Canada Gazette, Part I, Volume 159, Number 39: Regulations Amending the Wildlife Area Regulations and the Environmental Violations Administrative Monetary Penalties Regulations

September 27, 2025

Statutory authorities
Canada Wildlife Act
Financial Administration Act
Environmental Violations Administrative Monetary Penalties Act

Sponsoring department
Department of the Environment

REGULATORY IMPACT ANALYSIS STATEMENT

(This statement is not part of the Regulations.)

Issues

The Wildlife Area Regulations (the Regulations) provide for a controlled fall hunt program for migratory game birds (the hunt program) at the Cap Tourmente National Wildlife Area (NWA) as a conservation measure to protect the area’s large American Bulrush marsh (the bulrush marsh) from intensive grazing by the Greater Snow Goose (GSG). Recent biological monitoring by the Department of the Environment (the Department) shows that the health of the bulrush marsh in the NWA is stable and no longer of concern. Therefore, the hunt program as a conservation measure is no longer ecologically justified.

A second issue is the entrance fees to the Cap Tourmente NWA. The Regulations set out the fees to be paid by visitors to enter the NWA and to obtain naturalist services, if desired. However, access to all other NWAs is free to encourage more Canadians to explore and experience nature. Of the Department’s protected areas, the Cap Tourmente NWA is the only one without free access, and charging an amount to enter the NWA is inconsistent with the Government of Canada’s commitments under both the Canada’s Nature Legacy initiative, which aims to increase opportunities for Canadians to connect with nature, and the Strategic Program Plan and Vision to 2030 of the Protected Areas Program, which aims to encourage Canadians to gain an appreciation for and participate in nature conservation.

Background

The Canada Wildlife Act (the Act) and its regulations allow for the establishment, management, and protection of NWAs for wildlife research, conservation, and interpretation purposes. There are currently 64 NWAs across Canada protecting over 3.5 million hectares (ha) of nationally significant habitats for animals or plants. The creation of NWAs using federal lands of high conservation value and the effective management of these NWAs serve to protect and conserve wildlife and wildlife habitats in Canada. The Department not only designates new NWAs but also undertakes periodic reviews of existing NWAs to optimize their management to more effectively protect and conserve wildlife and wildlife habitats in Canada.

The Cap Tourmente NWA spans 2 308 ha along the north shore of the St. Lawrence River, 50 km northeast of Québec City. It was created in 1978 to protect the bulrush marsh that it encompasses, which is an important migratory stopover for the GSG.

To protect the bulrush marsh from intensive grazing by the GSG, the hunt program was introduced in the NWA in 1972 and regulated as a conservation measure starting in 1981. Biological monitoring by the Department in the NWA in 2021 showed decreased grazing pressure on bulrushes because of the stabilization of the GSG population in the 2000s^{footnote 1} and a change in the behaviour of the GSG, which now mainly uses migration stopover sites outside the NWA. The monitoring results indicate that the Cap Tourmente NWA hunt program is no longer required as a conservation measure for the bulrush marsh.

Although no other NWA charged entrance fees, fees to enter the Cap Tourmente NWA were introduced in 1985 and regulated in 1995 to help fund operating costs because this NWA provided more visitor services than other NWAs.

In Budget 2018, the Government of Canada committed to supporting biodiversity and protecting species at risk in Canada through Canada’s Nature Legacy initiative, in part by expanding opportunities for Canadians to experience nature and appreciate biodiversity, ecosystems, and wildlife.

In addition, in 2023, the Department published the Strategic Program Plan and Vision to 2030 of the Protected Areas Program. One objective of this plan is to encourage Canadians to explore the protected areas network and enable more Canadians to learn about, visit, and enjoy the Department’s protected areas. In support of this objective, the plan states that the “Connecting Canadians to Nature” initiative will provide the public with more opportunities to connect with nature on federal lands.

Objective

The objectives of the proposed Regulations Amending the Wildlife Area Regulations and the Environmental Violations Administrative Monetary Penalties Regulations (the proposed amendments) would be to

1. continue to manage the Cap Tourmente NWA based on the best scientific information available; and
2. support the Government of Canada’s commitments to increase opportunities for Canadians to connect with nature and to encourage them to explore the network of protected areas.

