Dam safety practice has developed extensive guidance on risk assessment and management, largely independently of the statutory safety obligations established under applicable legislation, resulting in multiple frameworks comprising legal obligations, regulatory systems and industry standards, and contemporary professional practices. While all aim to reduce harm, their differing foundations, principles and functions have created uncertainty among practitioners and a widening, yet largely unappreciated, gap between technical conformance, regulatory administration and legal compliance. This paper summarises the development of contemporary dam safety frameworks, noting that the obligation to exercise reasonable care to address foreseeable harm has long been embedded in the legal frameworks governing industrial activities in Canada and other Western jurisdictions irrespective of the existence or absence of a dam-specific regulatory framework. The independent development of contemporary engineering standards and risk assessment methodologies, without explicitly relating them to the jurisdiction-specific legal duties of various parties, has contributed to confusion, procedural focus and misunderstanding of statutory obligations.  The paper examines the interaction between legal obligations, regulatory systems and technical guidance, and the role and underlying logic of commonly used analytical tools. It argues that many of the difficulties encountered in contemporary dam safety frameworks arise because regulators, legislators, owners, designers and courts ask fundamentally different questions, yet concepts and tools developed for one purpose are often treated as though they answer them all. Effective dam safety management therefore requires a clear understanding of the purpose and limitations of individual tools together with stronger links between technical activities, the physical behaviour of the facility and the legally aligned responsibilities of the parties involved. The paper concludes by proposing a framework in which different analytical tools are explicitly aligned with their intended purposes, legally significant terminology is clearly defined, and guidance places greater emphasis on identifying, evaluating and implementing effective risk-reduction actions. Such an approach would strengthen the clarity, effectiveness and legal defensibility of dam safety management.