University; (b) the University may, at the University's sole discretion, accept or reject the delivery of the Controlled Item; and (c) in the event that the University rejects the delivery of the Controlled Item, such rejection by the University shall not constitute a breach of this Agreement. ARTICLE 3 - FEES 3.1 In consideration of the University carrying out the Research Plan, the Client shall pay the University the sum of two hundred thousand dollars ($200,000.00 CDN), which amount is inclusive of overhead expenses, a portion of which shall be for the purposes of hiring a minimum of three (3) graduate or post doctoral Students to carry out the Research Plan. In addition, the parties agree that the Client will provide a further three hundred thousand ($300,000 CDN) of in-kind support. 3.2 The sum stipulated in Section 3.1 shall be paid by the Client electronically or by cheque made payable to the University of Waterloo (Attn: Finance Department, ECS, 200 University Avenue West, Waterloo, Ontario N2L 3G1) within thirty (30) days of receipt of invoice(s) according to the following schedule: (a) $50,000.00 due upon execution of this agreement; (b) $50,000.00 due 1 September 2026; (c) $50,000.00 due 1 September 2027; Page 44 of 58 4 (d) $50,000.00 due 1 September 2028; 3.3 Invoices to the Client shall be sent by email to: City of Kitchener Accounts Payable: accountspayable(cDkitchener.ca 3.4 The Interest on overdue accounts may be charged at current bank rates on amounts not paid within thirty (30) days of submission of invoice. 3.5 The University shall not be obliged to perform any work beyond the Research Plan which would cause the aggregate costs to exceed the amount set forth in Section 3.1. ARTICLE 4 — RESEARCH RESULTS 4.1 The University, through the Principal Investigator, will provide the Client with any reports specified in Schedule "A", if applicable to the Research Plan. ARTICLE 5 - EQUIPMENT 5.1 Unless otherwise agreed upon by the Client and the University in writing, or specifically provided for pursuant to the terms of this Agreement, all equipment and materials purchased by or provided to the University for the carrying out of the Research Plan, shall be, and remain, the property of the University. ARTICLE 6 - CONFIDENTIALITY 6.1 All Confidential Information will remain the property of its owner or the party that furnished it as the case may be. 6.2 For a period of three (3) years from the date of disclosure of Confidential Information, the receiving party agrees to maintain in confidence all Confidential Information disclosed to it with the same degree of care as the receiving party normally takes to preserve its own confidential information of similar grade, but in any event, no less than a reasonable degree of care. 6.3 The receiving party may only disclose Confidential Information to persons with a "need to know" who shall be made aware of, and be required to observe and comply with the covenants and obligations contained herein, and the Confidential Information shall only be used for the purpose of the Research Plan. 6.4 A receiving party may disclose Confidential Information pursuant to the requirements of a government agency or pursuant to a court order, provided that the receiving party gives the disclosing party sufficient notice to enable it to seek an order limiting or precluding such disclosure. ARTICLE 7 - INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY 7.1 All aspects and parts of the Background Intellectual Property shall be exclusively owned by its owner and nothing herein shall serve to, or should be constr G3dg045 of 58 5 transfer any ownership rights whatsoever in the Background Intellectual Property. Such Background Intellectual Property may be used by the receiving party solely as required to perform that party's obligations in performing the Research Plan. The limited, non -transferable license granted herein will automatically terminate upon expiration or termination of this Agreement. Any further use of the Background Intellectual Property shall be on terms and conditions to be agreed upon in writing between the parties. Background Intellectual Property belonging to the University and the University Research Personnel and Students includes the items listed in Schedule "C". 7.2 All Research Results shall be owned by the University whereby the University will assign its interest in and to the Research Results to the Creator(s), subject to Sections 7.3 and 7.4 below. 7.3 The Creator(s) are required to promptly disclose the Research Results to the University and to the Client. The University hereby grants to the Client a fully paid- up, royalty -free, irrevocable, non-exclusive license to use the Research Results the following field of use: gas distribution system design, operations, and maintenance(the "Field of Use"). The Client acknowledges and agrees that a similar non-exclusive license will be granted by the University to the other NSERC Sponsors. 