OFA’s continuously updated policy hub on Alto HSR, calling for a suspension of the project and an independent agricultural impact assessment. Includes links to earlier letters and submissions.

Joint press release (Feb. 27, 2026) calling for an immediate suspension of Alto. Sets out demands on prime agricultural land avoidance, farm severance, drainage, crossing maintenance, and proportional compensation. Also references the Canadian Federation of Agriculture AGM resolution passed Feb. 25 and Beef Farmers of Ontario’s endorsement.

Resolution passed at the CFA Annual General Meeting on Feb. 25, 2026, urging the Government of Canada to immediately halt Alto to allow for a thorough economic, social, and environmental impact assessment and meaningful consultation with affected communities. Put forward by UPA and seconded by OFA. Full resolution text is included in the joint OFA/UPA press release.

BFO endorsed the OFA/UPA position and added a specific demand to include all actively farmed lands — pasture, hay ground, and grazing lands — in protections, not only lands classified as prime agricultural. Passed as a resolution at BFO’s 64th AGM, Feb. 18–19, 2026.

NFU-O states it cannot support the project in its current form without clear, enforceable protections for farmland, farmers, farm businesses, water systems, and affected Indigenous and rural communities, and calls for a pause on further planning. Sets out five areas of concern: farmland loss; inadequate consultation; environmental and ecological impacts; public-interest and affordability questions; and expropriation and democratic accountability — with explicit concern about Bill C-15 weakening ordinary safeguards.

Ontario Farmland Trust highlights serious implications for farmland from the Alto HSR project — including potential expropriation, fragmentation of farm parcels, disruption of local ecosystems, and broader impacts on regional food production. Calls on farmers and rural community members to participate in Alto’s public consultation.

Ontario’s largest non-profit fish and wildlife conservation organization — representing 100,000 members and 675 member clubs — states it “cannot support the proposed high-speed rail project.” Key findings: a 1,000 km continuous fenced corridor “will function as a complete ecological barrier… on a scale that cannot be addressed through conventional mitigation methods”; OFAH confirms that Alto representatives have stated crossings would be minimized, characterizing this as actively avoiding “the single most critical mitigation strategy available”; no field studies or baseline environmental data have been made available; and adequate mitigation would require crossing densities approaching ≤1 km in natural landscapes.

Trans Canada Trail confirms it is actively participating in Alto consultations and closely monitoring both corridor options, given that portions of the 28,000 km national trail network cross the study area. Raises concerns about continuity of the trail in the event of corridor selection.

The Rideau Trail Association Board has confirmed that letters will be sent to both Hike Ontario and the Ontario Trails Council, citing potential direct impacts on trails and the many likely negative environmental impacts of the project. Encourages individual members to participate in public hearings and meetings during the consultation period.

Formal motion passed March 26, 2026, formally opposing the ALTO southern route. The Cataraqui Trail is a 104-kilometre multi-use recreational trail connecting Smiths Falls to Strathcona, forming an integral component of the Trans Canada Trail. The motion notes that the proposed southern route coincides with the entire length of the trail and would cross it in multiple places — disrupting end-to-end connectivity, disturbing hydrological and ecological features, and requiring costly overpasses and underpasses. Resolves: (1) to formally oppose the southern route; and (2) to recommend that the Government of Canada direct ALTO to consider an alternative, higher-speed route.

Expresses deep concern about potential negative impacts on wildlife species and habitat in the corridor, with particular focus on the Napanee Limestone Plain — a globally rare alvar grassland and one of only two remaining breeding sites for the critically endangered eastern loggerhead shrike. Calls for more thorough environmental assessment before route selection.

Raises serious concerns about the environmental cost of a 1,000 km rail corridor, citing impacts on turtle habitat, wetlands, and the broader rural Ontario landscape. Argues that the project’s environmental footprint demands greater scrutiny before corridor selection.

Open letter from Dr. Cooke — Canada Research Professor in Fish Ecology & Conservation Physiology at Carleton University — and ecology colleagues, raising concerns about freshwater biodiversity, fish habitat, and aquatic ecosystem risks posed by the Alto corridor, particularly in Eastern Ontario.

