Failing to Produce Things or Provide Information During an Inspection in Ontario:

---

Last Updated: September 13 2026

---

Question: If I’m in Ontario and charged with failing to produce things or provide information during an inspection, what should I do before responding to the summons or ticket?

Answer: If you’ve received an Ontario provincial summons or ticket for failing to produce things for inspection (Fish and Wildlife Conservation Act, 1997, s. 89(2)) or failing to provide information during an inspection (Fish and Wildlife Conservation Act, 1997, s. 90(8)), do not panic, read the exact offence wording and section on the document, note the inspection setting and the exact items or questions requested, and preserve all related records and messages.   Paying the set fine is often treated as pleading guilty, so confirm which offence you were charged under and whether the officer’s request was actually within the inspection power.   A paralegal from DefendCharges.ca™ can help you organize evidence, assess whether the inspection authority and relevance were properly applied, and plan next steps for your court response in Ontario; call (647) 559-3377 to discuss your situation.

Add this website to Google Preferred Sources

---

Failing to Produce Things or Provide Information During an Inspection in Ontario

Received a ticket or summons for Failing to Produce Things or Provide Information During an Inspection in Ontario?  You have been charged with a provincial offence under Ontario wildlife law.  The page title covers two separate Conservation Officer inspection offences: failing to produce requested things for inspection after a conveyance stop under subsection 89(2), and failing to provide relevant information during an inspection of a building or other place under subsection 90(8) of the Fish and Wildlife Conservation Act, 1997.

Note: Please contact DefendCharges.ca™ by phone at: (647) 559-3377 to discuss any specific questions that you may have.

Do not panic.  Being charged does not automatically mean you will be convicted.  The two offences arise in different inspection settings and have different legal requirements.  The officer's authority to conduct the inspection, what was requested, whether the request fell within the applicable inspection power, and what you did in response can all matter.

This page explains the two inspection offences, when the relevant inspection powers can be used, what must be proven, the current set fines and possible consequences, the evidence and legal issues that may matter, and what may happen next.  These offences are part of Conservation Officers & Investigations.

I Received an Inspection Offence Ticket or Summons.  What Should I Do?

A summons is a court document requiring you to attend court or respond as directed.  Read every document carefully and do not miss the response deadline or required court date.

Start with the exact offence wording and section number on your ticket or summons.  The current Ontario Court of Justice set fine schedule lists Fail to produce things for inspection under subsection 89(2) and Fail to provide information during inspection under subsection 90(8).  Both currently have a $200 set fine, but they are separate offences.

Record what happened while the details are still fresh.  Note where the inspection occurred, whether it involved a vehicle, boat, aircraft, building, land, business, or another place, what the Conservation Officer asked you to produce or explain, the words used in the request, what you provided, what you could not provide, who was present, and whether photographs, video, messages, records, receipts, GPS information, or other evidence may exist.

Keep your ticket or summons and any documents or records connected with the inspection.  Do not delete, alter, discard, or modify potentially important evidence.

Should I Pay the Ticket?

Paying the ticket will generally be treated as pleading guilty and will result in a conviction, meaning a finding of guilt.  Before paying, identify which inspection offence was charged and compare the request made by the officer with the legal power being exercised.

A subsection 89(2) production charge concerns a request to produce wildlife, an invertebrate, fish, a document, or another thing for inspection after a section 89 conveyance stop.  A subsection 90(8) information charge concerns information requested during a section 90 inspection that was relevant to that inspection.  Those duties should not be treated as interchangeable.

What Is a Failing to Produce Things or Provide Information During an Inspection Charge?

This is a plain English title covering two separate offences under the Fish and Wildlife Conservation Act, 1997.  The first arises from subsection 89(2), which deals with inspection of a conveyance.  A conveyance means a vehicle, boat, or aircraft.

Failing to Produce Things for Inspection

Under subsection 89(1), a Conservation Officer may stop a conveyance if the officer has reasonable grounds to believe that stopping it would assist in determining compliance with the Act or regulations.  After the stop signal, subsection 89(2) requires the operator to immediately stop and to produce for inspection any wildlife, invertebrate, fish, document, or other thing requested by the officer for the purpose of the Act.

