Aquatic Invasive Species Regulations Update

Summary#

The federal government has published a proposal to amend the Aquatic Invasive Species Regulations (AISR) under the Fisheries Act. The notice (published on November 1, 2025) would clear up legal gaps so regulators can explicitly allow certain non‑pesticide substances used together with pesticides, require authorization holders to follow directions on their permits, and let regulators amend, suspend or cancel authorizations. This is a proposal and not law; there is a public comment period of 30 days.

What it does#

• Explicitly allows regulators named in the AISR to authorize the deposit of substances that appear on a pesticide’s label when used with that pesticide. Examples named in the proposal include:
  • detoxifying or neutralizing agents (commonly called deactivating agents),
  • agents to remove taste and odours (e.g., activated charcoal),
  • reactants, and
  • utility modifier adjuvants.
• Makes it a requirement to follow any directions (conditions) written on an authorization. Failing to follow those directions would be an offence under the proposed changes.
• Gives regulators the power to amend, suspend or cancel an authorization they issued. It also allows for a simpler process for proponents to request changes instead of submitting a whole new application.
• Updates how two provincial ministers are described in the regulations (Manitoba and Alberta) so the wording won’t become outdated if minister titles change.

Who's affected#

• Department of Fisheries and Oceans (DFO) and the provincial/territorial regulators who issue AIS authorizations — they gain clearer powers.
• Applicants who ask for permission to use pesticides to control aquatic invasive species. Typical applicants are:
  • municipal, provincial or federal government bodies,
  • non‑profit conservation groups,
  • Indigenous groups and communities,
  • property owner associations, and
  • professional pesticide application companies.
• Health Canada’s Pest Management Regulatory Agency (PMRA) — its pesticide label requirements are a key reason for the change.
• Nearby communities, water users, and industries (e.g., fisheries, hydro, aquaculture) could be indirectly affected when authorized treatments occur.
• The proposal says many sectors were notified during consultation; it does not add new obligations on businesses but clarifies legal standing.

Why it matters#

• Legal certainty: regulators and project proponents currently allow the use of label‑recommended companion substances (like deactivating agents) but the regulations did not clearly say this was authorized. The change would remove that ambiguity and reduce legal risk for projects that use those companion substances.
• Public safety and environmental protection: making directions on authorizations enforceable and letting regulators amend or stop an authorization gives regulators tools to act if an approved project is not carried out as planned or if new risks appear.
• Efficiency: a streamlined process for minor changes to existing authorizations could save time for proponents and regulators compared with submitting a full new application.
• Consultation notes: Indigenous groups and other stakeholders generally understood and often supported the proposed fix, but some advised DFO to ensure meaningful engagement, local risk review, and transparency about decisions. The proposal says DFO will continue to consult Indigenous peoples as required.
• Scope and impact: the government expects few direct costs or new burdens. The amendments mainly formalize what is already happening in practice and are expected to have, at most, small positive environmental effects by enabling safe use of pesticides and their companion substances.