Description

The proposed amendments would repeal the hunt program, entrance fees and incidental fees for naturalist services in the Cap Tourmente NWA by removing from the Regulations and the Environmental Violations Administrative Monetary Penalties Regulations all references to the program, entrance fees and incidental fees, and repealing the sections, schedules and/or provisions that refer to them.

The general prohibition on hunting, fishing or trapping set out in subsection 3(1) of the Regulations would apply to the entire NWA at all times. After the proposed repeal of the hunt program, subsection 3(1) of the Regulations would prohibit the hunting of any wildlife in the NWA except in accordance with a permit issued under section 4 of the Regulations.

Regulatory development

Consultation

The Department conducted consultations from November 16 to December 30, 2022, regarding the proposal to repeal the Cap Tourmente NWA hunt program and entrance fees. The proposal to repeal fees for naturalist services, underlying the proposal to repeal entrance fees, was not presented during the consultations. However, this underlying proposal is considered minor and unlikely to have any negative impact on users of the NWA, given that these services have been unavailable for a few years because of staff shortages.

The Department informed the partners and stakeholders affected by these proposals by email. Regarding the repeal of the hunt program, the Department reached out to 45 relevant partners and stakeholders in eight categories: Indigenous peoples and communities, hunting, conservation, education, provincial governments, municipal governments, local organizations, and scientific research. Regarding the repeal of entrance fees, the Department contacted 72 partners and stakeholders in nine categories: Indigenous peoples and communities, associations (hunting, fishing, and outfitting), conservation, education, provincial governments, municipal governments, local organizations, tourism, and tour operators.

Nine comments were received regarding the proposal to repeal the hunt program. Three of the nine comments were in favour of the proposal to repeal the hunt program, two were neutral and four were against. The negative comments came from organizations and stakeholders engaged in migratory game bird hunting.

The main reason given by one of the hunting organizations was that a public-private partnership between the Department and a private business might be possible, rather than repealing the hunt program. Other hunting organizations expressed a desire to see the hunting tradition continue and proposed that the hunt program be modernized rather than repealed to better reflect management requirements, particularly the protection of the bulrush marsh.

However, the hunt program is a conservation measure to protect the bulrush marsh from intensive grazing by the GSG and not a program for sport or services to the public. Under the Regulations, it would be inappropriate for the Department to continue the hunt program when existing conservation measures are sufficient to maintain the health of the bulrush marsh. Long-term monitoring of the bulrush marsh will make it possible to track its health and adapt management practices to protect and conserve habitats. Moreover, other areas and outfitters in the region are available for hunting.

The Department held consultations with four First Nations, two of which provided neutral comments, while the other two did not raise any specific concerns.

One of the First Nations that responded supported closing the migratory game bird hunt to non–First Nations hunters because the conservation objective to protect the bulrush marsh from intensive grazing by the GSG, which was the goal of the hunt program, had been achieved. However, this First Nation considered the Cap Tourmente NWA a place for its members to engage in traditional migratory bird hunting on the banks of the St. Lawrence River and requested that access to the location be maintained for members wishing to hunt there. The Department informed the First Nation that it would continue its earlier discussions with the First Nation regarding hunting by community members in the NWA.

Fifteen comments were received on the proposal to repeal entrance fees. Of these 15 comments, 12 were in favour of repealing entrance fees, 2 were neutral and 1 was against. The negative comment came from a local non-profit organization offering paid recreational and tourism activities in a nature park. The main reason given by this organization, which is funded in part by its visitor admission fees, was that free access to the NWA would result in competition for customers between the two locations. This organization also stated that it was in favour of a user-pays approach and that the NWA should charge a higher entrance fee than it currently does. However, the Department is considering repealing entrance fees to align the Cap Tourmente NWA with the rest of the NWA network and connect Canadians to nature by providing access to more visitors. Operating costs would be covered by the Department’s general operating budget.

Indigenous engagement, consultation and modern treaty obligations

An assessment of modern treaty implications (AMTI) and a United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples Act (the Declaration) consistency analysis were conducted to ensure that the proposed amendments were developed and would be implemented in a way that respects and complies with modern treaties, the rights of modern treaty partners, and the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples.

The proposed amendments would not apply to or take effect in any modern treaty area; therefore, the AMTI did not identify any modern treaty implications with respect to the proposed amendments.

