B3. Species of Conservation Concern (SOCC) Vascular Plant Surveys · 2018-06-22 · Ecological Land...

1ra_2012-11-15_BW Amend Tps_60155032.Docx

B3. Species of Conservation Concern (SOCC) Vascular Plant Surveys

SOCC Vascular Plant

Survey

SCP-01

SCP-01


B4. Snake Hibernaculum Surveys

RH-05

EOS - Reptile

Hibernaculum Study


B5. Ontario Wetland Evaluation System (OWES) Field Notes


Appendix C Project Team CVs

Rob Aitken B. Sc.EcologistCurriculum Vitae

Through the completion of environmentalprograms at Trent University and Sir SandfordFleming College Mr. Aitken has developed asound understanding of the natural environmentand the tools that are used to evaluate it. Hehas continued to build on this foundation throughthe application of these skills while working fororganizations in the private and public sectorcompleting inventories and assessments ofaquatic and terrestrial ecosystems.

As a member of the Aboud & Associates team,Mr. Aitken is responsible for botanical andwildlife inventories, ELC/vegetation communityassessments and GIS Mapping on a wide rangeof projects.

EDUCATIONBachelor of Biology & EnvironmentalResources Sciences (Honours), TrentUniversity, 2008.Environmental Technologist, Sir SandfordFleming College 2006.Natural Resources Law Enforcement PostGraduate Certification, Sir Sandford FlemingCollege, 2004.Ecosystem Management Technician, SirSandford Fleming College 2003.

Continuing Education & Certification:Ontario Stream Assessment Protocol,OMNR/TRCA (2011)Class 2 Backpack Electro fishing Certificate,TRCA (2011)MTO/DFO/OMNR Environmental Guide forFish and Fish Habitat Workshop (2011)Asters and Goldenrods Workshop, RoyalBotanical Gardens (2010)Ecological Land Classification, OMNR (2010)Ontario Wetland Evaluation System, OMNR(2009)Ontario Stream Assessment Protocol Level 1Fish Identification (2009)

CAREER EXPERIENCEPrior to joining Aboud & Associates in 2010, Mr.Aitken worked with the following organizations:

Environmental ScientistConestoga Rovers & Associates (2008-2010)

Hydraulic stream flow monitoringGround and surface water quality monitoringSediment SamplingWetland delineationsFish collection and identificationCollection of aquatic invertebrates usingOBBN protocolsStream flow, ground water level andprecipitation data management andinterpretationPermits to Take Water and Certificates ofApproval

Shell Conservation InternThe Nature Conservancy of Canada (2007)

Flora and Fauna inventoriesClassifying ecological communities using theEcological Land Classification for SouthernOntarioMonitoring ongoing rehabilitation projectsCompleting site monitoring and managementreports

Field TechnicianThe Watershed Science Centre (2006)

Hydraulic stream flow monitoringCollection of aquatic invertebratesSuspended sediment collectionStream flow data and precipitationmanagement and interpretation

Greening Co-op StudentThe Regional Municipality of York (2005)

Assisted in implementing the Region’sgreening strategyInvasive species removalMapping natural features using Arcview GISStreet tree planting, mulching, pruning andinventories


CAREER EXPERIENCE (CONTINUED)

Environmental TechnicianConservation Halton (2004)

Collection and identification of aquaticinvertebratesCollection and identification of fishHydraulic stream flow monitoringClassifying ecological communities andperforming flora inventoriesAssisted in completing the North ShoreWatershed Study Report

Resources Management TechnicianPinery Provincial Park (2001)

Wild lupine seed collection, preparation andplantingPreparation work for prescribed burns andDeer CountsInvasive species removalNative species plantingsEducating public about rare natural featuresand species

AREAS OF EXPERTISEIdentification of flora and faunaELC / Vegetation Community AssessmentVegetation MonitoringGIS Mapping

SELECTED PROJECT EXPERIENCETree Inventory/Management Plan:

Lotco II Landscape Plan Street Tree Inventory(Cambridge)Street Tree Inventory for InfrastructureImprovement Projects (Cambridge)Jefferson Forest Edge Management &TreePreservation Plans (Richmond Hill)10606 Milton Road Tree Inventory (Pickering)Block 12 Phase 3 Trail Tree Inventory(Vaughan)Lackner Boulevard Tree Management Plan(Kitchener)

Tree Inventory/Management Plan(Continued):

699 Speedvale Avenue Tree Inventory(Guelph)Kleinburg Tree Preservation Plan &Relocation Strategy (Vaughan)Klienburg Edge Management Plan (Vaughan)

Botanical Inventory / Vegetation CommunityAssessment:

Rare species surveys for 407 extension(Durham)Windsor Essex Parkway – Species at Risk(SAR) surveys & Botanical Inventories ofremnant prairie communitiesBlock 12 Large Restore Buffer VegetationMonitoring (Vaughan)ENS Poultry Renewable Energy ApplicationNatural Heritage Assessment (Elora)Gordon Street Property ScopedEnvironmental Impact Study (Guelph)Block 5 Woodlot Management Plan(Brampton)Mill Pond Park Botanical Inventory & ELCAssessment (Richmond Hill)Block 11 Wetland Vegetation Monitoring(Vaughan)

Wildlife Inventory/Assessments:Heffernan Street Shoreline Rehabilitation FishHabitat Assessment (Guelph)Breeding Bird Surveys for Quarry Expansion(Waterloo Region)Breeding Bird Surveys for ProposedSubdivision (Guelph)Arkell Dam Restoration Fish Habitat/NaturalHeritage Assessment (Guelph)Subwatershed Study Snake and SnakeHibernacula Surveys (Fergus)Breeding Bird/Snake and Snake HibernaculaSurveys Summit Park (Hamilton)Mill Pond Park Breeding Bird Survey(Richmond Hill)


In addition, Mr. Aitken also provides assistancewith:

Data Collection and EntryReport WritingPeer Reviews

VOLUNTEER EXPERIENCEBotanical inventory/Bird Surveys for theEscarpment Biosphere Conservancy (2011)Amphibian Call Surveys for the MarshMonitoring Program (2011)Volunteer Backpack Electro fishingCrewmember Credit Valley ConservationAuthority (2009)Deer Check Station Flynns Turn (2004)Pinery Provincial Park Pine Removal Program(1998, 1999)

PROFESSIONAL AFFILIATIONSField Botanists of OntarioOntario Field Ornithologist

1 of 3

Sam Gildiner Ecologist

Education

MEM, Forestry, University of New Brunswick, 2011

BSc, Forest Management, University of New Brunswick, 2009

Diploma, Forest Technology, Maritime College of Forest Technology, 2007

Licenses/Registrations

Certified Arborist, Ontario, #ON-1579A, Issued 06/29/2012, Exp. 06/29/2015

Years of Experience

With AECOM: 1

With Other Firms: 7

Professional Associations

International Society of Arboriculture, Active Member

Association of Registered Professional Foresters of Ontario, Active Member

Association of Registered Professional Foresters of New Brunswick, Active Member

New Brunswick Wetland Delineators Association, Executive Committee, 2010 - 2012

Training and Certifications

Bear Awareness Training

CPR and First Aid Training

Fire Extinguisher Training

Mr. Gildiner is a terrestrial ecologist with more than 7 years of experience in the natural resource and environmental consulting field. He has worked throughout eastern and western Canada as a forester, and has worked in central and eastern Canada as an ecological consultant. Mr. Gildiner has experience in wetland science, forest science, habitat management, forest management, soil science, and arboriculture.

Project Experience

Other Category

J.D. Irving Limited, Federal Flood Relief Bridge and Culvert Replacement, Fredericton, New Brunswick. Coordinated assessments of watercrossing affected by storms on crown land. Performed field work with surveyors, engineers, and biologists to determine compensation to forest company. Prepared reports detailing required infrastructure damage and replacement objectives. [04/01/2011-11/10/2011]

Matt Harris and Sons Ltd., Water Source and Supply Assessment - Johnston Estates, Fredericton, New Brunswick. Coordinated well driller, location of wells, and field technicians to assess the potential for groundwater supply to well systems in a proposed residential subdivision. Managed long term safe yield calculations, water quality testing, and reporting for suitability of an aquifer for proposed development. [10/05/2011-10/31/2011]

Matt Harris and Sons Ltd., Water Source and Supply Assessment - Richardson Estates, Fredericton, New Brunswick. Coordinated well driller, location of wells, and field technicians to assess the potential for groundwater supply to well systems in a proposed residential subdivision. Managed long term safe yield calculations, water quality testing, and reporting for suitability of an aquifer for proposed development. [06/29/2011-08/22/2011]

Willow Homes, Water Source and Supply Assessment - Willow Estates, Fredericton, New Brunswick. Coordinated well driller, location of wells, and field technicians to assess the potential for groundwater supply to well systems in a proposed residential subdivision. Managed long term safe yield calculations, water quality testing, and reporting for suitability of an aquifer for proposed development. [07/27/2011-09/01/2011]

Peterson Mini Home Park, Peterson Mini Home Park - Environmental Impact Assessment, Fredericton, New Brunswick. Coordinated all field work and reporting associated with provincial EIA requirements including wildlife habitat, rare species, wetlands, groundwater, archaeology, and social considerations. [04/08/2011-09/22/2011]

Sam Gildiner

2 of 3

Matt Harris and Sons Ltd., Harris Estates - Environmental Impact Assessment, Fredericton, New Brunswick. Coordinated all field work and reporting associated with provincial EIA requirements including wildlife habitat, rare species, wetlands, groundwater, archaeology, and social considerations. [04/14/2011-08/18/2011]

Kria Resources, Nesting Bird Survey, New Brunswick. Conducted field work and reporting for bird nest surveys in northern New Brunswick for a mining project. [06/15/2011-06/22/2011]

Chippin Real Estate, Trail Design and Layout, Fredericton, New Brunswick. Designed and implemented on-the-ground a trail system that highlighted natural features of a significant woodland/wetland complex to increase natural capital of a residential subdivision. [08/02/2011-08/24/2011]

Department of Transportation - New Brunswick, Route 8 Suspended Solids Monitoring, Southern New Brunswick. Conducted total suspended solids monitoring, data management, reporting, and lab testing for water quality monitoring for a new highway alignment. [04/01/2011-11/23/2011]

Department of Transportation - New Brunswick, Route 8 Species at Risk and Nest Surveys, Fredericton, New Brunswick. Conducted field work, mapping, and reporting for habitat descriptions, rare plant surveys, and nesting bird surveys for several borrow pit locations along a highway construction path. [05/17/2011-07/05/2011]

Wassis Estates, Wassis Estates - Environmental Impact Assessment, Wassis, New Brunswick. Coordinated all field work and reporting associated with provincial EIA requirements including wildlife habitat, rare species, wetlands, groundwater, archaeology, and social considerations. [04/06/2011-07/20/2011]

City of New Maryland, New Maryland Water Supply Investigation - Environmental Impact Assessment, New Maryland, New Brunswick. Conducted field work and reporting duties for wildlife habitat assessment and wetland delineation for an area surrounding a proposed well location. [08/03/2011-08/23/2011]

Sunbury Developments, Noonan Estates, Noonan, New Brunswick. Performed field work, data compilation, and mapping duties for vegetation community description and wetland delineations. [08/10/2011-08/24/2011]

Wolastoqiyik Sacred Land Trust, Ecological Forest Management Plan, Burton, New Brunswick. Conducted field work, mapping, data compilation, public presentations, community teaching, and team management for forest management plan prescribing silvicultural interventions to meet community goals. [02/17/2010-11/15/2011]

Hill Developments, Hill Developments - Wetland Delineation, Fredericton, New Brunswick. Performed wetland delineation, mapping, data compilation, and reporting duties for residential subdivision wetland delineations. [07/01/2010-08/10/2010]

OVAC Ltd., Route 11 Wetland Delineations, Northern New Brunswick.