7.4 The University will specifically retain the perpetual and irrevocable right to use the Research Results for continued research and educational purposes without charge, fee, or royalties notwithstanding any other provision of this Agreement. 7.5 Nothing herein shall constrain the Client from selling or monetizing any new or more efficient processes it develops within the Field of Use where such developments are based in whole or in part on the research provided by the University or the Creator(s). ARTICLE 8 — PUBLICATION AND DISCLOSURE 8.1 The Client and the University agree that it is part of the University's function and policies to disseminate information and to make it available for the purpose of scholarship. The Client further acknowledges that some of the Client Confidential Information must be included in a publication, including but not limited to scholarly articles, in order for the University to give proper context to and meaningfully publish the Research Results. The University acknowledges that the Client has legal obligations under the Municipal Freedom of Information and Protection of Privacy Act and may be required by law to withhold certain information. 8.2 At any time during the term of this Agreement, the University will provide the Client with a draft copy of any proposed publication or disclosure of Research Results for its review at least sixty (60) days before submission for publication or disclosure. Upon the Client's written request, which shall be received by the University within the same sixty (60) day period, the University will: (a) work in good faith with the Client to ensure that only Client Confidential Information that is necessary for the University to meaningfully publish the Research Results shall be included in the final publication or disclosure, notwithstanding the University's obligation of Confidentiality as set forth in Section 6.2 above; or Page 46 of 58 6 (b) delay publication, subject to Section 8.3, up to a maximum of sixty (60) additional days for the purposes of filing for intellectual property protection on terms and conditions to be negotiated and agreed upon by the Client and the University. 8.3 Notwithstanding any other term or condition of this Agreement, the University retains the right to have any thesis reviewed and defended without delay for the sole purpose of academic evaluation in accordance with the University's established procedures. The Client may request, and the University shall not unreasonably deny, that a closed thesis defence is held and that the members of the thesis examination board, including the external examiner(s), be required to sign a non -disclosure agreement. ARTICLE 9 - INDEMNITY 9.1 Each party agrees to indemnify and save harmless the other party, its affiliates, elected officials, directors, officers, employees, agents, students and representatives from and against all claims, losses, damages or expenses of any kind (individually a "Claim" and collectively the "Claims") by any third party based upon, occasioned by, or attributed to actions, errors, omissions, or negligence of the indemnifying party and its directors, officers, employees, agents or representatives during the performance of this Agreement, except to the extent such Claim(s) are attributable to the negligence or wilful misconduct of the indemnified party. 9.2 In addition, the Client hereby agrees to indemnify the University, including its governors, directors, trustees, officers, researchers, employees, students, volunteers and agents against all Claims arising from the use by or through Client of the Research Results, and the design, production, manufacture, sale, use, lease, or promotion of any product, process, service or data developed by the Client, directly or indirectly, through use of the Research Results except (and subject to Section 10.3 below) to the extent such Claim(s) are attributable to the negligence, error or omission or misconduct of the University, including its governors, directors, trustees, officers, researchers, employees, students, volunteers and agents. 9.3 The indemnity in this Article 9 shall not affect or prejudice a party from exercising any other rights it may have under the law. ARTICLE 10 — REPRESENTATIONS AND WARRANTIES AND LIMITATION OF LIABILITY 10.1 Each party represents and warrants to the other party that it is duly organized, validly existing and in good standing, and it has the right and authority to enter this Agreement and do all acts and things as required or contemplated to be done, observed and performed by it hereunder. 10.2 The Client makes no warranty, express or implied, concerning the Client's Background Intellectual Property under this Agreement which are all provided "as is". THE CLIENT MAKES NO REPRESENTATIONS AND EXTENDS NO WARRANTIES OF ANY KIND, EITHER EXPRESS OR IMPLIED. THERE ARE NO EXPRESS OR IMPLIED WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE, OR THAT THE USE OF THE CLIENT'S BACKGROUND INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY WILL NOT INFRINGE ANY PATENT, COPYRIGHT, TRADEMARK OR OTHER PROPRIETARY R90 7 of 58 OF ANY THIRD PARTY. 