The current short form offence Fail to produce things for inspection addresses the production part of subsection 89(2).  It is separate from the other subsection 89(2) offence of failing to stop for a Conservation Officer.

Failing to Provide Information During an Inspection

Subsection 90(1) gives a Conservation Officer authority to enter and inspect a building or other place where the officer believes on reasonable grounds there is work, an undertaking, meaning an operation or activity, or another thing to which the Act or regulations apply.  During a section 90 inspection, subsection 90(7) allows the officer to inspect relevant wildlife, fish, documents, computer information and other things, ask questions that may be relevant, and conduct relevant tests.

Subsection 90(8) separately requires a person, during the inspection, to provide information requested by the Conservation Officer that is relevant to the inspection.  The current short form offence is Fail to provide information during inspection.

The exact charge determines which inspection power, request, and duty must be examined.  Other Conservation Officer enforcement offences are organized under Conservation Officers & Investigations.

When Can a Conservation Officer Require Things to Be Produced from a Vehicle, Boat, or Aircraft?

The subsection 89(2) production duty arises in the context of the section 89 conveyance inspection power.  Subsection 89(1) permits a Conservation Officer to stop a conveyance where the officer has reasonable grounds to believe the stop would assist in determining whether there is compliance with the Act or regulations.

Reasonable grounds means there must be an objectively supportable basis for the officer's belief.  The officer does not need to have already proven that another offence occurred, but section 89 does not create an unrestricted power to stop every conveyance for any reason.

Once the stop power is lawfully exercised, subsection 89(2) allows the officer to request production for inspection of wildlife, an invertebrate, fish, a document, or another thing for the purpose of the Act.  The request actually made and the thing said to have been withheld should therefore be identified precisely.

When Can a Conservation Officer Inspect a Building or Other Place?

Section 90 permits a Conservation Officer to enter and inspect a building or other place where the officer believes on reasonable grounds there is work, an undertaking, or another thing to which the Act or regulations apply.  This can include places connected with licences, wildlife, fish, hunting, trapping, fishing, transportation, buying, or selling.

The inspection power has specific statutory limits.  Subsection 90(2) does not permit entry or inspection for a purpose related to farmed animals.  Subsection 90(3) generally excludes a building or part of a building being used as a dwelling unless the officer has the inspection warrant authorized by subsection 90(4).  Subsection 90(6) also requires entry to be made at a time that is reasonable in view of the activity conducted at the place.

These limits can matter to a subsection 90(8) charge because the information duty applies during the inspection.  If the legal basis or scope of the inspection is disputed, the circumstances supporting entry and the authority being exercised should be reviewed.

Does Every Question from a Conservation Officer Have to Be Answered?

Subsection 90(8) does not say that every question asked by a Conservation Officer in every circumstance must be answered.  The duty applies during a section 90 inspection and concerns information requested by the officer that is relevant to that inspection.

The wording of the request, the purpose and scope of the inspection, and whether the information was relevant can therefore matter.  A separate Conservation Officer interaction that is not a section 90 inspection should not automatically be treated as a subsection 90(8) information demand.

Is Producing a Hunting Licence the Same Offence?

No.  Ontario has separate offences for failing to produce a licence or authorization to a Conservation Officer.  Section 67 requires the holder of a licence or authorization to produce and show it on the officer's request, and the current set fine schedule lists separate $200 offences for failing to produce a licence and failing to produce an authorization.

A ticket under subsection 89(2) for failing to produce things for inspection or subsection 90(8) for failing to provide information should therefore be analyzed under the section actually charged.  Similar facts can sometimes produce more than one charge, but one production duty should not be substituted for another.

Does the Conservation Officer Have to Show Identification?

A Conservation Officer acting under Part VIII of the Act must produce identification when requested.  That requirement appears in subsection 87(3) of the Fish and Wildlife Conservation Act, 1997.