Sam Gildiner

3 of 3

Performed wetland delineations, functional assessments, mapping, and data compilation for a linear highways alignment as part of a provincial environmental impact assessment. [06/09/2010-08/04/2010]

Sundbury Developments, Noonan Developments, Noonan, New Brunswick. Performed wetland delineation, mapping, data compilation, and reporting for a residential subdivision. [08/12/2010-09/07/2010]

Department of Transportation - New Brunswick, Lorneville Barge Terminal - Environmental Impact Assessment, Lorneville, New Brunswick. Assisted with rare plant surveys, habitat assessments, electrofishing, and shoreline assessment of a proposed barge terminal as part of an EIA. [08/17/2011-09/14/2011]

Chippin Real Estate, Wetland Delineation, Fredericton, New Brunswick. Performed wetland delineation field work, mapping, data compilation, and reporting duties for a residential development. [07/29/2010-08/18/2010]

Port of Belledune, Port Expansion, Belledune, New Brunswick. Performed suspended solids monitoring in ocean waters during a dredging operation. [05/03/2011-07/05/2011]

1 of 8

Jessica Piette H. B.ES Terrestrial Ecologist

Education

Bachelor’s Degree, Environment and Resources Studies, University of Waterloo

Diploma, Environmental Assessment – University of Waterloo

Years of Experience

With AECOM: 5


Ecological Land Classification for Southern Ontario Training Course, Ministry of Natural Resources, 2007

Ontario Wetland Evaluation Training Course, Ministry of Natural Resources, 2008

First Aid Certification, St. John’s Ambulance, 2007

Environmental Impact Assessment Diploma, University of Waterloo, 2004

Ms. Piette is a terrestrial ecologist with AECOM’s Ecological Services Group working in Kitchener, Ontario. Her technical skills include wetland boundary delineation, and evaluations, soils identification, air-photo interpretation, vegetation inventories, community descriptions, amphibian surveys, and woodland evaluations. She is trained and has experience in the application of Ecological Land Classification (ELC) of Southern Ontario, and the Ministry of Natural Resources Wetland Evaluation guidelines. These skills facilitate in the preparation and data collection to complete environmental impact studies, constraints and opportunity reports, subject land status reports, tree preservation reports, environmental assessment evaluations, and natural heritage studies.

Project Experience

Environmental Impact Studies Orfus Realty, King Township Property – Natural Heritage Constraints & Opportunities Report, King Township, Region of York. Completed terrestrial field investigations including aerial photography interpretation, the delineation of vegetation into Ecological Land Classification (ELC) units, the collection of a comprehensive floral species list and the delineation of on-site wetland communities following the Ministry of Natural Resources Wetland Evaluation Protocol for insertion into the final Natural Heritage C&O document. Completed a Species at Risk (SAR) Screening to identify any potential SAR as well as their associated habitat located within the study area. City of London, Southcrest Storm Sewer and Outfall Replacement – Environmental Impact Study, London, Ontario. Completed terrestrial field investigations to determine existing site conditions. This included the delineation of vegetation communities into Ecological Land Classification Units, as well as a tree inventory along the proposed storm sewer alignment and outfall location. Completed a Species at Risk (SAR) Screening to identify any potential SAR as well as their associated habitat located within the study area. Following data collection completed the corresponding sections within the EIS report. City of London, South West Area Plan – Natural Heritage Report, London Ontario. Completed terrestrial investigations for 24 unevaluated vegetation patches within the City of London in order to determine their significance within the Natural Heritage System. Investigations included aerial photography interpretation as well as site specific investigations. Following data collection the City of London’s woodland evaluation guidelines, and/or wetland evaluation guidelines were applied accordingly. City of London, Meadowlily Area Plan – Natural Heritage Study, London Ontario – Conducted terrestrial field investigations, including aerial photography interpretation, the application of Ecological Land Classification and the collection of a comprehensive floral species list for insertion into the Meadowlily Area Plan – Natural Heritage Study Report.

Jessica Piette

2 of 8

City of Kitchener, Blockline Road Extension, Kitchener, Ontario – Conducted terrestrial field investigations, including aerial photography interpretation, the application of Ecological Land Classification, the collection of a comprehensive floral species list and the delineation of on-site wetland communities following the Ministry of Natural Resources Wetland Evaluation Protocol for insertion into the final Environmental Impact Study document. Regional Municipality of Waterloo, Rapid Transit Initiative, Transit Project Assessment Process, Environmental Impact Assessment. – Carried out terrestrial field investigations, including aerial photography interpretation, the application of Ecological Land Classification and the collection of a comprehensive floral species list along the proposed Light Rail Transit (LRT) Route. This was completed in order to assess the significance of the existing natural heritage features, to present potential development constraints, as well as, provide direction for specific design considerations of the LRT. GMS Mortgage, Huron Shores – Environmental Impact Study, Lampton County. Assisted in the delineation of wetland communities, plant identification and the completion of necessary report updates. St. Joseph’s Health Care, St. Thomas Regional Mental Health Care Centre - Scoped Environmental Impact Study. Completed terrestrial field investigations for existing site conditions for the development of a Regional Mental Health Care Centre facility on lands located adjacent to Hepburn Drain and lands designated as Significant Woodland and Significant Valleyland. This included the delineation of vegetation communities into Ecological Land Classification (ELC) units, as well as a tree inventory for the subject lands for insertion into the final document. Sifton Properties, Wilton Grove Road Environmental Impact Study, London, Ontario. Assisted in the completion of vegetation inventories to determine existing conditions. Completed the description of vegetation communities using proper Ecological Land Classification units according to the Ministry of Natural Resources: Ecological Land Classification System (Lee et al, 1998), created corresponding vegetation profiles, as well as assisted in the preparation of the final report. Completed salamander monitoring using cover boards as described by EMAN-Parks Canada National Monitoring Protocol for Terrestrial Salamanders. Sydney Tar Ponds Agency, Sydney Tar Ponds Baseline Avifauna Environmental Effects Monitoring Report, Sydney, Nova Scotia. Assisted in the collection of background information as well as in the completion of the Avifauna baseline report. Sifton Properties, Hardy Road Environmental Impact Study, Brantford, Ontario. Aided in the completion of vegetation inventories to determine existing conditions, completed background research on native prairie species for Brant County and created a detailed plant list. Participated in restoration efforts in association with the Ministry of Natural Resources regarding on-site tufa and a remnant prairie community.

Jessica Piette

3 of 8

Sifton Properties, Fanshawe Ridge – Environmental Impact Study, London, Ontario. Helped in the data collection to determine existing site conditions and constraints to development to be inserted in the final EIS document. This included aerial photography interpretation, vegetation community delineation into Ecological Land (ELC) Classification units, and the collection of a detailed floral species list. The onsite Fanshawe Ridge Provincially Significant Wetland boundaries were refined using the protocols set out in the Ministry o Natural Resources Wetland Evaluation Guide. GMS Mortgage, Huron Shores Environmental Impact Study, Lampton County, Ontario. Aided in the delineation of a wetland community. Labrador Iron Mines, Labrador Iron Mines Environmental Impact Study, Schefferville, Quebec. Aided in the completion of the baseline breeding birds report. Sifton Properties, Wickerson Road Environmental Impact Study, London, Ontario. Created corresponding vegetation profiles for Ecological Land Classification communities. Assisted in the completion of the final report. Completed amphibian surveys, using the “point-count” techniques as described in the Great Lakes Marsh Monitoring Program, as well as completed salamander monitoring using cover boards as described by EMAN-Parks Canada National Monitoring Protocol for Terrestrial Salamanders. Valente & Theocharis, 14873 Medway Road Constraints and Opportunities Report, London, Ontario. Aided in the completion of vegetation inventories to determine existing site conditions. Contacted local and provincial authorities requesting background information on the subject lands. Assisted in the description of vegetation communities using proper Ecological Land Classification units according to the Ministry of Natural Resources: Ecological Land Classification System (Lee et al, 1998), and assisted in the completion of the final report. City of Woodstock, Woodstock Woodlands Environmental Impact Study, Woodstock, Ontario. Assisted in the completion of vegetation inventories, the description of vegetation communities using proper Ecological Land Classification units, according to the Ministry of Natural Resources: Ecological Land Classification System (Lee et al, 1998), and in the completion of the final report. Completed a wetland evaluation for two of the patches using the Ministry of Natural Resources Southern Ontario Wetland Evaluation System. Sifton Properties, Denfield Property DAR, London, Ontario. Aided in the completion of vegetation inventories to determine existing site conditions. Contacted local and provincial authorities requesting background information on the subject lands. Assisted in the description of vegetation communities using proper ELC units and assisted in the completion of the final report. Sifton Properties, Fratscko Lands Advisory and Environmental Impact Statement, London, Ontario. Aided in completion of field investigations to determine existing site conditions. Completed vegetation inventories and helped complete preliminary amphibian surveys, using the “point-count” techniques as described in the Great Lakes Marsh Monitoring Program.