10.3 The University, on behalf of itself and the Creators, makes no warranty, express or implied, concerning the Research Results under this Agreement, which are all provided "as is". THE UNIVERSITY MAKES NO REPRESENTATIONS AND EXTENDS NO WARRANTIES OF ANY KIND, EITHER EXPRESS OR IMPLIED. THERE ARE NO EXPRESS OR IMPLIED WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE, OR THAT THE USE OF THE RESEARCH RESULTS WILL NOT INFRINGE ANY PATENT, COPYRIGHT, TRADEMARK OR OTHER PROPRIETARY RIGHT OF ANY THIRD PARTY. FURTHER, CLIENT ACKNOWLEDGES AND AGREES THAT ANY RESEARCH RESULTS PROVIDED UNDER THIS AGREEMENT DOES NOT CONSTITUTE LEGAL OR HEALTH ADVICE OR ADVICE OF ANY OTHER REGULATED INDUSTRY NOR DO THE RESEARCH RESULTS CREATE A WARRANTY OF ANY KIND BY THE UNIVERSITY. CLIENT ACKNOWLEDGES AND AGREES THAT IT SHALL CONSULT AN APPROPRIATE PROFESSIONAL FOR SPECIFIC ADVICE TAILORED TO ITS SPECIFIC SITUATION. UNIVERSITY ACCEPTS NO LIABILITY WHATSOEVER FOR ANY LOSS OR DAMAGE CLIENT MAY INCUR THROUGH ITS RELIANCE UPON THE RESEARCH RESULTS TO SATISFY ANY LEGAL OR REGULATORY REQUIREMENTS. 10.4 NEITHER THE CLIENT NOR THE UNIVERSITY WILL BE LIABLE TO THE OTHER FOR ANY CONSEQUENTIAL DAMAGES, LOST PROFITS, LOST SAVINGS, LOSS OF ANTICIPATED REVENUE OR ANY EXEMPLARY, PUNITIVE, SPECIAL OR INDIRECT DAMAGES, EVEN IF ADVISED OF THE POSSIBILITY OF SUCH DAMAGES UNLESS (AND SUBJECT TO SECTION 10.3 HEREOF) CAUSED BY THE NEGLIGENCE OF THE INDEMNIFIED PARTY. ARTICLE 11 -INSURANCE 11.1 Each party shall obtain and maintain comprehensive general liability insurance and any other insurance that a prudent person would deem necessary, with at least a $5,000,000 per occurrence limit with respect to its operations. Such insurance shall contain provisions for cross -liability and severability of interest, and each party shall provide a certificate of insurance adding the other parties as additional insured as evidence of such coverage if requested by the other party with a 30 - day cancelation notice clause. 11.2 If, as an integral part of the Research Plan, a party, including its employees, agents and representatives, drives a vehicle onto the other party's property, then such party shall carry owned and/or non -owned automobile insurance with at least a $5 million per occurrence limit and the other party shall provide a certificate of insurance as evidence if requested by the other party. 11.3 It shall be the sole responsibility of each party to determine what additional insurance coverage, if any, is necessary and advisable for its own protection and/or to fulfill its obligations under this agreement. Any such additional insurance shall be obtained and maintained at the sole cost of the party. ARTICLE 12 — PERMITS AND LICENSES 12.1 For work to be carried out off the University's premises, the Client shall idenAfW48 of 58 8 permits, licenses or other required by any governing authority in relation to any of the work to be performed and agrees to obtain or to assist the University to obtain such permits, licenses or other. ARTICLE 13 — TERM & TERMINATION 13.1 This Agreement shall come into effect on September 1, 2025 (the "Effective Date"), and unless earlier terminated in accordance with the terms hereof, shall terminate August 31 2029. In the event that the Research Plan is funded in part by any federal or provincial agency or other government institution, the term of this Agreement shall, at a minimum, be equal in duration to the period of the agency award. Upon request the University shall forthwith provide to the Client duration of the period of such agency award. 13.2 This Agreement may be terminated by either party upon sixty (60) days written notice to the other party. Such termination will reflect in the termination of the Client's participation in the Research Plan, but not the termination of the Research Plan which shall continue with the other NSERC Sponsors. 13.3 Upon termination of this Agreement by either the Client or the University, the University will be reimbursed by the Client for all costs and non -cancellable commitments incurred by the University in the performance of the Research Plan, such reimbursement not to exceed the total estimated expenses set forth in Section 3.1. 13.4 Termination as set forth in this Article 13 shall not relieve any of the parties of any obligations accrued under this Agreement prior to the date of termination. Each of Articles 5 (Equipment), 6 (Confidentiality), 7 (Intellectual Property), 8 (Publication), 9 (Indemnity), 14 (General Provisions), Sections 10.2 and 10.3 (Disclaimer), 10.4 (Limitation of Liability), 13.3 (Reimbursement for expenses), and 13.4 (Survival) shall survive termination of this Agreement. ARTICLE 14 — GENERAL PROVISIONS 14.1 The Client shall not use the name, or any variation, adaptation, abbreviation, trademark or other, of the University, nor the name of any member of the University's staff or governors, in any publicity without the prior written approval of an authorized representative of the University. Subject to Section 14.2, the University will not use the name of the Client, or any variation, adaptation, abbreviation, trademark or other, nor the name of any employee of the Client, in any publicity without the prior written approval of the Client. 