Canada Gazette, Part I, Volume 159, Number 44: Regulations Amending the Aquatic Invasive Species Regulations

November 1, 2025

Statutory authority
Fisheries Act

Sponsoring department
Department of Fisheries and Oceans

REGULATORY IMPACT ANALYSIS STATEMENT

(This statement is not part of the Regulations.)

Issues

The Aquatic Invasive Species Regulations (AISR) were made in 2015 to provide for, among other purposes, a clear and comprehensive power to authorize the deposit of deleterious substances to control aquatic invasive species (AIS) across Canada. Fisheries and Oceans Canada (DFO) has become aware of a few unintended gaps in the Regulations.

First, although the AISR enable regulators to authorize the deposit of pest control products (pesticides) to control AIS, they do not clearly enable regulators to authorize the deposit of other substances recommended or required to be used along with the pesticide according to the pesticide’s label, such as a deactivating agent. As a result of this gap, persons carrying out projects using pesticides to control AIS may not be in full compliance with the Fisheries Act when they deposit the deactivating agent or any other substance, even when they are undertaking the project in a manner consistent with their authorization issued under the AISR and the directions specified on the pesticide’s approved label.

Second, while the AISR include the authority for regulators to specify directions on authorizations to deposit deleterious substances to control AIS, they do not also indicate that authorization holders must follow them. Consequently, regulators may be constrained in their ability to pursue enforcement action against project proponents who do not follow directions specified on their authorizations.

Third, regulators lack the authority to amend, suspend or cancel a previously issued authorization, for example if new information should come to light prompting a need to change or stop a previously authorized project.

Background

Aquatic invasive species (AIS) are non-native organisms that pose a serious threat to Canada’s freshwater and marine ecosystems, negatively affecting our biodiversity, economy, and society. In some situations, to prevent the introduction or spread of AIS, it is necessary to undertake chemical control activities using pest control products (pesticides). Anyone wishing to use a pesticide to control an AIS must receive an authorization under the AISR, from either DFO, Parks Canada Agency, or the appropriate provincial or territorial regulator. Applicants for such authorizations are generally government organizations (e.g. municipal governments), non-governmental conservation groups, Indigenous groups or communities, property owner associations, and professional pesticide application companies working on behalf of these types of groups.

Health Canada’s Pest Management Regulatory Agency (PMRA) is responsible for pesticide regulation in Canada. The PMRA assesses the health and environmental risks of pesticides before products are registered or authorized for use in Canada, in accordance with the Pest Control Products Act (PCPA) and its regulations. This includes assessing potential impacts when products are used according to label directions. The PMRA-approved labelling of some pesticides identifies other substances, such as deactivating agents, agents to remove taste and odours, reactants, and utility modifier adjuvants, that must or may be used in conjunction with the pesticide to mitigate the impacts of the pesticide on the environment or to help ensure the pesticide performs as intended.

Proposals to deposit pesticides to control AIS are evaluated on a site-specific and application-specific basis. This includes evaluating whether the concurrent use of the deactivating agents or agents to remove taste and odours identified on the labels of the pesticide would be appropriate to mitigate potential impacts of the pesticide. For example, when rotenone-containing products are being considered for use in flowing water, it is necessary to use potassium permanganate to deactivate the rotenone that migrates downstream of the area being treated to prevent unintended negative impacts. It also includes evaluating whether the concurrent use of a reactant or utility modifier adjuvant is needed according to pesticide label directions for the pesticide to work optimally.

