Protected Areas and the Tourism Economy



ALTO HSR · Environment · Tourism & Economy

The Southern Corridor Isn’t Just an Environmental Question — It’s an Economic One

Canada’s protected areas generate $10.9 billion in GDP annually. The Frontenac Arch Biosphere is one of those assets — and there is a calculable cost to degrading it.

Independent research by the ALTO HSR Citizen Research Initiative
April 2026
Drawing on CPAWS (2026), Statistics Canada, and international HSR research

Section 1 — The Numbers
Protected areas are economic infrastructure, not just ecological assets

The CPAWS white paper Widely Enjoyed but Inadequately Valued (February 2026, peer-reviewed by the C.D. Howe Institute and Simon Fraser University) provides the most comprehensive analysis to date of Canada’s protected areas as economic infrastructure. These are empirically measured returns from assets that require ecological integrity to function.

$10.9B
GDP Contribution
From Canada’s protected areas (2023–24)
$3.62
Return per $1
In visitor spending per dollar invested
150K
Jobs Supported
By Canada’s protected areas nationally
$1.4B
Tax Revenue
Returned to governments annually

Protected areas play an outsized role in rural economies, contributing up to 1.6% of rural GDP nationally. Tax revenues from protected areas grew 250% over 15 years — outpacing the 50% growth in public investment. Canada’s protected areas also store the equivalent of emissions from 57.8 billion cars annually, worth $51.1 trillion in avoided global economic damages (CPAWS, 2026).

The missing calculation. The CPAWS methodology provides a framework for valuing the economic cost of degrading a protected area. That calculation has not been done for the Frontenac Arch Biosphere. The Prime Minister’s Expert Taskforce on Natural Capital Accounting, announced March 31, 2026, is mandated to formalise exactly this kind of valuation. ALTO’s financial model — which contains no natural capital accounting — cannot be considered complete until this methodology is applied.

Section 2 — The Landscape at Stake
The Frontenac Arch Biosphere supports a $1.8 billion regional tourism economy

The Frontenac Arch is an ancient granite ridge connecting the Canadian Shield to the Adirondack Mountains — the only continuous north-south forest corridor in eastern North America. It is home to the highest diversity of reptiles, amphibians, and invertebrates of any national park region in Canada, and holds three formally designated Key Biodiversity Areas (Thousand Islands, Charleston Lake, Frontenac Forests), with the Napanee Limestone Plain proposed as a fourth.

The communities within and around the Biosphere — South Frontenac, Rideau Lakes, Stone Mills, and the broader Frontenac County and Leeds & Grenville areas — support a tourism economy built on what the landscape is: quiet, ecologically intact, dark-sky landscapes. Visitors come to cycle the Cataraqui Trail, paddle the Rideau Lakes, explore Charleston Lake and Frontenac Provincial Parks, and stay in the B&Bs, heritage inns, and agri-tourism operations that depend on these assets.

That character is the economic product. It cannot coexist with a permanently fenced, 300 km/h rail corridor that bisects the landscape, fragments habitat, closes trails, and imposes a decade of construction disruption through the communities it passes.

Section 3 — Government Policy · March 31, 2026
A Force of Nature: Canada’s Strategy to Protect Nature
The Prime Minister’s own nature strategy requires what communities have been asking for

PM Announcement — March 31, 2026 — Three weeks before the consultation closes

On March 31, 2026, Prime Minister Carney committed $3.8 billion and binding government policy to the following — all directly relevant to the southern corridor:

  • Strengthen the protection and recovery of species at risk across Canada to identify priority habitats — the southern corridor crosses confirmed critical habitat for more than a dozen SARA-listed species.
  • Leverage regional assessments under the Impact Assessment Act “to proactively address the effects of development on a region before project reviews” — the precise procedural protection communities have requested from ALTO.
  • Avoid and minimise environmental impacts using the mitigation hierarchy — a framework requiring demonstration that all less-harmful alternatives have been genuinely assessed before the most damaging option proceeds.
  • Implement comprehensive mapping of Key Biodiversity Areas — three designated KBAs lie within the Frontenac Arch; a fourth is pending at the Napanee Limestone Plain.
  • Launch an Expert Taskforce on Natural Capital Accounting in spring 2026 to integrate the value of nature into government decision-making — ALTO’s financial model contains no such accounting.
  • Commit to 30×30: protect 30% of Canada’s lands and waters by 2030 — the southern corridor crosses thousands of hectares already contributing to this commitment.
The internal contradiction. Bill C-15 grants the Minister of Transport authority to exempt ALTO from IAA environmental review. A Force of Nature commits the government to using those same IAA regional assessment powers before project reviews. Both cannot apply to the southern corridor simultaneously. The government must reconcile them publicly before April 24, 2026.