Jessica Piette

4 of 8

Downham, Downham Property Environmental Impact Statement, London, Ontario. Assisted in completion of vegetation inventories for the subject property. Prepared community descriptions and profiles using ELC units. City of Woodstock, BB2D Wetland Environmental Impact Statement, Woodstock, Ontario. Assisted in collection of vegetation inventories and prepared a detailed list with all common and Latin floral names. Contacted local and provincial authorities requesting background information. Sifton Properties, Old Victoria Road Environmental Impact Statement, London, Ontario. Aided in gathering of vegetation inventories according to Ecological Land Classification units (ELC) and delineation of wetland boundaries. Contacted local and provincial authorities to obtain necessary background information. Kenmore Home, Bierens Property, London, Ontario. Assisted in description of vegetation communities by creating vegetation profiles and detailed plant lists. Contacted local and provincial authorities obtaining necessary background information. Renewable Energy NextEra Energy Canada, Bluewater Wind Energy Centres and Transmission Line Renewable Energy Project, Grand Bend, Ontario. Completed terrestrial site investigations, including delineations of vegetation communities into Ecological Land Classification (ELC) units, amphibian surveys following the Marsh Monitoring Protocol. Completed the woodland evaluations following the protocols set out in the Natural Heritage Assessment Guide for Renewable Energy Project Table 8: Significant Woodland Evaluation Criteria and Standards. Wetland Restoration ORE Development, Highbury Business Park Wetland Creation, London, Ontario. Aided with the vegetation inventory and monitoring of the area. Wetland Monitoring City of London, Uplands North Storm Water Management – Wetland Monitoring Program – Baseline Data, London, Ontario. Completed baseline data collection for a 3 year monitoring program within a wetland located adjacent to a storm water management pond. This included the selection and establishment of 5 permanent monitoring quadrats within the study area as well as a tree health assessment for existing trees within the wetland. Conducted amphibian surveys following the Marsh Monitoring Protocol for inclusion into the baseline report. Following data collection completed Baseline Wetland Monitoring Report. City of London, Forest City Wetland Forest City Stormwater Management Facility Westminster Wetland Complex Assessment of Reported Die-back. Conducted wetland assessment of Westminster Wetland complex including boundary delineation and a detailed floral species list for insertion into the final document.

Jessica Piette

5 of 8

City of London, Uplands North Storm Water Management – Wetland Monitoring Program – Year 1 Monitoring, London, Ontario. Completed Year 1 data collection for a 3 year monitoring program within a wetland located adjacent to a storm water management pond. This included vegetation monitoring within the 5 permanent monitoring quadrats within the study area as well as a tree health assessment for existing trees within the wetland. Class Environmental Assessments Regional Municipality of York, Upper York Sewage Solutions Environmental Assessment – Natural Environment Baseline Conditions Report. Completed terrestrial field investigations using a combination of Rapid Ecological Land Classification (ELC), and a comprehensive floral species list for the entire study area. This was completed in order to determine existing conditions as well as provide constraints to the overall selection of the preferred alternative. Township of Woolwich, Municipal Class Environmental Assessment for the Proposed Replacement of Floradale Road Structure # 050106 – Collected necessary background documentation from local agencies. Completed terrestrial field investigations using a combination of Ecological Land Classification (ELC), and a comprehensive floral species list, and conducted impact assessment for insertion into the final EA document. Niagara Region, Municipal Class Environmental Assessment for the Proposed Reece Bridge Replacement – Collected necessary background documentation from local agencies. Completed terrestrial field investigations using a combination of Ecological Land Classification (ELC), and a comprehensive floral species list, and conducted impact assessment for insertion into the final EA document. Go Transit, Expansion of Rail Service from Oshawa to Bowmanville on the Lakeshore East Corridor: Natural Environmental Conditions Report. – Completed terrestrial field investigations using a combination of Rapid Ecological Land Classification (ELC), and a comprehensive floral species list for 14 land parcels within the study area. This was completed in order to determine existing conditions as well as in the prevention and reduction of potential negative effects associated with the overall design, construction implementation and long-term operation of the rail expansion to natural heritage features. San Gold Corporation, Bissett Gold Mine Tailings Pond Expansion, Bissett, Manitoba. Aided in the completion of vegetation inventories to determine existing conditions. City of Toronto, Toronto Island Water Main Extension EA, Toronto Ontario. Aided in the completion of vegetation inventories. City of London, Sunningdale Stormwater Management Pond EA, London, Ontario. Aided in the collection of vegetation inventories and background information.

Jessica Piette

6 of 8

City of Woodstock, Water-Wastewater EA, Woodstock, Ontario. Assisted in the collection of existing conditions to aid in selection of a preferred alternative, and in the completion of a memo reporting these findings. City of Grimsby, Russ Road Extension EA, Grimsby, Ontario. Aided in the collection of field data, including vegetation inventories. Assisted in the completion of the memo reporting the investigation results. City of London, Bradley Avenue Trunk Water Main Class EA, London, Ontario. Collected vegetation inventory for the section of Bradley Avenue from Jackson Road to Airport Road, by identifying tree species, calculating its DBH, dripline, and assessing its health. Also assisted in writing the methods, findings, and significance sections of the initial report. City of London, Western Road Widening, London, Ontario. Aided in the compilation of field data to determine existing site conditions. Completed vegetation inventories and finalized initial memo to the client. City of Milton, Alternate Water Supply Class EA, Milton, Ontario. Helped refined preferred route by taking notes and photographs then compiling the data into report form. Manitoulin Island, Islandwide Waste Management Plan, Manitoulin, Ontario. Aided in collection of background information by contacting Manitoulin’s landfill and transfer station representatives and asking a series of predetermined questions pertaining to their waste practices. Also contacted were the marinas and aquaculture farms of the area. City of London, Old Oak SWM Pond, London, Ontario. Aided in gathering of field data by completing vegetation inventories and community descriptions, as well as, completing a detailed floral list for the study area. City of Guelph, Burke Well, Guelph, Ontario. Aided with compilation of vegetation inventories and community descriptions. Mining Labrador Iron Mines, Labrador Iron Mines, Environmental Impact Study, Schefferville, Quebec. Assisted in the completion of vegetation community delineations by aerial photography interpretation followed by ground truthing using the Canadian Vegetation Classification System. Compiled a detailed plant species list for each of the three specific areas of interest. Helped in the completion of the baseline breeding birds report. San Gold Corporation, Bissett Gold Mine Tailings Pond Expansion, Bissett, Manitoba. Helped in the completion of vegetation inventories to determine existing conditions for the expansion of the tailings ponds. Bancroft Uranium, Bancroft, Ontario. Completed the delineation of vegetation communities using aerial photography interpretation followed by field investigations. Sydney Tar Ponds Agency, Sydney Tar Ponds – Baseline Avifauna

Jessica Piette

7 of 8

Environmental Effects Monitoring Report, Sydney, Nova Scotia. Assisted in the collection of background information as well as in the completion of the Avifauna baseline report. Subject Land Status Reports City of London, Highbury and Highway 401 Expansion, London, Ontario. Completed vegetation inventories to determine existing conditions. Completed the description of vegetation communities using proper Ecological Land Classification units according to the Ministry of Natural Resources: Ecological Land Classification System (Lee et al, 1998), and completed the final report. Sifton Properties, Fanshawe Ridge Wetland Subject Land Status Report, London Ontario. Aided in the completion of field investigations, including vegetation inventories, community delineation into proper Ecological Land Classification units according to the Ministry of Natural Resources: Ecological Land Classification System (Lee et al, 1998), the delineation and staking of the wetland boundary, and in the completion of the final report. City of Woodstock, Parkinson SWM Pond Cleanout, Woodstock, Ontario. Participated in the initial amphibian’s survey for the study area. Assisted in field investigations by collecting vegetation samples and prepared detailed community descriptions for the final report. Tree Preservation Plans City of Mississauga, Hanlan Feedermain Environmental Assessment, Mississauga Ontario. Completed a tree inventory along each proposed feedermain route in order to assist in the identification in the preferred route. This included noting trees species within proximity to alternative alignments, potential impacts from proposed works. As well detailed tree data was collected including identification of dominant species, measuring diameter at breast height, assessing health, calculating height, and measuring the dripline along alternative routes as well as a description of existing riparian vegetation along various watercourse crossings. Sifton Properties, Hopedale Tree Preservation Plan, London Ontario. Collected tree inventory data by identifying individual species, measuring diameter at breast height, assessing health, calculating height, and measuring the dripline in order to complete a Tree Preservation Plan. Toronto Island Watermain extension – EA, Toronto Ontario. Aided in the collection of tree data. This included the identification of tree species, measuring the diameter at breast height, calculating height, assessing health and measuring the dripline. This information was then used to complete a Tree Preservation Plan. City of London, Innovation Park Phase 4, London Ontario. Completed significant woodland/wetland boundary staking using the dripline of edge trees. Completed vegetation inventories and tree inventory noting species, diameter at breast height, health and height. This information was used to determine the existing conditions of the subject property in order to complete a Tree Preservation Plan.

Jessica Piette

8 of 8

Environmental Monitoring Bancroft Uranium, Bancroft, Ontario. Completed the delineation of vegetation conditions using aerial photography interpretation followed by field investigations. Woodland Assessments Pen Equity Corporation and Goal Ventures Inc., Subject Land Status Report. London Ontario. Conducted necessary site investigations to complete a woodland evaluation following criteria set out by the City of London. Sifton Properties, Van Horik Woodland Assessment, London, Ontario. Assisted in the completion of field investigations, which included the collection of detailed plant lists and the delineation of different communities within the woodland using the Ministry’s Ecological Land Classification System.

of 4

Pete Read-Faunal Related Resume to 2011 Education: Hons. B.Sc. Zoology / Ecology. (University of Western Ontario)

Experience: Projects marked with ** indicate I was working as part of Dave Martin’s Environmental Consulting team of faunal surveyors 2012 Acted as “expert” bird hike leader in May at Point Pelee NP for Friends of Point Pelee 2011 Avian studies for Wind Turbine Projects on Amherst Island. Avian studies for rail and storage yard development in Sept Isle, Quebec. Various avian studies for AECOM in London and area, and for 404 extension. **Observations at Eagle nests in South-western Ontario for post wind turbine construction (Chatham-

Kent) Acted as “expert” bird hike leader in May at Point Pelee NP for Friends of Point Pelee

2010 **Faunal studies at sites for wind turbine projects (Haldimand and Norfolk) Designing and Constructing Enclosures and Consulting for Loggerhead Shrike Recovery Program

employed by Toronto Metropolitan Zoo. (continuing program). Acted as “expert” bird hike leader in May at Point Pelee NP for Friends of Point Pelee

2009 **Faunal surveys at sites for wind turbines (Middlesex, Bruce, Grey, Norfolk and Haldimand) **Faunal surveys in 37 woodlots in Tecumseh, Essex County. Designing and Constructing Enclosures and Consulting for Loggerhead Shrike Recovery Program

employed by Wildlife Preservation Canada and Canadian Wildlife Service. (continuing program). Acted as “expert” bird hike leader in May at Point Pelee NP for Friends of Point Pelee

2008 **Field studies, mostly road surveys of avifauna for wind turbine projects(Chatham-Kent, Middlesex,

Lampton) Designing and Constructing Enclosures and Consulting for Loggerhead Shrike Recovery Program


2007 **Field studies of avifauna for wind turbine projects (Chatham-Kent, Middlesex) **took part in surveys and habitat assessments for Acadian Flycatchers and Hooded Warblers at various

sites in Elgin, Middlesex, Oxford and Lambton Counties Designing and Constructing Enclosures and Consulting for Loggerhead Shrike Recovery Program


2006 **Field studies of avifauna for wind turbine projects (locations, migration watches) in Dover Township

and near Amherstburg. Designing and Constructing Enclosures and Consulting for Loggerhead Shrike Recovery Program

employed by Wildlife Preservation Canada and Canadian Wildlife Service (continuing program). Acted as “expert” bird hike leader in May at Point Pelee NP for Friends of Point Pelee

of 4

2005 Crew Leader for Boreal inventories of birds (locations, habitats, point counts) and wildlife in different

regions of North Western Ontario employed by Federation of Ontario Naturalists (Ontario Nature), Boreal Initiative, and Atlas of Breeding Birds for a joint study. In charge of program, transportation, accommodations, communications with First Nations People on trip, final reports, etc.