RWLT notes that 17 of its 25 nature reserves lie within the proposed southern corridor. Argues that the Frontenac Arch cannot be fragmented without irreversible loss. Specific concerns include continuous safety fencing creating permanent wildlife barriers; impacts on Threatened Gray Ratsnakes; Cerulean Warbler breeding sensitivity; disruption of Rideau waterway headwater wetland complexes; and alteration of surface and groundwater drainage.

QUBS is deeply concerned about the potential environmental impacts of the southern Alto route on the Frontenac Arch Biosphere. The southern route would cut directly through QUBS lands and threaten federally and provincially supported long-term research, ecological monitoring programs, and land-based educational programming. QUBS highlights that its lands contribute to Canada’s 30×30 biodiversity conservation commitment; support the Frontenac Forest IBA, home to the nationally endangered Cerulean Warbler; and host over 1,100 peer-reviewed publications.

The KFN Conservation Committee brought forward a motion that the Board adopted: KFN opposes the ALTO high-speed rail project in all its proposed forms, citing environmental concerns. Communicated by the Chair of the KFN Conservation Committee in a letter dated March 11, 2026.

Formally opposes the ALTO high-speed rail project in both its proposed routes, due to multiple environmental concerns. Highlights in particular the extreme disruption in the Napanee Plain — a federally designated Key Biodiversity Area — and in the Frontenac Arch Biosphere. Also notes risk of fragmentation of over 3,000 acres of prime agricultural land in Lennox & Addington County.

Formally opposes the proposed southern route, which would bisect the UNESCO Frontenac Arch Biosphere and affect Sydenham Lake — the reservoir for the municipal water supply and a Source Water Protection Area. Argues the southern corridor would deliver no local transportation benefit while destroying community assets, and calls for the route and stop locations to be revisited. CC’d to the Prime Minister, Minister of Transport, Premier Ford, relevant MPs and MPPs, and the Mayors of Kingston and South Frontenac.

Raises concern about both proposed route options’ impacts on the Salmon River watershed, noting that neither geotechnical studies nor the UNESCO Frontenac Arch Biosphere designation were addressed in Alto’s proposal. Warns that even small disruptions to the interconnected headwater wetland system could cascade downstream. Supports improved rail service but calls for rigorous environmental assessment, more route detail, and longer consultation periods.

The LTC Board of Directors has passed a resolution stating that they are not in favour of the proposed southern route due to potential negative impacts to agricultural lands, environmentally sensitive lands, roads, and emergency services. LTC staff will share environmental data with ALTO and have been asked to consider the existing railway corridor, if demonstrated to be financially viable.

In a unanimous vote of all 20 Board members, Quinte Conservation does not support either the northern or southern Alto corridor. The Board cites its statutory responsibility to protect watershed integrity, noting that the northern route may impact more than 40 Quinte Conservation properties and the southern route more than 25. Calls on the federal government to enhance existing VIA Rail passenger service along established corridors.

The Corridor Train Alliance advocates for reliable regional passenger rail near the 401 corridor. CTA is concerned about the proposed project for the same reasons voiced by rural communities and considers it misguided in its current form. Their position: if a project is approved, it must include a stop in Kingston and must run along the 401 corridor for least impact. CTA argues that 300 km/h should not be the leading design criterion, and that least impact on farms and nature, and social acceptance, must be equal or greater criteria in route selection.

The EOWC — representing 103 communities across a 50,000 km² region — formally opposes the ALTO project in its current form. The resolution cites: only one proposed stop across the entire EOWC region; impacts on communities, infrastructure, agricultural lands, municipal trails, and environmentally sensitive areas; road closures imposing unknown ongoing municipal costs and impairing emergency response; and insufficient detailed information on land use and environmental effects. Calls on the federal government and ALTO to fully explore route options along existing infrastructure corridors, including VIA Rail and/or Highway 401.

Open letter signed by over 100 legal scholars, human rights experts, Indigenous leaders, and civil-society organizations urging parliamentarians to remove Part 5, Division 5 from Bill C-15. The provision would allow federal ministers to exempt any person, corporation, or government department from virtually any federal law — including environmental, labour, and Indigenous rights protections.

Human Rights Watch is a co-signatory on the parliamentary open letter. The letter characterizes Part 5, Division 5 of C-15 as a “constitutional abomination” enabling ministers to suspend laws protecting health, environment, Indigenous rights, privacy, and national security — with only the Criminal Code exempted. Calls for removal of the offending division before passage.