11/11/2022 The Financial Benefits of WetlandsAuthored by Joanna Eyquem (Managing Director, Climate-Resilient Infrastructure) and Kathryn Bakos (Director, Climate Finance and Science, Intact Centre on Climate Adaptation) on November 11, 2022 Wetlands are not just “nice to have” – they provide services that are of direct financial benefit to our communities. These services include soaking up and storing water to reduce flood risk, helping to keep water flowing during times of drought, filtering our drinking water and reducing extreme heat in urban areas. When we lose wetlands, we also lose all of these services. However, this loss is not transparent since the financial value of wetlands does not routinely figure on our balance sheets. The good news, as outlined in the recent report Getting Nature on the Balance Sheet: Recognizing the Financial Value Provided by Natural Assets in a Changing Climate, is that over 90 local governments across Canada are working to identify and value services provided by natural assets, such as wetlands, including 27 local governments in Ontario. Work within these communities has focused on valuing services that local governments are responsible for, for example provision of clean drinking water and flood protection. So what are wetlands “worth”?
Economic valuation studies outline examples of significant, “hidden” financial benefits of wetlands, focused on specific community services. Water filtration In Southern Ontario, University of Waterloo researchers, Tariq Aziz and Philippe Van Cappellen found that wetlands provide an estimated $4.2 billion worth of water filtration services each year. If these services are lost, communities would need to treat the water by building and maintaining costly grey infrastructure solutions. Flood protection The report Combating Canada’s Rising Flood Costs: Natural infrastructure is an underutilized option demonstrated the significant value of flood protection provided by wetlands drawing on examples from across Canada. For a rural case study in Ontario (in the Credit River watershed), flood damages were 29% ($3.5 million) higher when headwater wetlands were assumed lost to agriculture. In an urban case study (Uptown Waterloo in the Laurel Creek watershed) estimated flood damages were 38% ($51 million) higher without the wetlands. These estimates were also noted as conservative. If wetlands are lost to urban development rather than agriculture, the increased runoff from impervious (waterproof) urban surfaces (such as buildings, roads and parking lots) is likely to further increase flood damages. You can find more details of each case study in the report When the Big Storms Hit. Carbon storage and sequestration As communities implement plans to reduce greenhouse emissions and reach net-zero, wetlands are again on our side. According to the Geological Survey of Canada, Canada’s wetlands hold almost 60 per cent of all the carbon stored in soils across the country. As an example at the local level, wetlands within the National Capital Region are estimated to provide climate regulation services to a value of $ 2.9 million per year. A parting thought Wetlands are essentially our front line allies in tackling climate change and biodiversity loss. Preserving these habitats is a cost-effective way to maintain services of financial value to our communities. It is more complex and costly to restore wetlands once they are lost, or to replace the essential services they provide with grey infrastructure. Authored by Lenore Fahrig, on November 10, 2022 Unlike large wetlands, most of Ontario's small wetlands currently have no protection, and Bill 23 would remove what little protection they do have. This is a big problem for Ontario's biodiversity. When a small wetland is drained or filled to build a home, a few plants, turtles, frogs, birds, and other wildlife lose their homes. When another small wetland is drained or filled to build another home, a few more plants, turtles, frogs, birds, and other wildlife lose their homes. While each lost small wetland by itself might not seem like a big deal, altogether the accumulated loss of small wetlands is a huge deal for Ontario's biodiversity. It's like this. Say someone steals $10,000 from you by removing $1,000 from your savings account every day for 10 days. The impact of that theft on your life would be just as big as if they stole the whole $10,000 all at once. It's the same, and worse, for wetland loss. Ten small wetlands together actually hold more biodiversity than a single large wetland that is the same size as the ten small ones put together. This means that the destruction of the ten small wetlands, one at a time, has an even bigger impact on wetland biodiversity than the destruction of the large one. In southern Ontario, we have already lost about three-quarters of the total wetland area that was here before European colonization. So, we have already lost three-quarters of the potential homes for wetland wildlife in southern Ontario. This is why in Ontario we have many threatened and endangered wetland species. And this is also why every remaining bit of wetland in Ontario, whether big or small, is precious to Ontario's wetland biodiversity. We can accommodate our growing human population by increasing housing density within the already-developed areas of towns and cities. However, the same option is not available to wetland species. In southern Ontario, to provide homes for wetland wildlife and prevent their extinction, we need to protect all remaining wetland areas. Despite this, Ontario law allows the destruction of most small wetlands, simply because they are small. The one category of small wetlands that can be protected under Ontario law is the small wetlands that form part of a larger group or "complex" of wetlands. But Bill 23 would remove even this protection for small wetlands in Ontario. This would place at even greater risk the plants, turtles, frogs, birds, and other wildlife who call these wetlands home. Want to know more about changes that would erase small wetlands? Read this blog
Authored by Autumn Watkinson, November 9 2022 Turtles can’t talk, but if they could, they would tell you that their livelihood in southern Ontario is hanging by a thread.
Under Bill 23, changes to Ontario’s Wetland Evaluation System (OWES) will make it harder for a wetland to be classified as Provincially Significant. Provincially Significant Wetlands are afforded protections to ensure that they are not developed or altered. Currently, the Special Features category under OWES considers a wetland’s value as habitat for threatened or endangered species … but changes to OWES under Bill 23 will remove this consideration, meaning still less protection for the province’s most vulnerable flora and fauna. Even with protections to species at risk habitat afforded under the Endangered Species Act, Ford’s government has granted thousands of permits allowing harm to species at risk and their habitats. Continuing to remove protection for species at risk and their habitats will only make it easier for critical habitat to be destroyed. Bill 23 would also see smaller wetlands that contribute to larger wetland complexes lose protection. Although small patches of habitat may not seem as important as larger areas of unfragmented habitat, recent studies have shown that a group of small habitat patches can host as many or more species than a large patch. As more and more smaller habitat patches are destroyed, the connectivity of larger wetland complexes will also be lost. These smaller patches become islands, isolated from the larger mainland, surrounding by a sea of human activities. For species at risk, this might mean that movement between habitat patches is no longer possible or that they will have to traverse a dangerous, anthropogenic landscape to reach their destination. Without being able to move between wetlands, species are more vulnerable because they cannot escape any adverse changes that may occur in their home wetland. And by traversing longer distances between wetlands, species increasingly encounter roads, which are the leading cause of morality for turtles and other herpetofauna. Both scenarios further increase threats of these already extremely vulnerable species. Ford’s government has already demonstrated they do not consider the cumulative affects their actions have on species at risk. Since 2007, Blanding’s turtles have been impacted by 1,403 individual approvals for harmful activities, with no regard for the cumulative impact this would have on the species. Under Ford’s government, we’ve already lost habitat protection for many species at risk and there is no long term plan to improve the overall state of species at risk in the province. Further negative changes could be so detrimental that we lose some of these species forever. Turtles can’t talk, but if they could, they would tell you that their livelihood in southern Ontario is hanging by a thread. Please speak up for Ontario’s species at risk and take action to #SaveOntarioWetlands!
|