Bird survey work (locations, habitats, point counts) as one of the summer field work crew leaders in area near Algonquin Park, hired by Atlas of Breeding Birds for Ontario.

Designing and Constructing Enclosures and Consulting for Loggerhead Shrike Recovery Program employed by Wildlife Preservation Canada and Canadian Wildlife Service(continuing program)

Acted as “expert” bird hike leader in May at Point Pelee NP for Friends of Point Pelee 2004 Crew member for Boreal Forest inventories of birds (locations, habitats, point counts) and other wildlife

during summer field season, in North Western Ontario, employed by Federation of Ontario Naturalists (Ontario Nature), Boreal Initiative, and Atlas of Breeding Birds for a joint study.

Collection of nest records, habitat studies, banding, blood sampling of Acadian Flycatchers for the Acadian Flycatcher research program in South Western Ontario run by Dr. Bonnie Wolfenden, York University.

Designing and Constructing Enclosures and Consulting for Loggerhead Shrike Recovery Program employed by Wildlife Preservation Canada and Canadian Wildlife Service.

Acted as “expert” bird hike leader in May at Point Pelee NP for Friends of Point Pelee 2003 Breeding bird survey work (locations, habitats, point counts) studying in area near Temagami, North Bay,

Sudbury regions for Atlas of Breeding Birds and Federation of Ontario Naturalists (Ontario Nature). Acted as “expert” bird hike leader in May at Point Pelee NP for Friends of Point Pelee

2002 ** Faunal surveys at Clear Creek, Chatham-Kent, for the Nature Conservancy of Canada ** Faunal surveys for the Fort Erie Natural Areas Inventory for Dougan and Associates ** Faunal surveys at Bickford Oak Woods, Lambton, for Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources ** Amphibian surveys at Komoka PP Reserve, Middlesex, ** Surveys for Acadian Flycatcher and Hooded Warblers at southwestern Ontario Core sites for Canadian Wildlife

Service Acted as “expert” bird hike leader in May at Point Pelee NP for Friends of Point Pelee

2001 ** Faunal Surveys for Komoka Provincial Park ** Habitat assessment and nest productivity of Acadian Flycatcher in southwestern Ontario for Canadian Wildlife

Service and Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources Acted as “expert” bird hike leader in May at Point Pelee NP for Friends of Point Pelee

2000 ** Surveys for Acadian Flycatcher and Hooded Warblers at southwestern Ontario Core sites for Canadian Wildlife

Service 1999 ** Searched for Acadian Flycatchers at ravine and upland forest sites in Elgin, Middlesex and Lambton Counties for

Bird Studies Canada. 1998 ** Searched for breeding Acadian Flycatchers, Hooded Warblers and other VTE species at known sites in

southwestern Ontario and noted habitat features at breeding territories. Bird Studies Canada, Canadian Wildlife Service, World Wildlife Fund Canada

1997 ** Searched for breeding Acadian Flycatchers, Hooded Warblers and Prothonotary Warblers and other VTE species

at known sites in southwestern Ontario and noted habitat features at breeding territories. Bird Studies Canada, Canadian Wildlife Service, World Wildlife Fund Canada

of 4

Additional… 1975+ Organizer or co-ordinator for the following projects: * London Peregrine Project (1995-2005) MNR advisor and co-ordinator of volunteers for monitoring nest site * Ontario Breeding Bird Atlas (2001-2005) member of Atlas Co-ordinators team, Region 4 * London Audubon Christmas Bird Count (since 1983) co-ordinate and compile, as well as participate * Audubon Field Notes (since 1983) contributor/editor for Middlesex County *Middlesex Bird Records Compiler and Committee Chair –recording and compiling bird records for Middlesex

County and chairing the evaluations of record committee (1983+) * Compiled Bird Checklist for Komoka Provincial Park for Ontario Parks (1985)

1975+ Participated as a volunteer in the following data collection/monitoring programs * Audubon Christmas Bird Counts (40+ counts since 1975) * Atlas of the Mammals of Ontario for Middlesex (1990-1992) * Atlas of the Breeding Birds of Ontario (1985-1987) * CWS Breeding Bird Surveys (10+ years, 3 routes) * CWS Forest Bird Monitoring (Skunk’s Misery Forest 1990 to 2001) * CWS Species at Risk Studies (1990s) * CWS Endangered Species Studies (2001) * McIlwraith Field Naturalists of London Thames River Breeding Bird Census (1985 - 90) * McIlwraith Field Naturalists of London Life Science Inventories (Skunk's Misery, Komoka P.P. Reserve)

Related Natural History Experiences 2005 Member of interpretive staff for Akademik Ioffe, cruise ship to Antarctica for Peregrine Tours 1995-1997 Teacher at Outdoor Education Facilities in London, Ontario (JK-OAC) 2001+ Trip Leader for Worldwide Quest Nature Tours (Cuba, Costa Rica, Iceland, Amazon). 2001+ Trip Leader for Friends of Point Pelee 1980+ Numerous hikes for various nature clubs such as the Ontario Field Ornithologists, Ontario Nature /

Federation of Ontario Naturalists, Nature London / McIlwraith Field Naturalists, and Canadian Nature Federation. 1980 -1990 Teacher of birding interest courses with associated field trips for Fanshawe College and University of

Western Ontario Recent Publications. Read, P. McCowan’s Longspur:New to Ontario. In Ontario Birds, August 2006, Volume 24, number 2. Ontario Field Ornithologists. Domm, J. 2002. Guide to London Birds. (selected and wrote London Birding Hot Spots). Lorimer Publ. Read, Peter. 2000 American Anhinga, Anhinga anhinga summers at Delaware Sportsman’s Conservation Pond. In Ontario Birds, December 2000, Volume 18 number 3. Ontario Field Ornithologists. Read, P. and David Martin. Bird Checklist for Middlesex County. compiled 1990, revised 1996, 2003, 2009. Nature London aka McIlwraith Field Naturalists of London J.C. Findlay. 1984, revised 1990s. A Bird-finding Guide to Canada ( selected, wrote and revised section on London, St. Thomas and Sarnia) Hurtig Publ Read, Peter. From 1983+ Annual Summary of Birds Reports for Middlesex County. In: The Cardinal. Nature London / The McIlwraith Field Naturalists of London. Read, Peter. From 1983+ Seasonal Bird Reports. In: The Cardinal, 4 times a year. Nature London / The McIlwraith Field Naturalists of London. Read, Peter. From 1983+ many articles including trip reports, news items, but also birding articles such as… Osprey Nesting in Middlesex , Sharp-shinned Hawk Rescue, Peregrine Falcon Nesting, etc. In: The Cardinal. Nature London / The McIlwraith Field Naturalists of London.

of 4

Awards The Conservation Award in recognition of outstanding contributions to conservation from The McIlwraith Field Naturalists of London, 1996 Ministry of Natural Resources Great Lakes Raptor Recovery Program in recognition of outstanding contributions to the restoration, recovery and conservation of raptor populations in the great lakes basin, London Project Peregrine, 1996 Ontario Field Ornithologists certificate of appreciation, Sept 2000 Federation of Ontario Naturalists (Ontario Nature) for outstanding commitment to nature as teacher, volunteer, birder and researcher, May 2002 The W. E. Saunders Award of Merit in recognition of outstanding contributions to The McIlwraith Field Naturalists of London, November 2004 Nature London Special Recognition Award in recognition of 26 years on the Board of Directors for Nature London/McIlwraith Field Naturalists of London, November 2009 Related Affiliations/Memberships/Positions: American Birding Association member Canadian Nature Federation member Ontario Nature / Federation of Ontario Naturalists member Friends of Point Pelee member Long Point Bird Observatory/Bird Studies Canada member Nature London / McIlwraith Field Naturalists of London-former Chairperson Birding Wing 1985-2009 -Vice president 2010-2011 -President as of Sept. 2011 Ontario Field Ornithologists-Life/charter member Woodland Advisory Committee for the County of Middlesex-member since 2007 Komoka Provincial Park Advisory Committee (completed 2005) References (others as needed) 1. Quest Nature Tours- 1-800-387-1483 2. Dave Martin- 1-519-269-3262 3. Ian Platt- 1- 519- 438-3330

Tom Shorney Ecologist

Professional History

07/25/2011 - present, AECOM, Ecologist 03/20/2011 – 07/22/2011, Quiet Nature, Restoration technician 06/2008 – 12/17, 2010, Natural Resources Canada, Great Lakes Forestry Centre, Ecological Technician

Education

Diploma, Ecosystems Management Technology, Sir Sandford Fleming College

Years of Experience

With AECOM: 4 months


Ecological Land Classification Certification 2012

First Aid Certification, St. John’s Ambulance 2012

Diploma, Ecosystems Management Technology, Sir Sandford Fleming College

WHIMIS training

Canadian Pleasure Craft Operator

Tom Shorney is a Terrestrial Ecologist with 4 years of field experience, with a keen interest in Birds and Amphibians. Since having joined the AECOM team in the summer of 2011, Tom has participated in both small and large scale projects. The majority of Tom’s experience in the consulting industry has involved assisting in Ecological Land Classification field work, as well as general stream measurements. He has had a major role in preparing Environmental Impact studies, and utilizing the Natural Heritage Information Centre for background species research. Experience Renewable Energy NextEra Energy Canada Along with a team of ecologists, several terrestrial investigations were conducted over a large spatial area for the purpose of wind energy. Specific investigations involved Ecological Land Classification (ELC) surveys, Significant Wildlife Habitat surveys, and wetland investigations. During the breeding season for amphibians, day searches and night call surveys were conducted. Monitored the distance of turbine locations to natural features during the micrositing process. Class Environmental Assessments Huron Bridge, City of Kitchener Performed terrestrial field investigations including the characterization of the surrounding vegetative communities along Schneider creek and prepared a photographic log. Cooksville Creek Erosion Control Study, EA Assisted in characterizing the terrestrial environment using Ecological Land Classification (ELC) techniques. Compiled a complete floral species list of plants in the area. Performed aquatic field investigations including stream depth, stream width, mineral composition of stream bottom, bank stabilization, and photo log. Contacted area officials regarding Species at Risk, and prepared the existing conditions portion of the report.

