001-45_EJQR10_FALL26_PT - Flipbook - Page 20
liability and potential professional discipline if inadequate ESA
identi昀椀cation contributes to the application of incorrect standards or
non-compliant soil placement.
ESAs and why they matter
Ontario’s “Rules for Soil Management and Excess Soil Quality
Standards” identi昀椀es ESAs as areas provincially or municipally
recognized as natural features of heightened ecological signi昀椀cance.
These include protected natural heritage features identi昀椀ed through
provincial legislation, land use plans and municipal designations.
“Improper management of excess soil can negatively a昀昀ect ground or
surface water quality and/or quantity in natural areas and agricultural
lands,” according to the Ontario Ministry of the Environment,
Conservation and Parks (MECP) in its Handling Excess Soil guidance.
This is especially true in environmentally sensitive areas, where
ecological features and functions are more vulnerable to disturbance
and degradation.
For excess soil projects, the key consideration is not the speci昀椀c type
of ESA, but whether one is present at a reuse site. The presence of an ESA
can a昀昀ect soil quality requirements and project due diligence obligations
under the Excess Soil Framework. These designated features serve as vital
ecological lifelines. Misidentifying or overlooking ESAs creates signi昀椀cant
environmental and regulatory risks: depositing excess soil that fails to meet
the required ESQS for sensitive features—creating signi昀椀cant regulatory
compliance risks and detrimental impacts on sensitive ecological features.
Some ESA categories, like Area of Natural and Scienti昀椀c Interest (ANSIs),
are mapped in online databases and can be con昀椀rmed through desktop
screening. However, other categories remain challenging, due to unmapped
boundaries, evolving regulatory interpretation, and ecological dynamics.
Consider two examples: Species at Risk (SAR) habitat and wetland, both of
which can contribute to a reuse site being considered an ESA.
In terms of SAR, Ontario’s natural heritage system is under increasing
pressure from urban development and climate change. In response, the
regulatory framework, as well as the status, distribution, and habitat
requirements of SAR, continue to evolve and habitat identi昀椀cation often
requires more than screening datasets. While grid-mapping provides good
preliminary identi昀椀cation across a broad area, it requires con昀椀rmation for
E N V I RON M E N T J OURN A L QUA RT E RLY RE PORT • FA L L 2 02 6 • P AGE 2 0