If the identity or authority of the person conducting the inspection was genuinely unclear, evidence about uniforms, badges, identification, marked vehicles, communications, and any request for identification may be relevant.  The legislation does not require the officer to volunteer identification in every inspection when no request is made.

What Law Applies?

Sections 89 and 90 of the Fish and Wildlife Conservation Act, 1997 are the principal provisions for these charges.  Subsection 89(2) contains the duty to produce requested things for inspection after a section 89 conveyance stop, while subsection 90(8) contains the duty to provide requested information that is relevant during a section 90 inspection.

The important limits and exceptions are also found in sections 89 and 90.  They include the reasonable grounds threshold for a conveyance stop and, for a section 90 place inspection, the farmed animal exclusion, the dwelling rule and inspection warrant, and the requirement that entry occur at a reasonable time.

What Must Be Proven?

The prosecutor, meaning the lawyer or representative presenting the government's case, must prove every required part of the particular charge beyond a reasonable doubt.  Beyond a reasonable doubt is the high legal standard that must be met before the court can find you guilty.

Failing to Produce Things for Inspection Under Subsection 89(2)

For the subsection 89(2) production charge, the prosecution must establish the facts connecting the request to the section 89 conveyance inspection and to you as the operator.  The central issues generally include:

• That you were the operator of the vehicle, boat, or aircraft;
• That the section 89 stop power was lawfully engaged;
• That the officer requested wildlife, an invertebrate, fish, a document, or another thing for inspection for the purpose of the Act;
• What thing was requested and whether the request was communicated to you; and
• That you failed to produce the requested thing for inspection as required.

The charge should be tied to the thing actually requested, not merely to a general assertion that you were uncooperative.  Whether the item existed, was available to you, was understood to be requested, or could reasonably be produced may also matter to the evidence and statutory defences.

Failing to Provide Information During an Inspection Under Subsection 90(8)

For the subsection 90(8) information charge, the prosecution must prove a request falling within that specific statutory duty.  The central issues generally include:

• That an authorized section 90 inspection was being conducted;
• That the Conservation Officer requested information from you during that inspection;
• That the information requested was relevant to the inspection;
• What information was requested and whether the request was communicated clearly enough to be understood; and
• That you failed to provide the requested information as required.

The word relevant matters.  Subsection 90(8) does not create a standalone duty to provide any information an officer might request outside the scope of the inspection.

What Are Common Situations That Lead to These Charges?

Wildlife or Another Thing Was Requested During a Conveyance Stop

A Conservation Officer may ask an operator to produce wildlife, fish, documents, or another thing for inspection after a section 89 stop.  A dispute may arise about what was requested, whether the operator had access to it, whether it was produced, or whether the request was understood.

A Record or Document Was Requested

The production offence can involve a document requested for inspection under subsection 89(2).  The actual document, its availability, what the officer asked to see, and what the operator produced may become important evidence.

Questions Were Asked During a Place Inspection

During a section 90 inspection, a Conservation Officer may ask questions relevant to the inspection, and subsection 90(8) requires relevant requested information to be provided.  The case may turn on the wording of the question, the inspection purpose, relevance, and what response was given.

The Person Said They Did Not Know the Answer

A charge may arise where an officer expected information and the person responded that they did not know or could not provide it.  Whether that amounted to a failure to provide information depends on what was actually known, what was requested, and the surrounding evidence.

The Scope or Legality of the Inspection Is Disputed

A subsection 90(8) case may involve disagreement about whether the officer was conducting a section 90 inspection, whether a dwelling or another statutory limit was involved, or whether the information requested was relevant to the inspection.  Those issues should be examined against the exact authority relied on.

What Is the Fine?

The current set fine is $200 for each of the two inspection offences covered on this page.  The current Ontario Court of Justice set fine schedule lists:

• $200 for Fail to produce things for inspection under subsection 89(2); and
• $200 for Fail to provide information during inspection under subsection 90(8).

A set fine is the preset fine used when a particular provincial offence is dealt with by ticket.  The set fine is different from the statutory maximum available if the matter proceeds through court.