Reece Bridge Restoration Project, EA Assisted in field investigations such as classifying the terrestrial environment using Ecological Land Classification guidelines; and gathered specific background information using Natural Heritage Information Centre (NHIC). Forest City, City of London Performed field investigations pertaining to Stormwater Management Facility. Project required Aerial Photograph interpretation, NHIC search for background information, and the close contact with city and conservation authorities. Played key role in preparing the report. Cedar Creek, City of Woodstock Conducted a complete tree survey within study area including components such as: species, Diameter at breast height (DBH), tree condition, distances from stream, and GPS waypoints. Conducted background search and was in contact with provincial authorities. Monitoring Uplands North Storm Water Management – Wetland Monitoring Program, City of London Assisted in the preparation of a 3 year monitoring program which track the potential affects that development of a Storm Water Management Pond may have on the surrounding wetland. 5 plots were constructed in randomly selected areas, where vegetation communities will be closely monitored as well as, Water depth, water quality and tree health. Upper York Sewage Solutions, The Regional Municipality of York, EA Played a role in the completion of terrestrial investigations such as classifying vegetative communities and preparing a photographic log. Kitchener Waste Water Treatment Plant Assisted in the completion of terrestrial investigations which included photo interpretation, vegetation inventories which included using the ELC protocol, identified and measured trees and photographic log. Highway 2 Rapid Bus, Regional Municipality of Durham, Existing Environmental Conditions Performed terrestrial investigations along entire study which included classification of vegetative communities using ELC units, roadside tree inventory, photographic log and general notes. Supplied background information using the Natural Heritage Information Centre’s (NHIC) Biodiversity explorer, and assisted in the preparation of the report.

Barrie-Oliver, Class Environmental Assessment\ Performed Background information research using the Natural Heritage Information Centre’s (NHIC) Biodiversity explorer, as well as prepared a Species at Risk (SAR) table which outlines the species, their preferred habitat and when the species was last spotted. Species at Risk Assessment for Highway 81 Developed an information card for area citizens pertaining to the identification features of the Chimney Swift, which is listed as a Species at Risk.


Appendix D Weather Conditions during Site Investigations

1ra_2012-11-15_BW Amend - App D - Weather Data _60155032.Docx

Appendix D Weather Conditions during Bluewater Amendment Site Investigation Surveys – 2012 Weather Station: ........ Goderich Climate Identifier: ....... 6122847

Field Date Max. Temp. (°C) Min. Temp. (°C) Total Precip. (mm)

Speed of Max. Gust (km/h)

Average Wind Speed (km/hr)1

4/17/2012 4.9 -1.4 0 39 14.5 4/19/2012 11.3 6.9 0 41 17.7 4/23/2012 7.4 3.3 0 67 29.9 5/16/2012 12.4 4.6 2.9 44 19.9

Note: 1. At the time of this report, Environment Canada’s National Climate Data and Information Archive did not have the wind speed from 12 p.m. to 2 p.m. The average wind speed, therefore, was calculated using the wind speed data available.


Appendix E Vascular Plant Species List

Appe

ndix

H.

Plan

t Spe

cies

Lis

tN

exte

ra -

Blu

ewat

er S

tudy

Are

a

Coefficient of Conservatistm

Wetness Index

Weediness Index

Provincial Status

OMNR StatusCOSEWIC Status

Global Status

Local Status Huron County

514 BLW1603&1658

April 17, 2012

514 BLW1603&1658

April 17, 2012

514 BLW1603&1658

April 17, 2012

551 BLW1358&1371

April 19, 2012

551 BLW1358&1371

April 19, 2012

555 BLW1329April 23, 2012

555 BLW1329June 19, 2012

582 BLW1315May 16, 2012

582

Oldham et al

Oldham et al

Oldham et al

Newmaster

Newmaster

Oldham 1993

SWD

6-3

FOD

5-1

CU

M1

FOD

5-2

C

UM

1-1

CU

P3-2

FOD

9-5

SOC

CVa

scul

ar P

lant

Su

rvey

FOD

9-5

CU

M1-

1

PTER

IDO

PHYT

ESFE

RN

S &

ALL

IES

Dry

opte

ridac

eae

Woo

d Fe

rn F

amily

Mat

teuc

cia

stru

thio

pter

isO

stric

h Fe

rn5

-3S5

G5

XU

Ono

clea

sens

ibilis

Sens

itive

Fer

n4

-3S5

G5

XU

GYM

NO

SPER

MS

CO

NIF

ERS

Pina

ceae

Pine

Fam

ilyPi

cea

abie

sN

orw

ay S

pruc

e5

-1SE

3G

?U

Pinu

sst

robu

sEa

ster

n W

hite

Pin

e4

3S5

G5

XU

DPi

nus

sylv

estri

sSc

otch

Pin

e5

-3SE

5G

?I

RTs

uga

cana

dens

isEa

ster

n H

emlo

ck7

3S5

G5

XR

Cup

ress

acea

eC

edar

Fam

ilyTh

uja

occi

dent

alis

East

ern

Whi

te C

edar

4-3

S5G

5X

UU

DIC

OTY

LED

ON

SD

ICO

TSAc

erac

eae

Map

le F

amily

Acer

plan

tano

ides

Nor

way

Map

le5

-3SE

5G

?U

Acer

sacc

haru

m

Suga

r Map

le4

3S5

G5T

?X

AU

DF

FA

cer

negu

ndo

Man

itoba

Map

le0

-2S5

G5

UR

Acer

Xfre

eman

iiFr

eem

an's

Map

leS5

DU

Anac

ardi

acea

eSu

mac

or C

ashe

w F

amily

Toxi

code

ndro

nra

dica

ns s

sp. n

egun

doPo

ison

-ivy

(Clim

bing

)5

-1S5

G5T

XU

RTo

xico

dend

ron

rydb

ergi

lPo

ison

-ivy

00

S5G

5F

Apia

ceae

Car

rot o

r Par

sley

Fam

ilyD

aucu

sca

rota

Wild

Car

rot

5-2

SE5

G?

IU

Aqui

folia

ceae

Hol

ly F

amily

Ilex

verti

cila

taw

inte

rber

ry5

-4S5

G5

XU

Aris

tolo

chia

ceae

Duc

hman

's-p

ipe

Fam

ilyA

saru

mca

nade

nse

Wild

Gin

ger

65

S5G

5X

UAs

clep

iada

ceae

Milk

wee

d Fa

mily

Ascl

epia

ssy

riaca

Com

mon

Milk

wee

d0

5S5

G5

XR

Aste

race

aeC

ompo

site

or A

ster

Fam

ilyAr

ctiu

mm

inus

C

omm

on B

urdo

ck5

-2SE

5G

?T?

IR

DR

UC

enta

urea

bieb

erst

eini

iSp

otte

d Kn

apw

eed

5-3

SE5

G?

USo

lidag

oal

tissi

ma

Tall

Gol

denr

od1

3S5

XU

Solid

ago

flexi

caul

isZi

g-za

g G

olde

nrod

63

S5G

5X

UD

Solid

ago

spec

ies

Gol

denr

od s

peci

esU

FSy

mph

yotri

chum

late

riflo

rum

Cal

ico

Aste

r3

-2S5

G5T

5R

UTa

raxa

cum

offic

inal

eC

omm

on D

ande

lion

3-2

SE5

G5

IR

RR

UB

alsa

min

acea

eTo

uch-

me-

not F

amily

Impa

tiens

cape

nsis

Spot

ted

Jew

elw

eed

4-3

S5G

5X

UB

erbe

ridac

eae

Bar

berr

y Fa

mily

Cau

loph

yllu

mth

alic

troid

esBl

ue C

ohos

h6

5S5

GX

UU

UR

Pod

ophy

llum

pelta

tum

May

-app

le5

3S5

G5

XU

UB

etul

acea

eB

irch

Fam

ilyB

etul

aal

legh

anie

nsis

Yello

w B

irch

60

S5G

5X

UBe

tula

papy

rifer

aW

hite

Birc

h2

S5G

5X

RC

arpi

nus

caro

linia

naBl

ue B

eech

60

S5G

5TX

RU

Ost

rya

virg

inia

naIro

nwoo

d4

4S5

G5

XR

UU

Bra

ssic

acea

eM

usta

rd F

amily

Allia

riape

tiola

taG

arlic

Mus

tard

0-3

SE5

G5

IF

UR

UF

Cap

rifol

iace

aeH

oney

suck

le F

amily

Loni

cera

tata

rica

Tarta

rian

Hon

eysu

ckle

3-3

SE5

G?

IU

Sam

bucu

sni

gra

Euro

pean

Bla

ck E

lder

berr

yS5

G5

UVi

burn

umac

erifo

lium

Map

le-le

aved

Vib

urnu

m6

5S5

G5

XR

Vibu

rnum

lent

ago

Nan

nybe

rry

4-1

S5G

5X

FU

RC

orna

ceae

Dog

woo

d Fa

mily

Cor

nus

alte

rnifo

liaAl

tern

ate-

leav

ed D

ogw

ood

65

S5G

5X

UU

Cor

nus

race

mos

aR

ed P

anic

led

Dog

woo

d/G

ray

dogw

oo2

-2S5

G5?

XU

Cor

nus

rugo

saR

ound

-leav

ed D

ogw

ood

65

S5G

5X

UC

ornu

sse

ricea

Red

-osi

er D

ogw

ood

2-3

S5G

5X

UD

Faga

ceae

Bee

ch F

amily

Fagu

sgr

andi

folia

Amer

ican

Bee

ch6

3S5

G5

XU

FU

UQ

uerc

usru

bra

Red

Oak

63

S5G

5X

RG

eran

iace

aeG

eran

ium

Fam

ilyG

eran

ium

robe

rtian

umH

erb-

robe

rt5

-2SE

5G

5I

U

551

555

(SC

P-0

1)B

OTA

NIC

AL N

AME

CO

MM

ON

NAM

E51

4

1ra_

2012

-11-

15_B

W A

men

d - A

pp E

- P

lant

Lis

t_60

1550

32.x

lsx

Pag

e 1

pf 4

Appe

ndix

H.