DFO has become aware that the AISR, as currently written, do not clearly give regulators the authority to authorize the deposit of other substances identified on the label of a pesticide being used to control AIS, such as deactivating agents, agents to remove taste and odours, reactants and utility modifier adjuvants. Section 21 of the AISR defines the classes of deleterious substances whose deposit into waterfootnote 1 may be authorized under sections 19 or 27 of the AISR. This includes, “pest control products that are registered, or whose use is authorized, under the [PCPA].” While the labels of pest control products registered under the PCPA may recommend the use of certain deactivating agents, agents to remove taste and odours, reactants and utility modifier adjuvants, these four types of substances themselves are not pest control products, and their inclusion on the labels of pest control products is not considered to constitute authorizing their use under the PCPA. Consequently, the deposit of these other substances risks contravening subsection 36(3) of the Fisheries Act, which prohibits the deposit of deleterious substancesfootnote 2 unless a regulation provides legal authority for such a deposit. Conversely, not using these other substances with the pesticide would, in some cases, contravene the PCPA, which prohibits use of a pest control product in a way that is inconsistent with the directions on its label. Despite the unintended gap in the AISR, regulators authorizing AIS treatments have allowed the deposit of these other substances along with the pesticides whose labels recommend their use because regulators are committed to minimizing unintended negative impacts of pesticide treatments needed to control AIS.

Deactivating agents are generally substances that are used to detoxify or neutralize a pesticide once it has been applied to a body of water, to convert the pest control product into a less toxic or a biologically inactive form.

Agents to remove taste and odours are substances that can be used to rapidly remove detectable taste and odour that may be present in water treated with certain pesticides. An example is activated charcoal.

Reactants are substances that are used in conjunction with a designated pest control formulation to generate a given biocidal active product.

Utility modifier adjuvants are substances that do not directly improve the efficacy of a pesticide but widen the conditions under which a pesticide is useful or maintain the integrity of the spray diluent. Examples of utility modifier adjuvants are buffering agents, antifoam agents, and compatibility agents when sold separately for in-tank mixing by the end user.

Authorizations issued under the AISR for the deposit of deleterious substances, including pesticides, to control or eradicate AIS typically specify directions (also referred to as conditions) to help ensure that the activity is carried out safely and effectively and as described in the application reviewed by regulators. While the AISR provide the authority for directions to be specified on authorizations, the AISR do not currently contain a provision explicitly stating that authorization holders must follow any directions specified on their authorization.

The AISR include a list of prescribed persons who may authorize the deposit of deleterious substances to control or eradicate AIS. This includes the Minister of Fisheries and Oceans, the Minister responsible for the Parks Canada Agency, and certain provincial and territorial ministers. Regulators under these federal, provincial and territorial ministers evaluate the applications and may be delegated responsibility for issuing the authorizations.

Objective

The first objective of the regulatory proposal is to eliminate the regulatory gap pertaining to a lack of clear authority for prescribed persons (regulators) to authorize the deposit of substances, such as deactivating agents, agents to remove taste and odours, reactants and utility modifier adjuvants, along with the pesticides whose labels recommend their use. The intended outcome is to eliminate the legal ambiguity regulators currently have about allowing the deposit of these substances as part of authorized pesticide treatment applications for the control of AIS, as well as any legal risk to the project proponents depositing these substances.

The second objective of the regulatory proposal is to increase the ability to take enforcement action in the event of non-compliance with directions specified on authorizations for the deposit of deleterious substances to control or eradicate AIS.

The third objective of the regulatory proposal is to allow regulators to amend, suspend or cancel an authorization to ensure regulators can change or stop a previously authorized project should the need arise. It is also intended to allow regulators to implement a simplified application process for project proponents to request amendments to previously issued authorizations.

Description

The proposed amendments would enable the persons prescribed under section 18 of the AISR to authorize the deposit of other substances identified on the labels of pest control products, when used in conjunction with such products. Such substances may include detoxifying or neutralizing agents (for simplicity collectively referred to as deactivating agents in this document), agents to remove taste and odours, reactants and utility modifier adjuvants.

The proposed amendments would require persons to whom a direction is given through an authorization issued under subsection 19(3) [i.e. an authorization to deposit a deleterious substance to prevent the introduction or spread of, or to control or eradicate, AIS] to follow the requirements specified in the direction. It would be an offence to not follow the directions.

The proposed amendments would enable the persons prescribed under section 18 to amend, suspend or cancel an authorization that they issued under subsection 19(3).