The consistency analysis focused on the possible positive and negative impacts of the proposed amendments on the rights and interests protected by the Declaration. The analysis revealed impacts, including on decisions on rights asserted over lands, territories and resources, and rights to participate in decisions affecting those lands. The analysis noted that, in the Sioui decision, the Supreme Court of Canada confirmed the existence and validity of a historical treaty covering a territory that includes the lands of the Cap Tourmente NWA, under which a consultation protocol was established between Canada and the First Nation in question.

The Department carried out its consultation and cooperation process based on potential impacts identified under protocols defining the area covered by the rights impact assessment. It held consultations with four First Nations, two of which provided neutral comments, while the other two did not raise any specific concerns about the proposed amendments. The Department engaged in discussions with one of the First Nations, which supported closing the hunt in the NWA to non–First Nations hunters but considered the NWA a place for its members to engage in traditional migratory bird hunting on the banks of the St. Lawrence River. This First Nation requested that access to the location be maintained for members wishing to hunt there. The Department stated that it would continue discussions with the First Nation. In addition, the Department will continue its dialogue with relevant First Nations and other interested parties regarding possible future amendments to the NWA management plan. This dialogue regarding the management plan will ensure that all parties agree on the objectives of the NWA and the management measures and methods to achieve these objectives.

Since there is no opposition to the proposed amendments from the First Nations affected and no concerns regarding the discussions with the First Nation that wishes to continue hunting in the NWA, the proposed amendments are consistent with the Declaration.

Instrument choice

The Act grants the Governor in Council the authority to establish NWAs by regulation and enables the Minister to ensure that wildlife and habitats are conserved in these NWAs and to take measures to promote such conservation, subject to the Regulations and the applicable provisions of the Environmental Violations Administrative Monetary Penalties Regulations. The conditions applicable to specific NWAs may be amended only by regulation. Accordingly, no other instruments were considered.

Regulatory analysis

Benefits and costs

This analysis presents the incremental benefits and costs associated with the proposed amendments, expressed as the difference between the status quo, or baseline scenario, and the scenario in which the hunt program, entrance fees and fees for naturalist services in the Cap Tourmente NWA are repealed. An analytical period of 10 years was used. Unless otherwise indicated, all monetary values in this analysis are expressed in constant 2025 Canadian dollars, over the period from 2026 to 2035, discounted at a rate of 3%.

Most of the expected monetized impacts of the proposed amendments are distributional in nature, that is, they would result in equivalent changes in enjoyment (benefits and costs) throughout society, producing a net neutral outcome for Canadians. In other words, they would not generate any net benefits or costs.

Benefits

The proposed amendments to repeal the hunt program would reduce the operating and administrative costs associated with managing the program and would result in the reallocation of dedicated human resources to other NWA management operations. The main environmental benefits of repealing the hunt program would be decreased disturbance to the GSG during its migratory stopover and a more peaceful environment for visitors in the fall.

The proposed amendments to repeal the entrance fees would result in free access for the public. It is expected that free access could benefit a greater number of visitors than the average number of visitors to the NWA, including new visitors who would not otherwise visit the reserve if entrance fees were maintained. For example, the number of visitors jumped 41% above the average when fees were waived in 2017 for the 150th anniversary of Confederation, and 53% when fees were waived in 2021 during the COVID-19 pandemic. As a result, more Canadians would benefit from the well-being associated with being in nature and observing the natural environment in the NWA.

Visitors could save up to $310,000 annually, or up to $2.6 million over 10 years. This estimate is based on the highest current entrance fee of $6 per adult and the highest number of visitors between 2015 and 2023, excluding years with waived fees, which is approximately 52 000 visitors.

The personnel currently handling entrance fees at the NWA would be reallocated to visitor services and other operations related to the expected increase in visitor numbers. The government would also benefit from reduced administrative costs associated with the complex management of this NWA’s recurring operating deficit. Repealing the entrance fees would permanently align the Cap Tourmente NWA with the rest of the NWA network in terms of free access, which would contribute to the Government of Canada’s objective of encouraging more Canadians to explore nature. However, most of these impacts would be distributional in nature because the portion of the NWA’s management costs currently funded by entrance fees would simply be transferred as an additional financial burden to the Department. In other words, the monetary benefit to visitors of this NWA would be transferred in the form of costs to society as a whole.

The proposal to repeal fees for naturalist services is purely administrative, since these services have not been offered for several years. This measure would simplify the Regulations and the Environmental Violations Administrative Monetary Penalties Regulations.