Plan

t Spe

cies

Lis

tN

exte

ra -

Blu

ewat

er S

tudy

Are

a


Wetness Index

Weediness Index

Provincial Status


Global Status


514 BLW1603&1658

April 17, 2012

514 BLW1603&1658

April 17, 2012

514 BLW1603&1658

April 17, 2012

551 BLW1358&1371

April 19, 2012

551 BLW1358&1371

April 19, 2012

555 BLW1329April 23, 2012

555 BLW1329June 19, 2012

582 BLW1315May 16, 2012

582

Oldham et al

Oldham et al

Oldham et al

Newmaster

Newmaster

Oldham 1993

SWD

6-3

FOD

5-1

CU

M1

FOD

5-2

C

UM

1-1

CU

P3-2

FOD

9-5

SOC

CVa

scul

ar P

lant

Su

rvey

FOD

9-5

CU

M1-

1

551

555

(SC

P-0

1)B

OTA

NIC

AL N

AME

CO

MM

ON

NAM

E51

4

Gro

ssul

aria

ceae

Cur

rant

Fam

ilyR

ibes

amer

ican

umW

ild B

lack

Cur

rant

4-3

S5G

5X

FU

UU

Rib

escy

nosb

ati

Pric

kly

Goo

sebe

rry

45

S5G

5X

UR

ibes

lacu

stre

Swam

p Bl

ack

Cur

rant

7-3

S5G

5F

UU

RJu

glan

dace

aeW

alnu

t Fam

ilyC

arya

cord

iform

isBi

ttern

ut h

icko

ry6

0S5

G5

XU

FD

Jugl

ans

nigr

aBl

ack

Wal

nut

53

S4G

5X

RR

Lam

iace

aeM

int F

amily

Clin

opod

ium

vulg

aris

Wild

bas

il4

5S5

XR

Ole

acea

eO

live

Fam

ilyFr

axin

usam

eric

ana

Whi

te A

sh4

3S5

G5

XF

FR

FF

Frax

inus

nigr

aBl

ack

Ash

7-4

S5G

5X

FFr

axin

uspe

nnsy

lvan

ica

Gre

en a

sh3

-3S5

G5

XU

UU

Ona

grac

eae

Even

ing-

prim

rose

Fam

ilyC

ircae

alu

tetia

naEn

chan

ter's

Nig

htsh

ade

33

S5G

5T5

UPa

pave

race

aePo

ppy

Fam

ilySa

ngui

naria

cana

dens

isBl

oodr

oot

54

S5G

5X

UF

UU

UPl

anta

gina

ceae

Plan

tain

Fam

ilyPl

anta

gom

ajor

Com

mon

Pla

ntai

n-1

-1SE

5G

5I

UPo

lem

onia

ceae

Phlo

x Fa

mily

Phlo

xsp

ecie

sU

Ran

uncu

lace

aeB

utte

rcup

Fam

ilyAn

emon

eca

nade

nsis

Can

ada

Anem

one

3-3

S5G

5X

UC

alth

apa

lust

risM

arsh

-mar

igol

d5

-5S5

G5

XU

Thal

ictru

mpu

besc

ens

Tall

Mea

dow

-rue

S5G

5X

UF

Rha

mna

ceae

Buc

ktho

rn F

amily

Rha

mnu

sca

thar

tica

Com

mon

Buc

ktho

rn3

-3SE

5G

?I

UR

RU

Ros

acea

eR

ose

Fam

ilyC

rata

egus

punc

tata

Larg

e-fru

ited

Thor

n4

5S5

G5

XR

UF

Cra

taeg

ussp

ecie

sH

awth

orn

spec

ies

UFr

agar

iavi

rgin

iana

Vi

rgin

ia S

traw

berr

y2

1SU

G5T

?X

UU

RF

Geu

mal

eppi

cum

Yello

w A

vens

2-1

S5G

5X

UM

alus

pum

ilaC

omm

on a

pple

5-1

SE5

G5

IR

Prun

usse

rotin

aBl

ack

Che

rry

33

S5G

5X

RR

UR

Prun

usvi

rgin

iana

ssp

. virg

inia

naC

hoke

Che

rry

21

S5G

5T?

XF

FF

FF

FPy

rus

spec

ies

Pear

spe

cies

RR

ubus

idae

usR

ed R

aspb

erry

SE1

G5T

5U

FF

UR

ubus

odor

atus

Purp

le-fl

ower

ed R

aspb

erry

35

S5G

5U

Sor

bus

aucu

paria

Euro

pean

Mou

ntai

n-as

h5

-2SE

4G

5I

USa

licac

eae

Will

ow F

amily

Pop

ulus

delto

ides

ssp

. del

toid

esEa

ster

n C

otto

nwoo

d4

-1SU

G5T

?X

RSa

lixsp

ecie

sW

illow

spe

cies

DTi

liace

aeLi

nden

Fam

ilyTi

liaam

eric

ana

Amer

ican

Bas

swoo

d4

3S5

G5

XU

UR

Ulm

acea

eEl

m F

amily

Ulm

usam

eric

ana

Whi

te E

lm3

-2S5

G5?

XR

UU

UU

RU

rtic

acea

eN

ettle

Fam

ilyU

rtica

dioi

ca s

sp. d

ioic

aEu

rope

an S

tingi

ng N

ettle

-1-1

SE2

G5T

?U

Viol

acea

eVi

olet

Fam

ilyVi

ola

cons

pers

aD

og V

iole

t4

-2S5

G5

XF

RV

iola

pube

scen

sD

owny

Yel

low

Vio

let

54

S5G

5X

RVi

ola

spec

ies

Viol

et s

peci

esF

MO

NO

CO

TYLE

DO

NS

MO

NO

CO

TSAr

acea

eAr

um F

amily

Aris

aem

atri

phyl

lum

Smal

l Jac

k-in

-the-

pulp

it5

-2S5

G5T

5X

UR

RU

Cyp

erac

eae

Sedg

e Fa

mily

Car

expe

dunc

ulat

aLo

ng-s

talk

ed S

edge

55

S5G

5X

RR

Lilia

ceae

Lily

Fam

ilyAl

lium

trico

ccum

Wild

Lee

k7

2S5

G5

RF

FEr

ythr

oniu

mam

eric

anum

ssp

. am

eric

anum

Yello

w T

rout

Lily

55

S5G

5T5

XF

UU

FF

FM

aian

them

umca

nade

nse

Wild

Lily

-of-t

he-v

alle

y5

0S5

G5

XU

Mai

anth

emum

race

mos

umFa

lse

Solo

mon

's S

eal

43

S5G

5TX

FF

UU

Poly

gona

tum

pube

scen

sH

airy

Sol

omon

's S

eal

55

S5G

5F

Stre

ptop

us

lanc

eola

tus

Ros

e Tw

iste

d-st

alk

10-1

S5G

5R

Trilli

umgr

andi

floru

mW

hite

Tril

lium

55

S5G

5X

UU

UF

U

1ra_

2012

-11-

15_B

W A

men

d - A

pp E

- P

lant

Lis

t_60

1550

32.x

lsx

Pag

e 2

pf 4

Appe

ndix

H.

Plan

t Spe

cies

Lis

tN

exte

ra -

Blu

ewat

er S

tudy

Are

a


Wetness Index

Weediness Index

Provincial Status


Global Status


514 BLW1603&1658

April 17, 2012

514 BLW1603&1658

April 17, 2012

514 BLW1603&1658

April 17, 2012

551 BLW1358&1371

April 19, 2012

551 BLW1358&1371

April 19, 2012

555 BLW1329April 23, 2012

555 BLW1329June 19, 2012

582 BLW1315May 16, 2012

582

Oldham et al

Oldham et al

Oldham et al

Newmaster

Newmaster

Oldham 1993

SWD

6-3

FOD

5-1

CU

M1

FOD

5-2

C

UM

1-1

CU

P3-2

FOD

9-5

SOC

CVa

scul

ar P

lant

Su

rvey

FOD

9-5

CU

M1-

1

551

555

(SC

P-0

1)B

OTA

NIC

AL N

AME

CO

MM

ON

NAM

E51

4

Orc

hida

ceae

Orc

hid

Fam

ilyEp

ipac

tishe

llebo

rine

Com

mon

Hel

lebo

rine

5-2

SE5

G?

IU

Poac

eae

Gra

ss F

amily

Dac

tylis

glom

erat

aO

rcha

rd G

rass

3-1

SE5

G?

IF

Gly

ceria

stria

taFo

wl M

anna

Gra

ss3

-5S5

G5

XR

Phal

aris

arun

dina

cea

Ree

d C

anar

y G

rass

0-4

S5G

5X

UD

Poa

prat

ensi

s ss

p. p

rate

nsis

Kent

ucky

Blu

egra

ss0

1S5

G5T

XF

FLO

RIS

TIC

SU

MM

AR

Y &

ASS

ESSM

ENT

Spec

ies

Div

ersi

tyTo

tal S

peci

es:

82N

ativ

e Sp

ecie

s:65

79.2

7%Ex

otic

Spe

cies

1720

.73%

Tota

l Tax

a in

Reg

ion

(Lis

t Reg

ion,

Sou

rce)

1000

0%

Reg

iona

l Tax

a R

ecor

ded

0.82

%R

egio

nally

Sig

nific

ant S

peci

es0

S1-S

3 Sp

ecie

s0

S4 S

peci

es1

S5 S

peci

es66

Co-

effic

ient

of C

onse

rvat

ism

and

Flo

ral Q

ualit

y In

dex

Co-

effic

ient

of C

onse

rvat

ism

(CC

) (av

erag

e)4.

20C

C 0

to 3

low

est s

ensi

tivity

1929

.23%

CC

4 to

6m

oder

ate

sens

itivi

ty41

63.0

8%C

C 7

to 8

high

sen

sitiv

ity4

6.15

%C

C 9

to 1

0hi

ghes

t sen

sitiv

ity1

1.54

%Fl

oral

Qua

lity

Inde

x (F

QI)

33.8

6

Pres

ence

of W

eedy

& In

vasi

ve S

peci

esm

ean

wee

dine

ss-2

.06

wee

dine

ss =

-1lo

w p

oten

tial i

nvas

iven

ess

529

.41%

wee

dine

ss =

-2m

oder

ate

pote

ntia

l inv

asiv

enes

635

.29%

wee

dine

ss =

-3hi

gh p

oten

tial i

nvas

iven

ess

635

.29%

Pres

ence

of W

etla

nd S

peci

esav

erag

e w

etne

ss v

alue

1.51

upla

nd24

29.2

7%fa

culta

tive

upla

nd20

24.3

9%fa

culta

tive

1417

.07%

facu

ltativ

e w

etla

nd18

21.9

5%ob

ligat

e w

etla

nd2

2.44

%

EXPL

ANAT

ION

OF

TERM

INO

LOG

Y Bo

tani

cal a

nd C

omm

on N

ame:

Fro

m In

tegr

ated

Tax

onom

ic In

form

atio

n Sy

stem

(IT

IS).

2012

.Co

-effi

cien

t of C

onse

rvat

ism

: Thi

s va

lue,

rang

ing

from

0 (l

ow) t

o 10

(hig

h), i

s ba

sed

on a

spe

cies

tole

ranc

e of

dis

turb

ance

and

fide

lity

to a

spe

cific

hab

itat i

nteg

rity.