The proposed amendment would replace the reference to Manitoba’s Minister of Conservation and Water Stewardship, an outdated title for the provincial minister, with a description that is less likely to change, that being “for Manitoba, the provincial minister responsible for managing and controlling aquatic invasive species.” Similarly, it would replace the reference to Alberta’s Minister of Environment and Sustainable Resource Development with “for Alberta, the provincial minister responsible for managing and controlling aquatic invasive species.”

Regulatory development

Consultation

Consultations with federal departments and agencies

DFO initially consulted Health Canada’s PMRA, which regulates the pesticides authorized for the control of AIS, and the Environmental Assessment Division (EAD) and the National Guidelines and Standards Office (NGSO) of Environment and Climate Change Canada (ECCC), which develop guidelines and risk assessments for chemicals, on potential options to address the regulatory gap for other substances identified on pesticide labels. These groups are supportive of the proposed amendment to the AISR to address this gap.

In September 2023, DFO held an information session with representatives from the PMRA, ECCC, and the Parks Canada Agency to give federal partners advance notice of the upcoming public engagement activities planned in support of the proposed amendments to the AISR and to go over the amendments being proposed. Federal partners were supportive of the initiative and the PMRA contributed to the development of the consultation documents.

Federal representatives from ECCC, the PMRA, the Parks Canada Agency, Transport Canada (TC) and the Canada Border Services Agency (CBSA) attended an engagement session held in January 2024, which targeted provinces and territories. In March 2024, the Parks Canada Agency confirmed in writing to DFO that it fully supported the proposed amendments to the AISR. No concerns were raised by TC or CBSA representatives.

Consultations with provinces and territories

A number of federal, provincial and territorial ministers are listed as prescribed persons in the AISR and may authorize the deposit of deleterious substances under the AISR to control AIS within their jurisdictions. These regulators are also impacted by the regulatory gaps that this regulatory proposal aims to address.

DFO sought provincial and territorial partner feedback through the National Aquatic Invasive Species Committee (NAISC) under the Canadian Council of Fisheries and Aquaculture Ministers (CCFAM). DFO heard from several provincial representatives of the NAISC, including from British Columbia, Alberta, and Nova Scotia, on the importance of being able to authorize the deposit of not only the registered pesticide but also any recommended deactivating agents, agents to remove taste and odours, reactants and utility modifier adjuvants listed on the product label to ensure the effective and safe use of the product and to avoid unintended adverse effects on the environment.

DFO conducted engagement activities with representatives of all provinces and territories in January and February 2024, with the intention of proposing potential amendments to the AISR. At the January 2024 engagement session, DFO provided information on the potential targeted amendments to the AISR, responded to questions to provide clarity, and provided provincial and territorial representatives with the information necessary for individual jurisdictions to discuss the proposed changes internally. Provincial and territorial representatives had another opportunity to share feedback and to discuss the proposed changes through their designated NAISC representative at a session dedicated to the potential AISR amendments held during the annual meeting of NAISC in February 2024. During the meetings, provinces and territories that can issue authorizations under the AISR expressed support for the proposed amendments, and no opposition was expressed by the other provinces and territories. Further, four provincial governments (British Columbia, Manitoba, Ontario, and Newfoundland and Labrador) submitted written feedback in support of the potential amendments to the AISR.

Consultations with the public, including Indigenous Peoples

To identify potentially interested parties to notify and attempt to engage in the regulatory proposal, DFO used, as a starting point, a database assembled by DFO’s Engagement, Partnerships and Integrated Planning group. This evergreen list of contacts was developed and has been used over many years by DFO’s Fish and Fish Habitat Program to seek meaningful feedback from a wide variety of Canadians, including Indigenous Peoples, on a wide range of policies. This list of contacts was subsequently complemented by including any missing stakeholders and Indigenous Peoples known to have a specific interest in AIS-related issues. A total of 1 879 notifications were sent to Indigenous contacts, including national Indigenous organizations, other organizations, communities, governments or individuals; federal, provincial and territorial partners, municipal associations (e.g. the Federation of Canadian Municipalities); industry associations and crown corporations from the agriculture, aquaculture and fisheries, forestry, hydroelectricity, nuclear and oil, gas and energy sectors; and non-governmental organizations. A total of 796 notifications out of the 1 879 were sent to Indigenous Peoples.