Costs

Repealing the hunt program would eliminate opportunities for hunters who frequent this NWA and, in theory, their corresponding enjoyment. However, there are several alternatives elsewhere in the broader region for this type of hunting. Incremental costs could be associated with travelling longer distances to reach alternative destinations, but no loss of enjoyment is expected.

Increased numbers of visitors to the NWA could also reduce visitors’ enjoyment of their nature viewing experience and could place pressure on the Department’s human resources that are responsible for on-site visitor reception and services.

In addition, non-recurring initial costs of approximately $7,000 to replace signage and publicize the proposed amendments are also expected to be borne by the Government of Canada. No additional funding would be required because these expenditures are provided for in the departmental operating budget for NWAs.

The loss of revenue incurred by the NWA as a result of eliminating the existing entrance fees, which could amount to $310,000 annually or $2.7 million over 10 years, should be assumed by the Department. However, as mentioned in the “Benefits” section above, this additional financial burden on the Department would simply be transferred in the form of increased enjoyment for visitors to the NWA, as they would save on entrance fees.

In a conservative scenario, it could be assumed that other nature parks in the area that charge entrance fees, including non-profit organizations (NPOs), could experience a decrease in visitors, and therefore in revenue, due to increased competition resulting from free access to the NWA. These revenue losses could total up to $280,000 per year. However, given the distributional nature of these losses (visitors who decide to visit the NWA instead would save an amount equivalent to the losses incurred by these parks) and the very low probability that such a scenario would occur due to the low substitutability of experiences between the Cap Tourmente NWA and local parks that charge entrance fees, these potential costs are not included in the main cost-benefit analysis.

Table: Summary of monetized benefits and costs
Note: Data have been rounded.

Monetarized impacts	Total (present value)	Annualized value (not discounted)
Benefits: Canadians — Potential visitors	Up to $2.7 million	Up to $310,000
Costs: Government — Increased management costs incurred	Up to $2.7 million	Up to $310,000
Total (net monetized benefits or costs)	$0	$0

Small business lens

The proposed regulations do not impose any direct costs on small businesses. However, as mentioned in the “Costs” section, it is possible that a local park, that is, a small non-profit business, could lose visitors due to increased competition from other outdoor experiences and activities as a result of the NWA’s decision to eliminate entrance fees. Although this effect is expected to be limited due to the low substitutability between the experiences and activities offered at the two locations, an analysis from the perspective of small businesses was conducted on the basis of a conservative assumption in order to take potential impacts into account. The potential decrease in visitor numbers could lead to a reduction in revenue of up to $280,000 annually, or $2.4 million over 10 years.

One-for-one rule

The one-for-one rule does not apply to the proposed amendments, as there is no change in the administrative burden on businesses.

Regulatory cooperation and alignment

The proposed amendments are not related to a work plan or commitment under a formal regulatory cooperation forum. However, as the proposed amendments would protect and conserve wildlife and wildlife habitats in Canada, they would support commitments made by Canada under the United Nations Convention on Biological Diversity and the Kunming-Montreal Global Biodiversity Framework. Moreover, the proposed repeal of entrance fees would achieve the objective of aligning the Cap Tourmente NWA with the rest of the NWA network in Canada in terms of free access.

To achieve these commitments, the Department is working with the provinces and territories by, among other things, negotiating Nature Agreements to advance shared conservation goals. Nature Agreements between the federal and interested provincial and territorial governments will include clear and strong commitments to nature conservation and protection and mutually agreed upon actions and financial commitments that Canada and the province or territory will take to reach their individual and collective conservation goals.

International obligations

The proposed amendments do not affect obligations arising from Canada’s international trade agreements.

Effects on the environment

The responses to the questions from the preliminary review of the climate, nature and economy lens assessment indicate that the proposed amendments would not produce any significant effects related to climate change, biodiversity or the environment. The stabilization of the GSG population since the 2000s, and a change in behaviour of the GSG so that it now mainly uses migratory stopover sites outside the NWA, would suggest that the proposed amendments, particularly the repeal of the hunt program, would have a minimal effect on nature and biodiversity. A potential increase in visitor numbers as a result of free access could put pressure on migratory birds, other wildlife and wildlife habitats, as well as cause a slight change in greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions due to increased traffic to and within the NWA. However, the magnitude of this pressure, its residual effects and the increase in GHG emissions would likely be minimal, especially since the existing parking spaces in the NWA limit the number of daily visitors, and access is restricted when this limit is reached. As a result, no strategic environmental analysis has been undertaken.

