The information below is a brief summary of some of the concerns about the Alto project held by the QFN executive. While public open houses have wrapped up, the window for public participation has been extended to April 24, 2026. We encourage you to make responses and to write to your MP and MPP.

Background

The proposed high speed rail line is to run about 1000 km between Toronto and Quebec City with trains travelling at up to 300m km/h on “mainly electrified tracks.” There will be stations at Toronto, Peterborough, Ottawa, Laval, Montreal, Trois-Rivières and Quebec City. It will be a public-private partnership between a consortium of several national and international firms known as Cadence and Alto, a crown corporation. Construction on the Ottawa-Montreal section is scheduled to begin around 2029-30. Phase 1 is projected to open around 2035-38, with completion of the entire line extending to 2041-44.

Concerns

As identified by Ontario Nature, there are many issues surrounding the project, not least of which are the cost and the strain on the provincial electrical grid. The ecological risks affecting sensitive species include:

• habitat fragmentation due to the required fencing for the track,
• direct mortality (mortality increases with increasing speed), 
• sensory disturbances (high frequency noise and vibration). 

Northern vs Southern Route

Assuming the high-speed line will be built, QFN’s greatest concern is the choice between two proposed routes — it’s an either/or question. At Norwood (east of Peterborough), rails will either continue parallel to highway 7 or loop south through rural Hastings, Lennox and Addington, and Frontenac counties to rejoin the northern route east of Perth. A bit of an after-thought, Alto has suggested that the southern route would offer an easier/cheaper construction alternative to the northern route. Regardless, cutting a 60-meter-wide swath through either region is devastating for the environment and agriculture. 

Adopting the northern route would cut through the part of the Canadian Shield known as the Land Between — ecologically intact Canadian Shield landscapes with forests, wetlands and lakes subject to localized but still considerable ecological fragmentation. 

Adopting the southern route would cut through a completely different physiographic region, the St. Lawrence – Great Lakes Lowlands characterized by significantly more agricultural land. A fenced 60-metre-wide track in this area would lead to farmland loss, farm severance, disruption to drainage systems and difficult access to fields. Ecologically the southern area is a mosaic of small woodlots, hedgerows, riparian strips and wetlands both seasonal and permanent, as evidenced by our members who live in Hastings County. These are necessary as movement corridors and breeding areas for many species such as deer, fox, coyote, turtles, and amphibians. These, and areas such as the Salmon River Alvar, are already under ecological stress from development. Adding to this stress does not seem wise.

Mitigation

In their recent presentation, Ontario Nature recommended the following mitigation measures if construction were to go forward: 

• Elevated Sections: Constructing the rail line on a continuous viaduct in key areas like the Southern Frontenac “pinch point” would eliminate the barrier effect of at-grade fencing, allowing for uninterrupted wildlife movement and preserving the hydrological integrity of wetland complexes below the tracks.

• Wildlife Crossing Structures: To counteract the barrier created by mandatory safety fencing, a high-density and ecologically-meaningful sequence of dedicated structures is required, including large mammal overpasses every 5–8km in critical corridors and specialized tunnels for reptiles every 300–500m to facilitate seasonal migrations.

• “No Go Zones” and Ecological Buffers: Establishing minimum 400m exclusion zones around core ecological assets like forest interiors and provincially significant wetlands would prohibit destructive “cut and fill” construction methods, thereby protecting interior forest sanctuaries and local hydrology from permanent alteration.

QFN supports Ontario Nature’s position that if the project proceeds, it must meet strict, science-based ecological performance standards.

We will support Ontario Nature in advocating to ensure the project does not become an impenetrable barrier within important ecological corridors. The climate benefits of this project must not come at the cost of habitat  and biodiversity. The maps below show proximity of protected areas and areas of high biodiversity.

For more information:

https://www.altotrain.ca/en – Alto’s official website

https://www.friendsofsalmonriver.ca/ – An excellent source for information about the effects of both routes.

https://wildlifepreservation.ca/blog/concerns-for-alto/ – Expresses concern about the possible effects on one endangered species, Loggerhead Shrike.

https://altohsrcitizenresearch.ca/ – Alto HSR Citizen Research

Various Facebook Pages:

• Alto Train , Northern route discussion and awareness
• Concerned Citizens Against the Alto Southern Route
• Save South Frontenac

What You Can Do – the online consultation period has been extended to April 24th

• Submit written comments to Alto and your MP and MPP.
• Complete the public questionnaire
• Leave location-specific comments using the interactive corridor map, which allows you to pin concerns or support at exact locations (e.g., farmland, wetlands, neighbourhoods) 

Official site: https://www.altotrain.ca/en/public-consultation [altotrain.ca]