Under the general penalty provision of the Fish and Wildlife Conservation Act, 1997, a person convicted of an offence under the Act may be liable to a fine of up to $25,000, imprisonment for up to one year, or both.

Those are statutory maximums, not the automatic or usual result of an ordinary $200 ticket.  The actual consequence depends on the offence, circumstances, and how the case is resolved.

Can a Conviction Affect a Licence or Authorization?

Potentially, but a licence or authorization restriction is not automatic merely because you have been charged or convicted of one of these inspection offences.  Section 104 permits a court, after conviction for an offence other than the separate careless firearm offence, to restrict a licence or authorization of a kind related to the offence and the activity requiring it.

If the court makes that discretionary order for a type of licence or authorization the person already holds, the court must also order it cancelled.  Whether that power has practical relevance to an inspection offence depends on the connection between the offence, the inspected activity, and the licence or authorization involved.

What Evidence May Be Used?

The important evidence depends on whether the charge concerns production under subsection 89(2) or information under subsection 90(8).  The request itself is central in both types of case.

Officer Notes and Inspection Records

Conservation Officer notes, reports, inspection forms, dispatch information, photographs, and other records may show why the inspection occurred, what authority the officer believed applied, what was requested, and how you responded.

Video and Audio Evidence

Officer video where available, dash camera footage, security footage, cell phone recordings, audio, and other recordings may help establish the exact words used, whether a request was clearly communicated, what was produced or said, and the sequence of events.

Documents, Wildlife, and Other Things

The item said to have been withheld may itself be evidence.  Documents, wildlife, fish, photographs, receipts, logs, records, equipment, or other physical evidence may help establish whether the requested thing existed, where it was, and whether it could be produced.

Inspection Location and Authority

Property information, business records, maps, photographs, an inspection warrant where applicable, and evidence about the use of a building or place may be important where the authority or scope of a section 90 inspection is disputed.

Witness and Response Evidence

Statements from the person charged, employees, occupants, passengers, customers, other witnesses, and officers may be used to establish what was requested, what was understood, what information was known, and what response was given.

What Possible Defences or Legal Issues May Apply?

The defence depends on which offence was charged and on the exact inspection request.  A defence or legal issue relevant to a subsection 89(2) production charge may differ from one arising under subsection 90(8).

The Inspection Power Was Not Lawfully Engaged

A subsection 89 conveyance stop requires the reasonable grounds described in subsection 89(1).  A subsection 90 place inspection requires the reasonable grounds described in subsection 90(1) and is subject to the statutory limits involving farmed animals, dwellings, inspection warrants, and reasonable timing.  If the relevant inspection authority was not lawfully engaged, that issue should be examined in relation to the charge.

The Requested Thing Was Not Within the Subsection 89(2) Duty

The production charge should be tied to a thing requested for inspection for the purpose of the Act.  The wording and context of the request may matter where there is a dispute about what was requested, why it was requested, or whether the request fell within subsection 89(2).

The Requested Information Was Not Relevant to the Section 90 Inspection

Subsection 90(8) expressly limits the duty to information relevant to the inspection.  If the requested information had no relevant connection to the section 90 inspection, the statutory requirement may be disputed.

The Request Was Not Understood or Was Not Clearly Communicated

Noise, language difficulties, competing instructions, unclear wording, missing audio, or other circumstances may affect what a person reasonably understood they were being asked to produce or provide.  The actual communication should be reviewed rather than assuming that every request was clear.

The Thing or Information Was Not Available to You

A person may dispute the charge where the requested thing did not exist, was not in their possession or access, or the requested information was genuinely not known.  Whether those facts support a defence depends on the precise statutory duty, the evidence, and the steps taken in response.

Due Diligence

Due diligence means taking all reasonable care in the circumstances to prevent the offence.  Section 101 provides a defence where the person charged establishes that they exercised all due diligence to prevent the commission of the offence.  Records showing efforts to locate a requested item, obtain information, clarify an unclear request, or provide what was reasonably available may be relevant.