DFO notified Indigenous Peoples, multi-interest holders and the public early and broadly of its intent to engage in potential amendments to the AISR. Notifications were done verbally through presentations given at existing federal, provincial and territorial working groups and committees and via emails sent in November 2023 to individuals and organizations from the broad list of national contacts described above.

On January 5, 2024, DFO posted information about the proposed amendments to the AISR on DFO’s Public Consultations and Consulting with Canadians website. All Canadians, including Indigenous Peoples, governmental partners, multi-interest holders and the public were invited to participate in the online engagement and provide feedback. On January 11, 2024, email notifications were sent to individuals and organizations from the broad list of national contacts to ensure that potentially interested parties knew where to find information about the proposed amendments to the AISR and to foster interest in the virtual engagement sessions. Two bilingual, virtual, national information sessions were advertised and held:

The public comment period was open until March 31, 2024. Comments could be sent by email or letter. A total of 18 submissions were received, with 8 of these being from Indigenous Peoples, 4 from multi-interest holders, and 6 from federal and provincial government representatives. The feedback received from governmental partners is summarized in the previous subsections.

Feedback received from Indigenous Peoples and multi-interest holders showed a general understanding and support for the potential amendments to the AISR. However, a number of concerns were raised and recommendations were made. One Indigenous organization expressed that they believed the duration of the engagement period was too short. Six submissions highlighted concerns and recommendations pertaining more to AIS chemical control authorizations in general rather than the proposed amendments. A significant portion of the comments focused on the management of pesticides in Canada, which falls under the mandate of Health Canada, and those concerns were shared with the PMRA for their information.

The feedback from Indigenous Peoples and multi-interest holders included the need for regulators to

This feedback was used to inform the regulatory process for the proposed amendments, and may inform future policies and guidance in support of the implementation of the AISR when applicable.

DFO will continue to collaborate with Health Canada’s PMRA as needed on establishing best practices regarding AIS pesticides and other substances referred to on the labels of pesticides. As is the current requirement, DFO will continue to consult with Indigenous Peoples whose potential or established Aboriginal or treaty rights may be affected by a specific project under review, and will consider Indigenous knowledge, as well as cultural practices or culturally significant species when evaluating project proposals that may be authorized. DFO will continue to ensure that suitable conditions of authorizations are imposed to mitigate environmental, human health or cultural impacts of projects authorized by the Department. DFO will ensure that proponents notify interested parties (e.g. municipalities, land owners) of proposed projects, of when an authorization has been issued for their projects, and of the timing of planned deposits, when and where applicable. DFO will also explore options for including information on authorizations that have been issued under subsection 19(3) of the AISR on the Fisheries Act registry.

As mentioned below in the “Implementation, compliance and enforcement, and service standards” section, DFO will outline the process to amend, suspend or cancel an authorization through a policy. The policy may include, to the extent appropriate, an overview of when modifications to an existing authorization may require consultation with Indigenous Peoples that may be affected by the proposed changes, or when proponent-led engagement with interested parties (e.g. municipalities, land owners) could be required.

More information on the feedback received during the January 5 to March 31, 2024, comment period and additional context on how DFO may respond are available in a What We Heard report published on DFO’s website.

Indigenous engagement, consultation and modern treaty obligations

DFO engaged with national Indigenous organizations and Indigenous groups nationwide to share information and to seek their views on the proposed regulatory amendments (refer to the “Consultation” section above). In addition, in February 2025, an information package about the proposed amendments was sent to contacts with Déline, Gwich’in, Inuvialuit, Sahtu Dene and Metis, and Tlicho modern treaty partners in the Northwest Territories, as well as the Nunavut Wildlife Management Board, Nunavut Impact Review Board, Kivalliq Wildlife Board, Nunavut Marine Council, Qikiqtaaluk Wildlife Board, Kitikmeot Regional Wildlife Board, and Nunavut Water Board. These Arctic region contacts were not included in the original group of 796 Indigenous contacts, and were therefore provided a separate opportunity to comment on the proposed amendments.