Sources: pm.gc.ca announcement  ·  Full strategy PDF

Section 4 — The Tunnel Effect
Stations create tourism. Tracks do not.

International research on HSR and tourism consistently identifies a critical distinction: HSR benefits accrue to communities with stations, not to the landscapes the train passes through. Research on Spanish HSR found that cities with stations saw measurable tourism increases, while communities the train passed through without stopping saw negligible or negative effects as competing destinations became easier to reach. China’s experience shows that HSR promotes tourism in node cities while non-station communities may lose market share.

The southern corridor has no planned station in the Frontenac Arch region. The effect would be to make Ottawa, Peterborough, and Toronto more accessible to each other — potentially drawing visitors away from rural southeastern Ontario — while imposing all construction and operational costs on the communities the line passes through.

MP Scott Reid has confirmed in writing that either HSR corridor option is likely to lead to lower VIA Rail ridership and service cuts through southeastern Ontario. VIA currently provides the region’s primary rail link for visitors arriving without a car. For destinations whose tourism brand is built on environmental responsibility, losing this low-carbon access mode compounds the damage.

Section 5 — Construction & Operational Impacts
Three categories of harm to a tourism economy built on landscape character
Construction phase — 10+ years
A decade of disruption to the region’s most valued assets

The Cataraqui Trail — a 104 km segment of the Trans-Canada Trail used for cycling, hiking, and cross-country skiing — runs directly through the proposed corridor. Trail closures would eliminate itinerary-based cycling tourism and the network of B&Bs, outfitters, and cafés that depend on trail traffic. ALTO has acknowledged its intent to utilise existing corridor infrastructure to reduce land acquisition costs. Dozens of grade separations would require extended closures on secondary roads that are often the only access to farms, cottages, and agri-tourism operations. Noise, dust, and night lighting are fundamentally incompatible with a tourism product built on quiet and dark skies.

Permanent operational impacts
A fenced barrier through the landscape — forever

A 300 km/h rail line requires continuous fencing across its entire length. Unlike a highway, there are no pedestrian or cyclist crossings. The ecological corridors that define the Frontenac Arch depend on species movement. A permanent barrier fragments habitat, isolates populations of endangered species (Blanding’s Turtles, Grey Ratsnakes, Cerulean Warblers), and reduces the wildlife encounters that drive ecotourism. Loss of ecological integrity could trigger review of the UNESCO Biosphere designation itself — with reputational consequences extending well beyond the physical corridor footprint.

The carbon paradox
ALTO promotes a “green” project that would destroy a carbon sink to build it

ALTO’s entire environmental case rests on replacing car and air travel with electrified rail. That case is contradicted by routing through the Frontenac Arch. The Biosphere’s intact peatlands, wetlands, and forests function as active carbon storage systems. Fragmenting them converts stored carbon to released carbon, while simultaneously destroying habitat Canada has committed to protect under the Kunming-Montreal Global Biodiversity Framework. A project cannot credibly claim to be green infrastructure while destroying irreplaceable ecological infrastructure to build it.

Section 6 — Community Response
Municipal Opposition — on the record
Five councils and two MPs oppose the corridor; the Biosphere Network was not consulted

Every township council along the proposed southern corridor that has voted on the issue has voted against it: South Frontenac Township (unanimous, citing “generational devastation”), Rideau Lakes Township (unanimous), Stone Mills Township (unanimous, calling on ALTO to “remove rural municipal lands from consideration where communities will experience disruption without service benefit”), Tyendinaga Township, and Belleville City Council.

MP Shelby Kramp-Neuman (Hastings–Lennox & Addington–Tyendinaga) formally opposes both routes. MP Scott Reid (Lanark–Frontenac) has stated the project “should be killed” and is sponsoring a House of Commons petition. The Frontenac Arch Biosphere Network has confirmed it was not consulted by ALTO during initial corridor planning — a significant gap given UNESCO’s expectations for infrastructure decisions within biosphere reserves.

