January to March 2026
Community Engagement
Community engagement for the Personal Watercraft Safety Plan took place between January and March 2026. The City gathered input from stakeholders and waterfront users directly affected by personal watercraft activity, including rental operators, boating and paddling organizations, marinas, swimming groups and other community organizations.
Engagement activities included:
- A public interactive thought exchange activity in February
- A full‑day stakeholder forum on February 28
- A two‑hour stakeholder “Closing the Loop” session on March 16
- Ongoing discussions with regulatory and enforcement partners
Download the stakeholder input summary report.
July to October 2025
Motorized Watercraft Exclusion Zone Pilot
The Toronto Port Authority, in coordination with the City and the Toronto Police Services Marine Unit, piloted a Motorized Watercraft Exclusion Zone (MWEZ) at Hanlan’s Point Beach during the 2025 boating season. The zone extended 200 metres from the shoreline along the west side of the Toronto Islands, providing a dedicated safe area for non-motorized watercraft such as kayaks, canoes and paddleboards. Community feedback on the pilot was gathered through an online survey to inform future planning.
Download the pilot survey summary report.
In addition to the survey submissions, the Toronto Port Authority received emails from community members providing feedback on the MWEZ pilot at Hanlan’s Point Beach. A summary of this feedback follows.
Feedback Summary
46 individuals’ responses were collected:
- 29 of the responses were against the exclusion zone (63 per cent)
- 11 of the responses were for the exclusion zone (24 per cent)
- 6 responses were indifferent/mixed (13 per cent)
The feedback collected showed a significant division among users of Hanlan’s Point. While some welcome reduced noise and improved conditions for swimmers, most respondents expressed concerns about safety, accessibility, and the approach taken to restrict boat access.
Arguments Given Against the Exclusion Zone
Safety Risks from Distance
- Anchoring 200 metres offshore forces vessels into deep, rougher water (20 to 30 feet), creating dangers for children, weaker swimmers and older individuals
- Emergencies become more hazardous due to increased distance from shore
Accessibility and Inclusion
- Many respondents said the restriction is discriminatory against families with children, seniors, people with disabilities and marginalized communities who rely on boats for access
- Boaters note irony that ferries/water taxis (motorized craft) are allowed while private motorboats are not
Legal and Jurisdictional Concerns
- Several respondents argued the restrictions are not authorized under the federal Vessel Operation Restriction Regulations (VORR)
- Claims that buoys and signage are “unauthorized and unenforceable”
Perceived Unfairness
- Responsible boaters feel punished for the actions of reckless jet skis and party boats
- Frustration that the blanket rules do not distinguish between respectful and disruptive users
Displacement Concerns
- Shifting 80 to 120 boats from Hanlan’s is expected to overcrowd Ward’s Beach and other anchorages
- Risk of simply moving noise and safety issues elsewhere
Lack of Consultation
- Concerns that meaningful consultation was limited and that groups like Friends of Hanlan’s do not represent the broader boating community
Suggested Alternatives
- Partial/sectional zones: dividing beach areas between boats and swimmers
- More buoys and ropes to mark swim zones
- Smaller area (e.g., 50 feet vs. 200 metres)
- Time-based restrictions (weekends only)
- Targeted bans (jet skis, rental party boats)
- Increased Marine Unit patrols and enforcement of existing noise and safety rules
Points Raised in Support of the Exclusion Zone
Noise Reduction
- Many respondents welcomed quieter conditions
- Fewer loud party boats and jet skis improved enjoyment
Swimmer Safety
- Support for clearer separation of swimmers and vessels, seen as safer
- Benefits cited for families, paddlers, kiteboarders and other non-motorized users
Expansion
- Supporters asked for similar zones, suggesting extending the pilot to all Toronto Island and mainland beaches
- Expressed belief that motorized exclusion is necessary in multiple high-use waterfront areas
Personal Testimonies of Support
- 38-year visitor and former beach business owner: Called it one of the best improvements at Hanlan’s, credited exclusion zone for much quieter, safer swimmer experience and urged it to continue indefinitely
- Kiteboarding community: Strong support, citing safety needs for swimmers/paddlers/kiteboarders; requested expansion, especially at Cherry Beach
- Residents and families: Reported safer, more relaxing beach experience without constant boat noise
- General supporters: Asked that the pilot be made permanent and better enforced with clearer buoys and signage
Mixed/Indifferent Views
- Acknowledgment of problems (noise, reckless boating), but questions if current approach is the best solution
- Some respondents questioned long-term enforceability
- Recognition that the pilot had good intentions, though many believe enforcement, not exclusion, is key
Conclusion
Public feedback reveals a clear divide between supporters and opponents:
- Supporters focus on reduced noise, enhanced swimmer safety and overall improved beach enjoyment. Many request permanent adoption and expansion.
- Opponents emphasize safety risks, accessibility barriers, legal validity, displacement concerns and lack of fair consultation.
However, there is strong consensus across both sides that:
- noise from boats is a problem
- reckless operators should be targeted more effectively
- better enforcement of existing rules is required, regardless of zoning decisions