As required by the Cabinet Directive on the Federal Approach to Modern Treaty Implementation, an assessment of modern treaty implications was conducted for the proposed amendments to the AISR. The assessment concluded that there is a low risk that this proposal will impact the rights, interests, and/or self-government provisions of modern treaty partners. DFO will continue to respect the consultation obligations set out in modern treaties.

Instrument choice

With regards to the regulatory gap related to the deposit of other substances along with the pesticides whose labels identify their use, in the short term, a policy-based approach has been taken. Regulators are continuing to allow the deposit of these companion substances when necessary to ensure the pesticide treatment against AIS is executed as safely and effectively as possible, and to avoid situations of non-compliance with the PCPA. The federal government is using its discretion in enforcing compliance with the Fisheries Act regarding deposits of these other substances as part of authorized AIS control activities, provided the activities are being undertaken in accordance with approved authorizations, including directions from regulators that comply with the PCPA. While this may suffice in the short term, the approach herein offers the most appropriate longer-term solution to provide legal certainty.

For the amendments enabling the amending, suspending and cancelling of previously issued authorizations and increasing the enforceability of directions specified on authorizations, even though non-compliance has not been an issue, the status quo was considered an unacceptable option because Canadians expect regulators to have the power to stop and fully enforce any authorized chemical control activities.

Regulatory analysis

Benefits and costs

Baseline scenario

Regulators, by policy, allow the use of other substances identified on a pesticide’s label, where appropriate, to support the safe and effective use of the pesticide.

Authorization holders are advised and expected to follow the directions specified on their authorizations, and there is a high level of voluntary compliance. Non-compliance with certain directions specified on authorizations (e.g. applying the wrong quantity or concentration of the product, or using the wrong product) could lead to a potential charge for violating subsection 36(3) of the Fisheries Act, on the basis that the deposit that was undertaken was not in fact authorized and did not meet the exception set out in subsection 36(4) of the Fisheries Act. Currently, proponents of chemical control projects typically cooperate with regulators and non-compliance is rare.

Owing to the AISR’s silence on amending authorizations, DFO instructs project proponents to submit new, complete project proposals for review and reauthorization, regardless of the scope and magnitude of the changes being proposed.

Regulatory scenario

Regulators would be able to explicitly authorize the deposit of other substances along with the pesticides being used to control AIS.

Non-compliance with any direction specified on an authorization could lead to enforcement action for engaging in any activity contrary to the requirements specified in the direction.

Regulators would be able to amend, suspend or cancel a previously issued authorization, either at the request of the proponent or by their own action. Proponents of chemical control projects typically work cooperatively with the regulators authorizing them, so it is anticipated that the need to amend, suspend or cancel an authorization would mostly originate from a project proponent request rather than the government regulator. For example, project proponents may need to have their authorization amended, suspended or cancelled if they face unforeseen delays (as authorizations are typically only valid for a specific period) or challenges preventing the implementation of the planned project.

Incremental costs

Enabling regulators to authorize the deposit of other substances along with the pesticides whose labels identify their use is not anticipated to result in incremental costs to Canadians or businesses in Canada, since it does not impose new requirements on applicants or additional review of applications by the Government. It would not result in more applications for proponents to submit or regulators to review, as the proposed new authority is limited to allowing the deposit of these other substances only as part of projects to control AIS with pesticides, which already require regulator approval. Therefore, no additional administrative or incremental government costs are expected.

The amendment related to directions specified on authorizations does not impose new requirements on project proponents. Incremental government costs associated with overseeing approved projects are not anticipated. Given that non-compliance has not been an issue to date, the amendment is not expected to lead to increased government costs building prosecution cases against violators.

Government-initiated amendments, suspensions and cancellations are expected to be rare (the lack of authority for this has not posed a problem in the 10 years since the coming into force of the AISR) and are typically related to a risk to the environment warranting intervention (e.g. unexpected impacts to fish and fish habitat were determined after the authorization was granted). Such events may have cost impacts on project proponents but are unknown and unquantifiable at this time, as the scope of project changes cannot be predicted.