W

etne

ss In

dex:

Thi

s va

lue,

rang

ing

from

-5 (o

blig

ate

wet

land

) to

5 (u

plan

d) p

rovi

des

the

prob

abilit

y of

a s

peci

es o

ccur

ring

in w

etla

nd o

r upl

and

habi

tats

.W

eedi

ness

Inde

x: T

his

valu

e, ra

ngin

g fro

m -1

(low

) to

-3 (h

igh)

qua

ntifi

es th

e po

tent

ial i

nvas

iven

ess

of n

on-n

ativ

e pl

ants

. In

com

bina

tion

with

the

perc

enta

ge o

f non

-nat

ive

plan

ts, i

t can

be

used

as

an in

dica

tor o

f dis

turb

ance

.Pr

ovin

cial

Sta

tus:

Pro

vinc

ial r

anks

are

use

d by

the

NH

IC to

set

pro

tect

ion

prio

ritie

s fo

r rar

e sp

ecie

s an

d na

tura

l com

mun

ities

. Th

ese

rank

s ar

e no

t leg

al d

esig

natio

ns.

S4 a

nd S

5 sp

ecie

s ar

e ge

nera

lly u

ncom

mon

to c

omm

on in

the

prov

ince

. Sp

ecie

s ra

nked

S1-

S3 a

re c

onsi

dLo

cal S

tatu

s:VU

: nat

ive

and

very

unc

omm

onX:

nat

ive

and

not r

are

or v

ery

unco

mm

onC:

nat

ive

and

com

mon

R: n

ativ

e an

d ra

reI:

intro

duce

d an

d pe

rsis

ting

outs

ide

of c

ultiv

atio

n.

Ir: in

trodu

ced

and

rare

Ih: i

ntro

duce

d an

d kn

own

only

from

his

toric

reco

rds

Ivu:

intro

duce

d an

d ve

ry u

ncom

mon

Iu: i

ntro

duce

d an

d un

com

mon

Ic: i

ntro

duce

d an

d co

mm

onAn

nota

tions

: Pro

vide

s co

mm

ents

on

gene

ral d

istri

butio

n an

d ab

unda

nce

on th

e su

bjec

t lan

ds.

Def

initi

ons

of te

rmin

olog

y an

d ab

brev

iatio

ns u

sed

as fo

llow

s.Ab

unda

nce

Dom

inan

t (D)

: rep

rese

nted

by

larg

e nu

mbe

rs; g

ener

ally

form

ing

>10%

gro

und

cove

r or >

25%

veg

etat

ion

in a

ny o

ne s

tratu

mFa

irly

com

mon

(F):

gene

rally

wid

espr

ead;

repr

esen

ted

by fa

irly

larg

e nu

mbe

rs o

f ind

ivid

ual c

lum

ps; u

sual

ly fo

rmin

g >1

0% g

roun

d co

ver

Unc

omm

on (U

): pr

esen

t as

wid

espr

ead

scat

tere

d in

divi

dual

s or

repr

esen

ted

by o

ne o

r mor

e cl

umps

of m

any

indi

vidu

als

Rare

(R):

repr

esen

ted

in th

e po

lygo

n by

less

than

abo

ut fi

ve in

divi

dual

s or

sm

all c

lum

ps

DETA

ILED

EXP

LAN

ATIO

N O

F TE

RMS

Flor

al Q

ualit

y In

dex

and

Coef

ficie

nt o

f Con

serv

atis

m V

alue

s

Gen

eral

hab

itat v

alue

s as

soci

ated

with

the

CC

val

ues

are:

0-3:

spe

cies

foun

d in

a w

ide

varie

ty o

f com

mun

ities

, inc

ludi

ng d

istu

rbed

site

s4-

6: s

peci

es a

ssoc

iate

d w

ith a

spe

cific

com

mun

ity, b

ut to

lera

te m

oder

ate

dist

urba

nce

7-8:

spe

cies

ass

ocia

ted

with

a c

omm

unity

in a

n ad

vanc

ed s

ucce

ssio

nal s

tage

, tol

eran

t of m

inor

dis

turb

ance

s9-

10: s

peci

es w

ith a

hig

h de

gree

of f

idel

ity to

a n

arro

w ra

nge

of s

ynec

olog

ical

par

amet

ers

Vege

tatio

n sp

ecie

s an

d co

mm

unity

sen

sitiv

ity w

as a

sses

sed

thro

ugh

the

appl

icat

ion

of c

oeffi

cien

t of c

onse

rvat

ism

val

ues

(CC

), as

sign

ed to

eac

h na

tive

spec

ies

in s

outh

ern

Ont

ario

(Old

ham

, et.

al, 1

995)

. Th

e va

lue

of C

C, r

angi

ng fr

om 0

(low

) to

10 (h

igh)

, is

base

d on

a

spec

ies

tole

ranc

e of

dis

turb

ance

and

fide

lity

to s

peci

fic h

abita

t int

egrit

y. T

he o

ccur

renc

e of

spe

cies

with

a C

C o

f 9 o

r 10

can

be g

ood

indi

cato

rs o

f und

istu

rbed

con

ditio

ns s

uch

as m

atur

e fo

rest

s, fe

ns o

r bog

s.

1ra_

2012

-11-

15_B

W A

men

d - A

pp E

- P

lant

Lis

t_60

1550

32.x

lsx

Pag

e 3

pf 4

Appe

ndix

H.

Plan

t Spe

cies

Lis

tN

exte

ra -

Blu

ewat

er S

tudy

Are

a


Wetness Index

Weediness Index

Provincial Status


Global Status


514 BLW1603&1658

April 17, 2012

514 BLW1603&1658

April 17, 2012

514 BLW1603&1658

April 17, 2012

551 BLW1358&1371

April 19, 2012

551 BLW1358&1371

April 19, 2012

555 BLW1329April 23, 2012

555 BLW1329June 19, 2012

582 BLW1315May 16, 2012

582

Oldham et al

Oldham et al

Oldham et al

Newmaster

Newmaster

Oldham 1993

SWD

6-3

FOD

5-1

CU

M1

FOD

5-2

C

UM

1-1

CU

P3-2

FOD

9-5

SOC

CVa

scul

ar P

lant

Su

rvey

FOD

9-5

CU

M1-

1

551

555

(SC

P-0

1)B

OTA

NIC

AL N

AME

CO

MM

ON

NAM

E51

4

mea

n C

C v

alue

/ %

spp

CC

>8

/ Con

ditio

n of

the

Land

scap

e5

/ 27

/ int

act

3.5

/ 19

/ slig

htly

deg

rade

d1.

3 / 2

/ se

vere

ly d

egra

ded

The

FQI a

ccou

nts

for t

he s

peci

es d

iver

sity

of t

he a

rea

by e

quat

ing

the

num

ber o

f nat

ive

spec

ies

with

the

mea

n C

C v

alue

. Th

e FQ

I is

gene

rally

use

d fo

r com

parin

g na

tura

l are

as.

The

CC

val

ue a

nd F

QI o

f the

stu

dy a

rea

wer

e ca

lcul

ated

for t

he e

ntire

stu

dy a

rea.

Wee

dine

ss In

dex

-1: l

ittle

or n

o im

pact

on

natu

ral a

reas

(mos

t non

-nat

ive

plan

ts a

re in

this

cat

egor

y)-2

: occ

asio

nal i

mpa

cts

on n

atur

al a

reas

, gen

eral

ly in

frequ

ent o

r loc

aliz

ed

-3: m

ajor

pot

entia

l im

pact

s on

nat

ural

are

as

Wet

ness

Inde

xAl

l pla

nts

in s

outh

ern

Ont

ario

hav

e be

en a

ssig

ned

a w

etla

nd c

ateg

ory,

bas

ed o

n th

e de

sign

atio

ns d

evel

oped

for u

se b

y th

e U

nite

d St

ates

Fis

h &

Wild

life

Serv

ice.

Pla

nts

are

desi

gnat

ed in

to th

e fo

llow

ing

cate

gorie

s:O

BL (O

blig

ate

Wet

land

): oc

curs

alm

ost a

lway

s in

wet

land

s un

der n

atur

al c

ondi

tions

(est

imat

ed >

99%

pro

babi

lity)

FAC

W (F

acul

tativ

e W

etla

nd):

usua

lly o

ccur

s in

wet

land

s, b

ut o

ccas

iona

lly fo

und

in n

on-w

etla

nds

(est

imat

ed 6

7-99

% p

roba

bilit

y)FA

C (F

acul

tativ

e): e

qual

ly li

kely

to o

ccur

in w

etla

nds

or n

on-w

etla

nds

(est

imat

ed 3

4-66

% p

roba

bilit

y)FA

CU

(Fac

ulta

tive

Upl

and)

: occ

asio

nally

occ

urs

in w

etla

nds,

but

usu

ally

occ

urs

in n

on-w

etla

nds

(est

imat

ed 1

-33%

pro

babi

lity)

UPL

(Upl

and)

: occ

urs

alm

ost n

ever

in w

etla

nds

unde

r nat

ural

con

ditio

ns (e

stim

ated

<1%

pro

babi

lity)

Each

wet

land

cat

egor

y ha

s be

en a

ssig

ned

a nu

mer

ical

val

ue to

faci

litat

e th

e qu

antif

icat

ion

of th

e w

etne

ss in

dex.

The

wet

land

cat

egor

ies

and

thei

r cor

resp

ondi

ng v

alue

s ar

e as

follo

ws:

OBL

: -5

FAC

W+:

-4FA

CW

: -3

FAC

W-:

-2FA

C+:

-1FA

C: 0

FAC

-: 1

FAC

U+:

2FA

CU

: 3FA

CU

-: 4

UPL

: 5

Prov

inci

al S

tatu

sPr

ovin

cial

rank

s ar

e us

ed b

y th

e N

HIC

to s

et p

rote

ctio

n pr

iorit

ies

for r

are

spec

ies

and

natu

ral c

omm

uniti

es.

Thes

e ra

nkin

gs a

re b

ased

on

the

tota

l num

ber o

f ext

ant O

ntar

io p

opul

atio

ns a

nd th

e de

gree

to w

hich

they

are

pot

entia

lly o

r act

ivel

y th

reat

ened

with

des

truct

ion.

The

S1

: Crit

ical

ly Im

peril

ed—

Crit

ical

ly im

peril

ed in

the

natio

n or

sta

te/p

rovi

nce

beca

use

of e

xtre

me

rarit

y (o

ften

5 or

few

er o

ccur

renc

es) o

r bec

ause

of s

ome

fact

or(s

) suc

h as

ver

y st

eep

decl

ines

mak

ing

it es

peci

ally

vul

nera

ble

to e

xtirp

atio

n fro

m th

e st

ate/

prov

ince

S2: I

mpe

riled

—Im

peril

ed in

the

natio

n or

sta

te/p

rovi

nce

beca

use

of ra

rity

due

to v

ery

rest

ricte

d ra

nge,

ver

y fe

w p

opul

atio

ns (o

ften

20 o

r few

er),

stee

p de

clin

es, o

r oth

er fa

ctor

s m

akin

g it

very

vul

nera

ble

to e

xtirp

atio

n fro

m th

e na

tion

or s

tate

/pro

vinc

eS3

: Vul

nera

ble—

Vuln

erab

le in

the

natio

n or

sta

te/p

rovi

nce

due

to a

rest

ricte

d ra

nge,

rela

tivel

y fe

w p

opul

atio

ns (o

ften

80 o

r few

er),

rece

nt a

nd w

ides

prea

d de

clin

es, o

r oth

er fa

ctor

s m

akin

g it

vuln

erab

le to

ext

irpat

ion

S4: A

ppar

ently

Sec

ure—

Unc

omm

on b

ut n

ot ra

re; s

ome

caus

e fo

r lon

g-te

rm c

once

rn d

ue to

dec

lines

or o

ther

fact

ors.