What We’re Asking For
Six pre-decision requirements before any corridor can be selected
1

Commission a Tourism Economic Impact Assessment

ALTO’s socioeconomic assessments have focused on productivity gains for corridor cities. A dedicated study is required to quantify what construction and permanent operations would cost the rural tourism economy of the Frontenac Arch — using the CPAWS methodology ($3.62 return per $1 invested) to establish the full opportunity cost of degrading this protected area.

2

Apply natural capital accounting to ALTO’s financial model

The Environmental Assessment must include a protected-area economic valuation. The Prime Minister’s Expert Taskforce on Natural Capital Accounting (spring 2026) is mandated to formalise this methodology. Corridor selection must not outrun the Taskforce’s work.

3

Confirm that SARA Section 79 notification has occurred

The obligation to notify the competent minister is triggered by current knowledge of likely species and critical habitat impacts — not by the formal start of the environmental assessment. ALTO must confirm and disclose whether this notification has been filed. ALTO’s CEO confirmed on CBC March 25, 2026 that species surveys commenced “this week” — one month before the consultation closes.

4

Engage Parks Canada, ECCC, and the Frontenac Arch Biosphere Network formally

Parks Canada and ECCC must be formally engaged on the implications for the Rideau Canal UNESCO World Heritage Site and the Frontenac Arch Biosphere Reserve. The Biosphere Network, which was not consulted during initial corridor planning, must be designated a formal consultation stakeholder.

5

Confirm binding pre-conditions including Trail continuity and VIA Rail services

Pre-conditions must include: continuity of the Trans-Canada Trail (Cataraqui Trail section); wildlife crossing infrastructure through the Frontenac Arch at intervals supporting species movement; and formal assessment of VIA Rail service impacts through southeastern Ontario before route selection is finalised.

6

Publicly reconcile Bill C-15 with A Force of Nature

The Minister of Transport and the Minister of Environment must jointly confirm, before April 24, whether the IAA regional assessment commitment in A Force of Nature will apply to the ALTO southern corridor — or whether Bill C-15 exemption powers will be used instead. Both cannot apply simultaneously. Communities are entitled to know which governs.

Bottom Line
The Frontenac Arch generates real economic returns. Degrading it has a calculable cost. The government’s own nature strategy now requires that calculation to be done.

Canada’s protected areas generate $10.9 billion in GDP and return $3.62 for every $1 invested. The Frontenac Arch Biosphere is one of those assets — a rural economy built on ecological integrity, UNESCO recognition, and the character of a quiet, nature-based destination.

International research is consistent: HSR benefits accrue to station communities. The southern corridor has no planned station in the Frontenac Arch region. Communities would bear all construction and operational costs with none of the connectivity benefits.

On March 31, 2026, the Prime Minister committed to regional IAA assessments before project reviews, KBA mapping, and natural capital accounting. The ALTO southern corridor process has not met any of these commitments.

The CPAWS methodology and the government’s own Expert Taskforce on Natural Capital Accounting provide the tools. The calculation has not been done for the Frontenac Arch. It must be — before corridor selection is finalised.

The public consultation deadline is April 24, 2026. Written submissions — specific, factual, and addressed to the issues above — create a formal record that is harder to dismiss than general opposition.

Submit to ALTO’s consultation — Deadline April 24, 2026

Sources
1CPAWS (2026). Widely Enjoyed but Inadequately Valued. Peer-reviewed by C.D. Howe Institute & SFU. cpaws.org
6UNESCO — Frontenac Arch Biosphere Reserve designation profile
8Albalate et al. (2017); Chen & Haynes (2015); Delaplace et al. (2014). HSR tourism effects: tunnel effect, station vs. non-station communities.
9Mosgrove & Beacher (2025). Asset mapping for sustainable tourism, Frontenac Arch. Tourism Geographies.
10MP Scott Reid (2026). Let’s Stop Alto! — scottreid.ca · VIA Rail displacement risk correspondence.
11MP Shelby Kramp-Neuman statement, February 25, 2026: opposition to both routes. Napanee Today
12South Frontenac, Rideau Lakes, Stone Mills, Tyendinaga, Belleville: unanimous council opposition motions, February 2026.

Submitted as part of the ALTO HSR public consultation process. All sources are documented. Research facilitated with AI tools with human review and revision. Consultation closes April 24, 2026.