14.2 The University may at its own discretion provide a brief listing of this Research Plan as part of any public statement disclosing research taking place at the University. Such disclosure may include, but is not limited to, the title of the Research Plan, the name of the Client, the name of the Principal Investigator, and the amount of funding. 14.3 The parties are independent parties and nothing in this Agreement shall constitute either party as the employer, principal or partner of or joint venturer with the other party. Neither party has any authority to assume or create any obligation or liability, either express or implied, on behalf of the other. Page 49 of 58 14.4 Any notice pursuant to this Agreement shall be in writing and shall be given by hand delivery or sent by registered mail, courier, email or facsimile addressed to the other party at the address set out below or to such other person or address as the parties may from time -to -time designate in writing delivered pursuant to this notice provision. Any such notices, requests, demands or other communications shall be received and effective: (a) upon the date of delivery if delivered personally; or (b) on the date of receipt of confirmation by answer -back, in the case of mail, email or facsimile. University: Laura Grafton, Grants and Contracts Manager Research Partnerships University of Waterloo Office of Research 200 University Avenue West Waterloo, Ontario N2L 3G1 E-mail: Ilgrafton(a)-uwaterloo.ca with a CC to Or-contracts@uwaterloo.ca Client: Brad Kowaleski City of Kitchener 4th Floor, Procurement Services 200 King Street West, Kitchener, Ontario N2G 4G_ Brad. Kowaleski(@kitchener.ca 14.5 For this Agreement, neither the Client nor the University shall be liable to the other for any failure or delay in performance by circumstances beyond its control, including but not limited to, acts of God, fire, labour difficulties or governmental action. 14.6 Unless otherwise specified in this Agreement, this Agreement and the schedules attached hereto shall supersede all documents or agreements, whether written or oral, in respect of the subject matter thereof. For greater clarity, no direct or indirect separate arrangement, whether oral or written, with the Principal Investigator or other person, involving any component of the work to be performed, is permitted unless prior agreement, in writing, is given by the authorized signing authorities of the Client and the University. The Client acknowledges and agrees that the University provides no insurance coverage whatsoever to faculty members or other university persons who may provide direct or independent services relating to this Agreement. Page 50 of 58 10 14.7 The terms herein stipulated may not be modified in any way without the mutual consent of the Client and the University in writing given by their authorized signing authorities. 14.8 This Agreement shall not be assigned by either the Client or the University without the prior written consent of the other party, such consent not to be unreasonably withheld. The University and the Client shall not subcontract any work to be performed under this Agreement without the prior written consent of the federal or provincial agency or other government institution, as applicable, and the other party (such consent not to be unreasonably withheld). 14.9 In the event that a translation of this Agreement is prepared and signed by the Client and the University for the convenience of the Client, this English language version shall be the official version and shall govern if there is a conflict between the two. 14.10 This Agreement shall be governed by and construed in accordance with the laws of the Province of Ontario and the laws of Canada applicable therein. 14.11 This Agreement may be executed digitally, and/or electronically, and may be transmitted digitally, and/or electronically, in any number of counterparts, each of which upon execution and delivery shall be considered an original for all purposes; provided, however, all such counterparts shall, together, upon execution and delivery, constitute one and the same instrument. 