Another question- I want to avoid the option 1, does land border is safer compared to airport for option 1?
@Ponga has largely answered what you need to know.
And, in particular, in regards to Port-of-Entry screening of PRs for Residency Obligation compliance, I explicitly agree that there is . . .
No difference between land PoE or airport.
That said, I will quibble slightly with the following:
The chance of CBSA creating a report under 44(1) is based upon the officer that you encounter, not the PoE that you choose - airport or land.
What happens at the PoE is based on the PR's situation. While individual officers will vary some in how strict or aggressive they are, what really matters, what most influences how things go, depends on the facts and circumstances in the particular PR's specific situation.
Key factors include the numbers (days in Canada within the previous five years, or since landing if that was less than five years ago), length of time abroad before the arrival, and the PR's explanation for not returning to Canada sooner. Other details can have some influence, including the PR's demeanor, especially whether the PR is cooperative or, in contrast, seems at all evasive or deceptive.
So, for example, for a PR in breach of the RO, generally it is better to get to Canada sooner.
In particular, this applies to:
-- the chance of being closely examined for RO compliance upon arrival at the PoE
-- for the PR not in compliance, the chance of a 44(1) Report for inadmissibility being prepared,
-- and if a Report is prepared, the chance that the Minister's Delegate (a second officer at the PoE) will proceed to issue a Departure or Removal Order based on that Report
Other than getting to Canada sooner, and being prepared to honestly explain their situation, there is not much a PR can do to affect the factual situation, which in turn is what will mostly determine how it goes on arrival. Again, there can be some slight differences in how this or that officer handles things, but for the most part it does not matter which officer it is or which PoE the PR arrives at (well, unless the PoE seems rather odd for the particular traveler; if after a lengthy absence from Canada a non-American Canadian-PR shows up at the Metaline Falls-Nelway crossing between northeastern Washington State and southeastern B.C., odds are that is going to trigger some further questions).
Additional Note: unless the first officer, the PIL (Primary Inspection Line) officer, waives the PR through without a referral to Secondary, what happens at the PoE is
not about what a single officer decides. One officer is the PIL officer, who decides whether to refer the traveler to Secondary. Then there is the officer who conducts the examination in Secondary, and for a PR the worst this officer can do is prepare a 44(1) Report, but if that happens, the PR will then be interviewed by yet another officer (acting as the "Minister's Delegate" but still just another CBSA immigration officer), and it will be that third officer who makes the decision whether to issue a Removal Order or to set aside the 44(1) Report (such as for H&C reasons).
That process can vary some, such as at a smaller PoE the PIL officer can also be the officer conducting a Secondary examination. And if there is a Report prepared, sometimes another officer is not available to review the report so that can be postponed. But there is no decision to terminate a PR's status, which the PR would need to appeal in order to try saving status, unless at least two officers
independently decide against the PR.