Honest and Reasonable Mistake of Fact

An honest and reasonable mistake of fact means honestly and reasonably believing facts that, if true, would make the conduct innocent.  Section 101 recognizes this defence.  Depending on the circumstances, a reasonable factual mistake about what was requested, whether an item had already been produced, whether information had already been provided, or another material fact may be relevant.

Could Documents or Other Property Be Removed, Seized, or Forfeited?

Yes, but removal for further inspection and seizure are legally different.  Under subsection 90(10), a Conservation Officer may remove documents or things for copying or further inspection, but that work must be carried out with reasonable dispatch and the documents or things must be returned promptly to the person from whom they were taken.

Section 92 separately allows a Conservation Officer who is lawfully in a building or other place to seize a thing the officer believes on reasonable grounds was obtained by or used in an offence, will provide evidence of an offence, or is intermixed with such a thing.  Seizure means the item has been taken into official custody.  Forfeiture means permanent loss of ownership and depends on the applicable statutory requirements and what happens in the case.

What Happens Next?

Your ticket or summons should identify the next procedural step and any response deadline or court date.  Do not miss that deadline while obtaining legal advice or deciding how to respond.

If you dispute the charge, the prosecution's disclosure should be obtained and reviewed.  Disclosure is the relevant information and evidence in the prosecutor's possession or control that you are entitled to receive, subject to the law.  It may include officer notes, inspection reports, video, audio, photographs, warrants, documents, witness statements, and records showing what was requested and what response was given.

After disclosure is available, compare the evidence with the exact provision on your ticket or summons.  For subsection 89(2), the review should focus on the conveyance inspection authority, the requested thing, communication of the request, and what was produced.  For subsection 90(8), the review should focus on the authority and scope of the place inspection, the requested information, its relevance, and your response.

The prosecutor may withdraw the charge, meaning the charge is no longer being pursued, or the matter may be resolved by a guilty plea or another agreement, or proceed to trial.  The appropriate response depends on the evidence, legal issues, possible consequences, and circumstances of your case.

How Can DefendCharges.ca™ Help?

DefendCharges.ca™ can review the wording on your ticket, summons, seizure notice, or other documents and compare it with the wildlife, records, and activity involved.  This can help identify the exact charge, the legal requirements that apply, and the factual issues that may be important to your case.

If the matter proceeds through court, DefendCharges.ca™ can explain the court process, review the available evidence and legal issues, discuss possible penalties or other consequences, and help you understand your options for responding to the charge.

Have Questions About Hunting Charges?

Whether you have been charged with one hunting offence or several, understanding your legal options is important.  DefendCharges.ca™ can review your case, explain the charges you are facing, and help you understand your legal options and the best course of action.  Contact us today to discuss your situation.

Key Takeaways

• This page covers two separate $200 inspection offences: failing to produce things under subsection 89(2) and failing to provide information under subsection 90(8);
• Subsection 89(2) applies in the context of a Conservation Officer's conveyance inspection power and concerns requested wildlife, fish, documents, or other things;
• Subsection 90(8) applies during a section 90 place inspection and requires requested information that is relevant to that inspection;
• Section 90 contains statutory limits involving the inspection basis, farmed animals, dwellings, inspection warrants, and reasonable timing;
• Failing to produce a licence or authorization under section 67 is a separate offence; and
• The exact request, inspection authority, relevance, available records, and your response should be reviewed before deciding how to respond to the charge.

Conclusion

A Failing to Produce Things or Provide Information During an Inspection charge should be reviewed by first identifying whether the ticket relies on subsection 89(2) or subsection 90(8).  The two offences arise in different inspection settings and require different facts concerning the officer's authority, the request made, and the response.

Before paying the ticket or entering a plea, review the charging document, inspection records, disclosure, video or audio where available, the thing or information requested, the legal basis and scope of the inspection, possible consequences, and any defence or legal issue supported by the circumstances.  Legal representation can help determine whether the evidence proves the particular offence and what options are available for responding.