14.12 The following appendices are attached to and form part of this Agreement: Schedule A — Research Plan Schedule B — Research Personnel and Student Agreement Schedule C — University Background Intellectual Property Page 51 of 58 m IN WITNESS WHEREOF the Client and the University hereto have executed this Agreement in a legally binding manner. UNIVERSITY OF WATERLOO Per: Name: Erin Windibank Title: Sr. Manager UWe have the authority to bind the corporation Date The City of Kitchener Per: Name: Title: INVe have the authority to bind the corporation Date Acknowledgment and Consent of Principal Investigator I, having read this Agreement, hereby agree to comply with all the terms and conditions contained herein and further agree to ensure that all University Research Personnel and Students who are involved in the Research Plan are informed of their obligations under the provisions of this Agreement and have acknowledged and consented by signature of a Research Personnel and Student Agreement (Schedule B). Date: David Del Rey Fernandez, Professor Page 52 of 58 12 SCHEDULE A RESEARCH PLAN Deliverables for optimized infrastructure planning through simulation and Al driven gas pipe -network digital twin growth scenario prediction research program Natural gas pipelines are critical infrastructure in municipalities, as residents use natural gas furnaces to provide domestic hot water and heating. To ensure reliable, accessible, and affordable gas supply, pipeline network upgrade and modification need to be carefully planned. On the one hand, dated pipelines should be upgraded in a timely and cost-effective manner to maintain a reliable gas supply to current customers and avoid costly infrastructure failures. On the other hand, new pipelines need to be laid to adapt to the change in population and its density in different neighbourhoods in a municipality, while maintaining adequate gas supply pressure in the entire network. Both pipeline upgrade and modification require significant investment from a municipality, but decisions are difficult to make. This results from uncertainties in real estate development, population change, local industry development, consumers' gas utilization patterns, and electrification (e.g., heat pumps), etc., which create further uncertainties in future gas demand. These uncertainties make the decision to upgrade and modify pipeline network very difficult without a full picture of all possible options. In such a complex decision-making situation with uncertainties, it is useful to implement mathematical and artificial intelligent tools to explore a wide range of options and provide useful decision-making metrics. Objective: The overall objective is to develop the mathematics, algorithms, software tools, and write reports to support data - driven decision making for gas pipeline network upgrade and modification. The software tools will provide simulation capabilities to predict, for example, maintenance costs, pipeline performance (e.g., pressure distribution) while accommodating the uncertainties in gas demands. The reports will provide analysis to drive decision making regarding, for example, growth scenarios, optimal placement of sensors, etc. This objective will be accomplished through three interdependent research pillars and deliverables described below, where research pillar one provides the mathematics, algorithms, and software to drive pillars two and three. Such research shall be conducted by a minimum of three (3) graduate or post doctoral students. Research Pillar 1: Gas pipe network digital twin This research pillar is aimed at developing core simulation software capabilities to 1) build a digital twin of the city's pipe network, 2) simulate changes to the network under different growth scenarios, and 3) provide optimal sensor placement to develop predictive models. Deliverable 1: Software for modular multi -fidelity physics -based simulation tool for gas pipe networks with data assimilation capabilities. This will be accomplished by developing simulation capabilities with different fidelity levels ranging from machine learning reduced -order modelling techniques, one-dimensional models, through three-dimensional models for pipe segments. To enable coupling of multi -fidelity models as well as rapid network modification, the various pipe segment models will be coupled using the port -Hamiltonian approach. Deliverable 2: Algorithms and software for optimal sensor placement. Research Pillar 2. Growth modelling and optimization This research pillar aims to model future gas demand under different scenarios of residential, commercial, and industrial development, and potential gas -electrical grid energy integration. Deliverable 3: Software to examine different growth scenarios. Deliverable 4: Technical report examining different growth scenarios and demand and their implication on infrastructure investment. Deliverable 5: Technical report on optimal placement of different sensors with similar cost and compare their utility. Page 53 of 58 13 Research Pillar 3. Maintenance assessment modelling This research pillar aims to investigate two critical areas: a) investigate how to model corrosion in metal pipes and degradation in plastic pipes. The outcomes of these studies will inform future modelling activities to improve the simulation software in Pillar 1. And, b) evaluate current data from sensors and other modalities for their predictive capacity, and evaluate the potential of new and existing sensors for improving predictive capabilities. Deliverable 6: Consolidate all existing data and documentation into a centralized database, and apply machine learning models to assess the predictive capability of the current information