Amendments to Canada’s Pleasure Craft Licence (PCL), announced in early January by Transport Canada (TC), have not been well-received by some boaters and advocacy groups.
TC says the changes, which took effect on Dec. 31, 2025, will help modernize Canada's pleasure craft licensing program and database.
The PCL is a unique identification number visible on recreational boats in Canada that have one or more engines whose combined power exceeds 10 horsepower. TC says the number allows emergency responders and law enforcement to quickly identify the owner of a boat, which improves response times in urgent situations and supports efforts to address unsafe or abandoned boats.
The changes include:
TC says these changes will “make boating safer, protect the environment, and ensure licence holders share the cost of administering the program fairly.” By keeping ownership information accurate and up to date, they say it will also help the federal government deal with wrecked, hazardous, and abandoned vessels.
Many anglers and hunters who own boats that require PCLs will be affected. Some, on social media and websites, have characterized it as a federal cash grab that provides no benefit for users.
The Ontario Federation of Anglers and Hunters (OFAH) has expressed disappointment regarding the changes, too.
“Transport Canada frames these changes as improvements to safety and environmental protection, yet they double down on their original Pleasure Craft Licensing proposal, raising the fee from $15 to $24 and adding a clause for annual increases, despite strong opposition,” OFAH Fisheries Biologist Adam Weir said. “Many concerns raised by the OFAH during consultations remain unresolved. While these changes are being promoted as benefiting boaters, there are no clear, tangible improvements such as better launches, parking, or washing stations to address invasive species. At this point, this looks far more like cost recovery than a meaningful investment in boating safety or access.”
The way TC has handled pleasure craft licensing raises questions about their proposal for mandatory wear of PFDs and lifejackets, he added.