In accordance with guidance under the Cabinet Directive on Strategic Environmental and Economic Assessment, this proposal’s strategic environmental and economic assessment did not include a strategic economic analysis due to the nature and scope of the proposed amendments.

Gender-based analysis plus

A gender-based analysis plus (GBA+) of the proposed amendments found no negative impacts related to gender or other identity factors.

Implementation, compliance and enforcement, and service standards

Implementation

The proposed amendments would come into force upon registration. The Department is the lead federal organization responsible for compliance promotion and enforcement activities according to the protections provided for under the Act and the Regulations.

Compliance and enforcement

A compliance strategy has been developed to support the implementation of the proposed amendments. Compliance promotion initiatives are proactive measures that encourage voluntary compliance with the legislation through education and outreach activities that raise awareness and understanding. Given that the proposed amendments would not impose any significant new requirements, compliance promotion and enforcement activities, including the prohibition on hunting, would be limited and would have a targeted focus. These activities may involve web content, social media, direct mail outs, signage, and responses to stakeholder inquiries.

The Act provides wildlife officers (designated under the Act) with various powers (for example inspection, right of passage, search and seizure, custody of things seized). Enforcement measures are available to wildlife officers (compliance orders, tickets, administrative monetary penalties [AMPs] and prosecutions) to secure compliance. The Designation of Regulatory Provisions for Purposes of Enforcement (Canada Wildlife Act) Regulations (the Designation Regulations) designate offences under the Act that subject an offender to minimum fines and increased maximum fines upon conviction by prosecution.

Enforcement activities are generally prioritized based on conservation risk to wildlife and wildlife habitats as well as the level of risk of non-compliance. In cases involving minor situations of non-compliance, a warning, compliance order, ticket or AMP may be appropriate. In cases involving a serious incident of non-compliance, prosecution may be the most appropriate recourse for enforcement purposes. In such cases, the fine regime described in the Designation Regulations would apply upon conviction and explain offences and punishments (penalties, fines and imprisonment) for offenders, whether they are individuals, small revenue corporations or other persons. Part I of Schedule I.2 to the Contraventions Regulations designates offences under the Regulations that can subject an offender to a fine. Division 1 of Part 2 of Schedule 1 to the Environmental Violations Administrative Monetary Penalties Regulations designates violations under the Act, and Division 2 designates violations under the Regulations, which can subject a violator to an AMP.

Contact

Caroline Ladanowski
Director
Wildlife Management and Regulatory Affairs Division
Canadian Wildlife Service
Department of the Environment
351 Saint-Joseph Boulevard, 13th Floor
Gatineau, Quebec
K1A 0H3
Email: ReglementsFaune-WildlifeRegulations@ec.gc.ca

PROPOSED REGULATORY TEXT

Notice is given that the Governor in Council proposes to make the annexed Regulations Amending the Wildlife Area Regulations and the Environmental Violations Administrative Monetary Penalties Regulations under section 12^{footnote a} of the Canada Wildlife Act ^{footnote b}, paragraph 19(1)(a)^{footnote c} of the Financial Administration Act ^{footnote d} and subsection 5(1) of the Environmental Violations Administrative Monetary Penalties Act ^{footnote e}.

Interested persons may make representations concerning the proposed Regulations within 30 days after the date of publication of this notice. They are strongly encouraged to use the online commenting feature that is available on the Canada Gazette website but if they use email, mail or any other means, the representations should cite the Canada Gazette, Part I, and the date of publication of this notice, and be sent to Caroline Ladanowski, Director, Wildlife Management and Regulatory Affairs Division, Canadian Wildlife Service, Department of the Environment, 351 Saint-Joseph Boulevard, 13th Floor, Gatineau, Quebec K1A 0H3 (email: ReglementsFaune-WildlifeRegulations@ec.gc.ca).

Ottawa, September 19, 2025

Janna Rinaldi
Acting Assistant Clerk of the Privy Council

Regulations Amending the Wildlife Area Regulations and the Environmental Violations Administrative Monetary Penalties Regulations

Canada Wildlife Act

Wildlife Area Regulations

1 The definitions adult, interpretation services, senior and student in section 2 of the Wildlife Area Regulations ^{footnote 2} are repealed.

