Multi-Barrier Protection of Drinking Water Systems in Ontario: A Comparison of First Nation and Non-First Nation Communities

Abstract

In some way or another, all levels of government in Canada and First Nations share responsibility to implement multi-barrier protection of drinking water. The goal is to protect water from source to tap to minimize risk so that people have access to adequate and safe drinking water. The federal government has committed to assist First Nations achieve comparable levels of service standards available to non-First Nation communities. However, several recent reports on the status of drinking water services standards in First Nations indicate that people in these communities often experience greater health risks than those living off reserves. Using the federal drinking water risk evaluation guidelines, the capacities of First Nations and nonFirst Nations in Ontario to implement multi-barrier protection of their drinking water systems are compared. The Risk Level Evaluation Guidelines for Water and Wastewater Treatment in First Nation Communities rank drinking water systems as low, medium, or high risk based on information about source water, system design, system operation, reporting, and operator expertise. The risk evaluation scores for First Nations drinking water systems were obtained from Aboriginal Affairs and Northern Development Canada. A survey based on the federal Risk Level Evaluation Guidelines was sent to non-First Nation communities throughout Ontario with 54 communities responding. The capacity among First Nations was variable throughout the province, whereas all of the municipalities were in the low risk category, even small and northern non-First Nation community water systems. It is clear that the financial and technological capacity issues should be addressed regardless of the legislative and regulatory regime that is established. The current governance and management structure does not appear to be significantly reducing the gap in service standards despite financial investment. Exploring social or other underlying determinants of risk may provide alternative solutions to the ongoing water crisis in many First Nations.

Source Water Protection Planning for Ontario First Nations Communities: Case Studies Identifying Challenges and Outcomes

“…Jurisdiction of reserve lands and resources is the responsibility of the Federal Government through the Department of Indigenous and Northern Affairs (INAC) and First Nations governments [8]. Management of water and wastewater in First Nations communities is addressed through policies and guidelines developed by Heath Canada, including drinking water quality guidelines, Environment Canada through wastewater regulations, and INAC through approvals of capital projects, including drinking water and wastewater treatment plants.…”

“…However, involvement by First Nations in the provincial process requires that the community, through a band resolution or a by-law agrees to comply with the provincial SWP planning process. Some First Nations see this approach as an abrogation of inherent and Treaty rights and therefore choose not to participate [8], while others are excluded as they are outside of regions covered by the provincial framework.…”

Closing the Gap: the need to consider perceptions about drinking water in rural Aboriginal communities in NSW, Australia

“…12 Despite financial and technological investment, the governance and management structures did not appear to significantly reduce the gap in service standards. Choices about drinking water consumption are governed by a complex set of factors related to sensory perception; risk perception; and economic, psychological and social issues, including media reports and marketing messages.…”

“…13 Walters and colleagues recommended exploring social or other underlying determinants of risk, such as community perceptions of the problem, to allow better mitigation of the risk. 12 …”

How does the media portray drinking water security in Indigenous communities in Canada? An analysis of Canadian newspaper coverage from 2000-2015

“…From this trend, it appeared that media coverage was prominent during and immediately after a water contamination event, but was not well covered before the event despite the chronic and on-going water security challenges in many communities. Further, despite the importance of preventative measures for safe drinking water, such as multi-barrier protection [82], or source water protection [5], these preventative measures were rarely reported in news articles. As such, news coverage focused more on responses and recovery rather than prevention and mitigation.…”