No you should be keeping track yourself,
This is important. Worth emphasizing. Worth repeating. PRs should keep an ongoing log of days in and days out of Canada.
Even those who settle upon landing and are mostly staying in Canada. Sooner or later the PR will be required to provide an accounting of days IN and days OUTSIDE Canada, either in a citizenship application or when applying for a new PR card.
It is important to be as accurate and complete as possible. Remember, while most people think of credibility in terms of being honest, actually credibility is about how much a person can be relied upon to be an accurate reporter of facts. A failure to ACCURATELY and COMPLETELY report ALL travel outside Canada is evidence the PR LACKS CREDIBILITY, because it shows the PR cannot be relied upon to be an accurate reporter of facts. Second only to the formal requirements, credibility looms as among the biggest factors which will influence how applications will go (again, either the application for a new PR card or an application for citizenship).
Make no mistake, even though the government is continually increasing and improving its resources and tools, and thus going forward is increasingly capable of determining when most (nearly all) PRs have entered or exited Canada, all indications are that
THE INDIVIDUAL PR will continue to be the one RESPONSIBLE for providing this information when it is relevant, which it is in any examination as to the PR's compliance with the Residency Obligation as well as when applying for citizenship.
The government appears likely to ONLY use its resources to VERIFY the PR's reporting.
While it has been a long while, perhaps the best illustration of how this works is an old citizenship application case. In response to RQ-related requests, the applicant provided documentary evidence to support her case, including her children's school attendance records in Canada (she had reported her children accompanied her both in and out of Canada). Some of the information in those attendance records indicated the children were, it appeared, IN school in Canada during a period of time the applicant reported she and the children were outside Canada.
Some people might believe that should have helped her case, showing she was IN Canada more than she reported.
But CIC (as what is now IRCC was named at the time) officials saw it differently. This discrepancy revealed she was NOT an accurate reporter of facts, and therefore her credibility was compromised. So this was actually among reasons to REJECT her application.
Another example: it is common for PRs to overlook and not report one or more day-trips to the U.S. How much impact this has varies considerably depending on the applicant's particular circumstances and history, but IRCC can easily discover (just comparing the PR's reported travel against the PR's CBSA travel history) the PR entered Canada on a date the PR has not reported (if the PR leaves out a day-trip to the U.S.), and while such a trip has ZERO impact on the number of days IN or OUTSIDE Canada, it can trigger elevated scrutiny and even full-blown RQ-related procedures. This forum has seen reports of this happening, full blown-RQ issued, apparently because the PR failed to report just one day-trip.
BOTTOM-LINE: KEEP A LOG. And last I looked IRCC was still specifically advising PRs to do this, providing a downloadable form (a very simple chart format) for doing this.