Incremental benefits

An advantage of the provision to amend authorizations is that DFO and other regulators would be able to implement a simplified process for project proponents to request amendments to their previously issued authorization. Allowing project proponents to submit project amendments rather than full project proposals could save time for both project proponents and the Government. No other discernible benefits have been identified.

Small business lens

Analysis under the small business lens concluded that the proposed amendments would not impact Canadian small businesses. The majority of project proponents are expected to be non-profit organizations and governments, and very few would be businesses. More importantly, the proposed amendments impose no new requirements on businesses in Canada, including the few who may apply for authorizations to deposit a deleterious substance to control AIS. The proposed amendments primarily bring legal certainty to what is already happening in respect of these authorizations (concurrent use of other substances recommended on a pesticide’s label for the pesticide treatment to be as safe and effective as possible; project proponents following directions of their authorizations; and authorized projects being amended, suspended or cancelled by project proponents, in collaboration with regulators).

One for one rule

The one-for-one rule does not apply, as no incremental administrative burden would be imposed on businesses.

Regulatory cooperation and alignment

The regulatory initiative is not related to a work plan or commitment under a formal regulatory cooperation forum. Regulators of the provinces of Nova Scotia, Ontario, Manitoba, Saskatchewan, Alberta and British Columbia, and from the Yukon Territory, are empowered under the AISR to authorize the deposit of deleterious substances for the control of AIS and are impacted by the gaps in the AISR. As described in the “Consultation” section, DFO consulted provinces and territories on the proposed amendments and confirmed their support, or lack of objection, for the proposed amendments.

The proposed amendments would align the AISR with the regulatory regime under the PCPA. Regulators would gain the legal authority to explicitly authorize the deposit of other substances required to be used along with a pesticide according to its approved label, to support compliance with the PCPA prohibition against using a pesticide in a way that is inconsistent with the directions on its label.

International obligations

The regulatory initiative is not anticipated to impact international trade or international obligations.

Effects on the environment

In accordance with the Cabinet Directive on Strategic Environmental and Economic Assessment (SEEA Directive), a preliminary scan was conducted, which concluded that a SEEA is not required.

While an objective of the regulatory amendments is to allow substances identified on pesticide labels to be deposited along with the pesticide being used to control AIS to support the safe and effective use of the pesticide, the magnitude of the positive impact of this amendment is limited. This is because regulators have been allowing the use of deactivating agents (and, to a lesser extent, agents to remove taste and odours and reactants) in good faith, as they have been following pesticide label recommendations and are committed to minimizing unintended negative impacts of pesticide treatments needed to control AIS. The regulatory amendment would bring legal certainty to these deposits and allow them to continue. For this reason, the regulatory amendments would have, at most, a small positive effect compared to the status quo. This regulatory amendment is not expected to cause negative environmental effects for this same reason — because it would not significantly change the current implementation of the AISR.

The labels of pesticides to control AIS currently identify four substances that would be covered by the proposed amendment:

  1. Potassium permanganate (KMnO4) [Chemical Abstracts Service Registry Number (CAS RN) 7722-64-7], deactivating agent
  2. Chlorine (CAS RN 7782-50-5), reactant (restricted application)
  3. Bentonite (CAS RN 1302-78-9), deactivating agent
  4. Activated charcoal (CAS RN 7440-44-0), agent to remove taste and odours

These four substances are included on the Canadian Environmental Protection Act, 1999 (CEPA) Domestic Substances List (DSL) and fall under CEPA’s regulatory framework. They have a well-documented hazard or risk profile. The hazard profiles of the four substances that are currently recommended on the labels of pest control products used to control AIS are well characterized, and their potential to cause ecological harm to aquatic organisms is considered low (i.e. bentonite and activated charcoal) or low when used as a deactivating agent to mitigate adverse effects from a high toxicity pest control product such as rotenone (i.e. potassium permanganate). As a reactant, chlorine is mixed with the registered pest control product prior to application. All pest control products requiring the use of chlorine as a reactant are restricted to application within industrial settings only (e.g. treating fire suppressing systems or water intakes), and releases of the pest control product within the receiving (i.e. natural) environment is not permitted under the label of the pest control product. No utility modifier adjuvants are currently recommended for use with pesticides to control AIS.