for pipe corrosion. Deliverable 7. Develop a numerical model, informed by laboratory experimental data, to asses the reliability of current resistivity measurements in evaluating the condition of pipe cathodic protection coatings. Deliverable 8: Technical report evaluating the effectiveness and cost -efficiency of available sensors for predicting metal pipe corrosion. Deliverable 9: Technical report that reviews and evaluates available sensors for assessing the degradation of plastic pipes, with a focus on the trade-off between cost and predictive effectiveness. Page 54 of 58 14 SCHEDULE B RESEARCH PERSONNEL AND STUDENT AGREEMENT WHEREAS the University of Waterloo and the Client are parties to a Sponsored Research Agreement number # 107616 to which this Research Personnel and Student Agreement is appended; and WHEREAS the undersigned is associated with the University of Waterloo and will be involved in the Research Plan defined by the Sponsored Research Agreement; NOW THEREFORE, in consideration of information and facilities made available to me in connection with my work in relation to the Research Plan and other valuable consideration, I agree that: 1. Defined Terms. All terms denoted with initial capital letters herein shall have the meanings ascribed to them in the Sponsored Research Agreement. 2. Reasonable Efforts. I will use all reasonable efforts to achieve the objectives and deliverables defined in the Article 2 of the Sponsored Research Agreement for those activities in which I am involved. 3. Research Results I will co-operate fully and in good faith in discussion and agreement with all conditions regarding Research Results as set forth in Article 7 of the Sponsored Research Agreement. 4. Confidential Information. In accordance with Article 6 of the Sponsored Research Agreement, I will keep confidential all of the Confidential Information that I may receive. 5. Publications. I will comply with all publication conditions that are set out in Article 8 of the Sponsored Research Agreement. 6. Ownership. I understand that ownership of and rights to any Research Results shall be determined in accordance with Article 7 of the Sponsored Research Agreement, as per Article 3(A) (third bullet) of the University of Waterloo Policy #73 (Intellectual Property Rights). 7. Invention Disclosure. I shall keep the University and the Principal Investigator fully and promptly informed on an on-going basis of the development of Research Results and shall not take any steps with respect to filing intellectual property protection for any Research Results without prior consultation with the University. 8. Cooperation in Patent Matters. I will cooperate fully in the signing of documents and taking such other steps as may be reasonably requested to obtain and maintain patent and other intellectual property protection for the Research Results relating to the Sponsored Research Agreement and in connection with any infringement action in any way relating to said Research Results, and I will Page 55 of 58 15 sign all documents and do all things necessary or proper to give effect to this Research Personnel and Student Agreement and any rights granted by the University under the Sponsored Research Agreement. 9. Acknowledgement. I have obtained or have been afforded the opportunity to obtain independent legal advice with respect to this Research Personnel and Student Agreement and all documents and transactions related thereto and I fully understand the nature and consequences of this Research Personnel and Student Agreement and all documents and transactions related thereto. By signing below, I indicate my acceptance of these terms. Personnel/Student's Signature Print Name Date Personnel/Student's Signature Print Name Date Personnel/Student's Signature Print Name Date Role in Research Plan (for statistical purposes only): ❑ Postdoc ❑ PhD Candidate ❑ Master's Student ❑ Undergraduate Student ❑ Other: Role in Research Plan (for statistical purposes only): ❑ Postdoc ❑ PhD Candidate ❑ Master's Student ❑ Undergraduate Student ❑ Other: Role in Research Plan (for statistical purposes only): ❑ Postdoc ❑ PhD Candidate ❑ Master's Student ❑ Undergraduate Student ❑ Other: Page 56 of 58 16 Personnel/Student's Signature Print Name Date Personnel/Student's Signature Print Name Date Personnel/Student's Signature Print Name Date Role in Research Plan (for statistical purposes only): ❑ Postdoc ❑ PhD Candidate ❑ Master's Student ❑ Undergraduate Student ❑ Other: Role in Research Plan (for statistical purposes only): ❑ Postdoc ❑ PhD Candidate ❑ Master's Student ❑ Undergraduate Student ❑ Other: Role in Research Plan (for statistical purposes only): ❑ Postdoc ❑ PhD Candidate ❑ Master's Student ❑ Undergraduate Student ❑ Other: Page 57 of 58 17 SCHEDULE C UNIVERSITY BACKGROUND INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY The background IP consists of a partial differential equations simulation framework, written in Julia, that can be run on multiple hardware systems including CPU and GPU clusters. Page 58 of 58