2 (1) The portion of subsection 3(1) of the Regulations before paragraph (a) is replaced by the following:

3 (1) Subject to subsections 3.1(1) to (3) and sections 3.6 and 3.7, a person must not do any of the following in any wildlife area except in accordance with a permit issued under section 4:

(2) Subsection 3(2) of the Regulations is replaced by the following:

(2) A person must not, except in accordance with a permit issued under section 4, hunt or fish from outside the wildlife area for wildlife located in the wildlife area.

3 Subsection 3.1(4) of the Regulations is replaced by the following:

(4) For greater certainty, a permit issued under section 4 is not required for those activities.

4 Sections 8.1 to 8.3 of the Regulations are repealed.

5 Schedules II and III to the Regulations are repealed.

Environmental Violations Administrative Monetary Penalties Act

Environmental Violations Administrative Monetary Penalties Regulations

6 Items 39 to 43 of Division 2 of Part 2 of Schedule 1 to the Environmental Violations Administrative Monetary Penalties Regulations ^{footnote 3} are repealed.

Coming into Force

7 These Regulations come into force on the day on which they are registered.

Terms of use and Privacy notice

Terms of use

It is your responsibility to ensure that the comments you provide do not:

• contain personal information
• contain protected or classified information of the Government of Canada
• express or incite discrimination on the basis of race, sex, religion, sexual orientation or against any other group protected under the Canadian Human Rights Act or the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms
• contain hateful, defamatory, or obscene language
• contain threatening, violent, intimidating or harassing language
• contain language contrary to any federal, provincial or territorial laws of Canada
• constitute impersonation, advertising or spam
• encourage or incite any criminal activity
• contain external links
• contain a language other than English or French
• otherwise violate this notice

The federal institution managing the proposed regulatory change retains the right to review and remove personal information, hate speech, or other information deemed inappropriate for public posting as listed above.

Confidential Business Information should only be posted in the specific Confidential Business Information text box. In general, Confidential Business Information includes information that (i) is not publicly available, (ii) is treated in a confidential manner by the person to whose business the information relates, and (iii) has actual or potential economic value to the person or their competitors because it is not publicly available and whose disclosure would result in financial loss to the person or a material gain to their competitors. Comments that you provide in the Confidential Business Information section that satisfy this description will not be made publicly available. The federal institution managing the proposed regulatory change retains the right to post the comment publicly if it is not deemed to be Confidential Business Information.

Your comments will be posted on the Canada Gazette website for public review. However, you have the right to submit your comments anonymously. If you choose to remain anonymous, your comments will be made public and attributed to an anonymous individual. No other information about you will be made publicly available.

Comments will remain posted on the Canada Gazette website for at least 10 years.

Please note that communication by email is not secure, if the attachment you wish to send contains sensitive information, please contact the departmental email to discuss ways in which you can transmit sensitive information.

Privacy notice

The information you provide is collected under the authority of the Financial Administration Act, the Department of Public Works and Government Services Act, the Canada–United States–Mexico Agreement Implementation Act,and applicable regulators’ enabling statutes for the purpose of collecting comments related to the proposed regulatory changes. Your comments and documents are collected for the purpose of increasing transparency in the regulatory process and making Government more accessible to Canadians.

Personal information submitted is collected, used, disclosed, retained, and protected from unauthorized persons and/or agencies pursuant to the provisions of the Privacy Act and the Privacy Regulations. Individual names that are submitted will not be posted online but will be kept for contact if needed. The names of organizations that submit comments will be posted online.

Submitted information, including personal information, will be accessible to Public Services and Procurement Canada, who is responsible for the Canada Gazette webpage, and the federal institution managing the proposed regulatory change.

You have the right of access to and correction of your personal information. To seek access or correction of your personal information, contact the Access to Information and Privacy (ATIP) Office of the federal institution managing the proposed regulatory change.

You have the right to file a complaint to the Privacy Commission of Canada regarding any federal institution’s handling of your personal information.

The personal information provided is included in Personal Information Bank PSU 938 Outreach Activities. Individuals requesting access to their personal information under the Privacy Act should submit their request to the appropriate regulator with sufficient information for that federal institution to retrieve their personal information. For individuals who choose to submit comments anonymously, requests for their information may not be reasonably retrievable by the government institution.