Gender-based analysis plus

No impacts based on gender and other identity factors have been identified for this proposal.

Implementation, compliance and enforcement, and service standards

The proposed regulatory amendments would come into force upon their registration.

No new government programs or stakeholder actions are needed to implement the changes related to authorizing the deposit of other substances identified on pesticide labels, ensuring the enforceability of directions specified on authorizations, or updating the titles of certain provincial ministers.

For the proposed new authority enabling regulators to amend, suspend and cancel previously issued authorizations, the primary reasons regulators would initiate an amendment, suspension or cancellation are anticipated to include the following:

Following final approval of the regulatory amendments, DFO will outline, in a policy, the process to amend, suspend or cancel an authorization. The policy will specify, for example, when proponents requesting to amend, suspend or cancel an authorization would be notified of the outcome of their requests. It will also establish a clear process to amend, suspend or cancel an authorization when initiated by the relevant minister. The policy may include, to the extent appropriate, an overview of when modifications to an existing authorization may require consultation with Indigenous Peoples that may be affected by the proposed changes, or when proponent-led engagement with interested parties (e.g. municipalities, land owners) could be required. Guidance for proponents seeking to amend, cancel or suspend their section 19 authorization will also be integrated into DFO’s section 19 guidance for applicants document, which is currently under development.

As the AISR are regulations made pursuant to the Fisheries Act, the penalty for contravening the proposed new AISR requirement to follow the directions specified on an authorization may include fines and imprisonment for repeat offenders. Under section 78 of the Fisheries Act, a person who contravenes the regulations may be liable for a fine up to $100,000 for a first offence punishable on summary conviction. Subsequent offences punishable on summary conviction may result in a fine of up to $100,000 or imprisonment for a term not exceeding one year, or both. For an indictable offence, the first offence may result in a fine of up to $500,000, and subsequent offences may result in a fine of up to $500,000 or imprisonment for a term not exceeding two years, or both.

Contact

Aquatic Invasive Species National Core Program
Biodiversity Management, Programs Sector
Fisheries and Oceans Canada
200 Kent Street
Ottawa, Ontario
K1A 0E6
Email: DFO.NationalAIS-EAENational.MPO@dfo-mpo.gc.ca

PROPOSED REGULATORY TEXT

Notice is given that the Governor in Council proposes to make the annexed Regulations Amending the Aquatic Invasive Species Regulations under paragraphs 34(2)(a) and 36(5)(a) and (f) and subsection 43(1)footnote a of the Fisheries Act footnote b.

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 Susan Roe, National Manager, Aquatic Invasive Species National Core Program, Department of Fisheries and Oceans, 200 Kent Street, Ottawa, Ontario K1A 0E6 (email: DFO.NationalAIS-EAENational.MPO@dfo-mpo.gc.ca).

Ottawa, October 24, 2025

Janna Rinaldi
Acting Assistant Clerk of the Privy Council

Regulations Amending the Aquatic Invasive Species Regulations

Amendments

1 (1) Paragraph 18(e) of the Aquatic Invasive Species Regulations footnote 3 is replaced by the following:

(2) Paragraph 18(h) of the Regulations is replaced by the following:

2 Section 19 of the Regulations is amended by adding the following after subsection (4):

Amendment, suspension or cancellation — authorization

(5) The Minister may amend, suspend or cancel an authorization that they issued under subsection (3).

3 Section 21 of the Regulations is amended by striking out “and” at the end of paragraph (a), by adding “and” at the end of paragraph (b) and by adding the following after paragraph (b):

4 The portion of subsection 30(1) of the Regulations before paragraph (a) is replaced by the following:

Requirements

30 (1) Every person to whom a direction is given under subsection 19(3), 22(2), 26(1) or 27(1)

Coming into Force

5 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.