S5

:Sec

ure—

Com

mon

, wid

espr

ead,

and

abu

ndan

t in

the

natio

n or

sta

te/p

rovi

nce

SNR

Unr

anke

d—N

atio

n or

sta

te/p

rovi

nce

cons

erva

tion

stat

us n

ot y

et a

sses

sed

SX: P

resu

med

Ext

irpat

ed—

Spec

ies

or c

omm

unity

is b

elie

ved

to b

e ex

tirpa

ted

from

the

natio

n or

sta

te/p

rovi

nce.

Not

loca

ted

desp

ite in

tens

ive

sear

ches

of h

isto

rical

site

s an

d ot

her a

ppro

pria

te h

abita

t, an

d vi

rtual

ly n

o lik

elih

ood

that

it w

ill be

redi

scov

ered

SNA

Not

App

licab

le —

A co

nser

vatio

n st

atus

rank

is n

ot a

pplic

able

bec

ause

the

spec

ies

is n

ot a

sui

tabl

e ta

rget

for c

onse

rvat

ion

activ

ities

. SU

: Unr

anka

ble—

Cur

rent

ly u

nran

kabl

e du

e to

lack

of i

nfor

mat

ion

or d

ue to

sub

stan

tially

con

flict

ing

info

rmat

ion

abou

t sta

tus

or tr

ends

Ran

k ra

nges

, e.g

. S2S

3, in

dica

te th

at th

e ra

nk is

eith

er S

2 or

S3,

but

that

cur

rent

info

rmat

ion

is in

suffi

cien

t to

diffe

rent

iate

.S#

S# R

ange

Ran

k —

A nu

mer

ic ra

nge

rank

(e.g

., S2

S3) i

s us

ed to

indi

cate

any

rang

e of

unc

erta

inty

abo

ut th

e st

atus

of t

he s

peci

es o

r com

mun

ity. R

ange

s ca

nnot

ski

p m

ore

than

one

rank

(e.g

., SU

is u

sed

rath

er th

an S

1S4)

.

REFE

REN

CES

Nom

encl

atur

e ba

sed

on:

Inte

grat

ed T

axon

omic

Info

rmat

ion

Syst

em (I

T IS

). 20

12: (

http

://w

ww

.itis

.gov

)

Co-

effic

ient

of C

onse

rvat

ism

, Wet

ness

& W

eedi

ness

:O

ldha

m, M

.J.,

W.D

. Bak

owsk

y an

d D

.A. S

uthe

rland

. 19

95.

Flor

istic

qua

lity

asse

ssm

ent f

or s

outh

ern

Ont

ario

. O

MN

R, N

atur

al H

erita

ge In

form

atio

n C

entre

, Pet

erbo

roug

h. 6

8 pp

.

Prov

inci

al (O

ntar

io) S

tatu

s:N

atur

al H

erita

ge In

form

atio

n C

entre

(NH

IC).

200

0. P

rovi

ncia

l sta

tus

of p

lant

s, w

ildlif

e an

d ve

geta

tion

com

mun

ities

dat

abas

e. h

ttp://

ww

w.m

nr.g

ov.o

n.ca

/MN

R/n

hic/

nhic

.htm

l. O

MN

R, P

eter

boro

ugh.

Loca

l Sta

tus:

Old

ham

, M.J

. 199

3. D

istri

butio

n an

d St

atus

of t

he V

ascu

lar P

lant

s of

Sou

thw

este

rn O

ntar

io. O

MN

R

The

floris

tic q

ualit

y of

an

area

is re

flect

ed in

the

mea

n va

lue

of C

C.

For e

xam

ple,

an

old

field

or g

raze

d w

oodl

ot w

ould

tend

hav

e a

low

mea

n C

C; t

hese

hab

itats

are

dom

inat

ed b

y op

portu

nist

ic s

peci

es th

at o

ccur

in a

wid

e ra

nge

of s

ite c

ondi

tions

and

are

tole

rant

of

dist

urba

nce.

A b

og, p

rairi

e or

inta

ct fo

rest

wou

ld h

ave

a hi

gher

val

ue, r

efle

ctin

g th

e sp

ecifi

c ha

bita

t req

uire

men

ts o

f man

y of

the

spec

ies

and

a ge

nera

lly u

ndis

turb

ed c

ondi

tion.

The

follo

win

g pr

ovid

es a

n ex

ampl

e of

inte

rpre

tatio

n of

CC

val

ues:

The

sens

itivi

ty o

f nat

ural

are

as c

an b

e as

sess

ed th

roug

h ap

plic

atio

n of

the

Wee

dine

ss In

dex.

The

Wee

dine

ss In

dex

quan

tifie

s th

e po

tent

ial i

nvas

iven

ess

of n

on-n

ativ

e pl

ants

, and

, in

com

bina

tion

with

the

perc

enta

ge o

f non

-nat

ive

plan

ts c

an b

e us

ed a

s an

indi

cato

r of

dist

urba

nce

Valu

es(r

angi

ngfro

m1-

to-3

)hav

ebe

enas

sign

edto

mos

tnon

-nat

ive

spec

ies

base

don

the

pote

ntia

lim

pact

each

spec

ies

can

have

inna

tura

lare

as:

Furth

er re

finem

ent o

f the

Fac

ulta

tive

cate

gorie

s ar

e de

note

d by

a “+

” or “

-” to

exp

ress

exa

gger

ated

tend

enci

es fo

r tho

se s

peci

es.

The

“+” d

enot

es a

gre

ater

est

imat

ed p

roba

bilit

y oc

curr

ing

in w

etla

nds

than

spe

cies

in th

e ge

nera

l ind

icat

or c

ateg

ory,

but

a le

sser

pro

babi

lity

than

spe

cies

occ

urrin

g in

the

next

hig

her c

ateg

ory.

The

"-" d

enot

es a

less

er e

stim

ated

pro

babi

lity

of o

ccur

ring

in w

etla

nds

than

spe

cies

in th

e ge

nera

l ind

icat

or c

ateg

ory,

but

a g

reat

er p

roba

bilit

y th

an s

peci

es o

ccur

ring

in th

e ne

xt lo

wer

gen

eral

cat

egor

y.

SH: P

ossi

bly

Extir

pate

d (H

isto

rical

)—Sp

ecie

s or

com

mun

ity o

ccur

red

hist

oric

ally

in th

e na

tion

or s

tate

/pro

vinc

e, a

nd th

ere

is s

ome

poss

ibilit

y th

at it

may

be

redi

scov

ered

. Its

pre

senc

e m

ay n

ot h

ave

been

ver

ified

in th

e pa

st 2

0-40

yea

rs. A

spe

cies

or c

omm

unity

cou

ld

beco

me

NH

or S

H w

ithou

t suc

h a

20-4

0 ye

ar d

elay

if th

e on

ly k

now

n oc

curr

ence

s in

a n

atio

n or

sta

te/p

rovi

nce

wer

e de

stro

yed

or if

it h

ad b

een

exte

nsiv

ely

and

unsu

cces

sful

ly lo

oked

for.

The

NH

or S

H ra

nk is

rese

rved

for s

peci

es o

r com

mun

ities

for w

hich

som

e ef

fort

has

bd

tl

tth

thi

li

thi

tt

fll

lt

tkf

ifid

tt

1ra_

2012

-11-

15_B

W A

men

d - A

pp E

- P

lant

Lis

t_60

1550

32.x

lsx

Pag

e 4

pf 4


Appendix F Wildlife Species List

Appendix F. Wildlife Species List

American Robin Turdus migratorius S5BBlack-capped Chickadee Poecile atricapillus S5Blue Jay Cyanocitta cristata S5Brown-headed Cowbird Molothrus ater S4BCooper's Hawk Accipiter cooperi S4Downy Woodpecker Picoides pubescens S5Horned Lark Eremophila alpestris S5BHouse Wren Troglodytes aedon S5BKilldeer Charadrius vociferus S5B, S5NMourning Dove Zenaida macroura S5Northern Cardinal Cardinalis cardinalis S5Northern Flicker Colaptes auratus S4BRed-bellied Woodpecker Melanerpes carolinus S4Red-tailed Hawk Buteo jamaicensis S5Red-winged Blackbird Agelaius phoeniceus S5Song Sparrow Melospiza melodia S5BVesper Sparrow Pooecetes gramineus S4BWhite-crowned Sparrow Zonotrichia leucophrys S4BWild Turkey Meleagris gallopavo S5Yellow Warbler Dendroica petechia S5BYellow-bellied Sapsucker Sphyrapicus varius S5B

Butterflies Red Admiral Vanessa atalanta S5

Amphibians Wood Frog Rana (Lithobates) sylvatica S5

Birds

Taxon

1 S Rank (from Natural Heritage Information Centre): S1 (Critically Imperiled), S2 (Imperiled) or S3 (Vulnerable), S4 (apparently secure, uncommon), or S5 (secure, common).

Common Name Scientific NameProvinical Status

(S Rank)1

1ra_2012-11-15_BW Amend - App F - Wildlife Species List_60155032.xlsx


Appendix H OWES Evaluation for Stanley Big Drain Wetland

3rd

3rd Class:

8961

154120424

Date:Jessica Piette, To Shorney, & Jillian deMan

July, 2011

Overall:Information Source

Stanley Big Drain Wetland

Submitted by:

Biological:Social:

Hydrological:Special Features:

Special Planning Considerations:


June 26, 2012Year/Month Last EvaluatedYear/Month Last Updated

Evaluation Edition:

ScoresNot Provincially Significant

Wetland Significance

Official Name:

The wetland polygon's were identified and mapped using 2010 hard copies of aerial photos

June, 2012

Wetland Evaluation Edition

Comments

Include relevant information that can not be entered in the wetland data record( Ex. Sections that have not been completed.)

Additional Information

This wetland complex is approximately 50.18 hectares in size, comprised of three wetland units. It is classified as both a riverine and palustrine wetland system, hydrologically connected to the Bannokburn River via Stanley Big Drain. This watercourse passes through the western portion of the wetland complex. This wetland complex is composed of both marsh and swamp wetland types. Dominant species observed within the marsh areas include Canada rush (Juncus Canadensis), swamp milkweed (Asclepias incarnata), hop sedge (Carex lupulina), purple-stem aster (Symphyotrichum puniceus), broad-leaved cattail (Typha latifolia), reed canary grass (Phalaris arundinacea), soft stem bulrush (Scirpus validus). The dominant species observed within the swamp areas include, green ash (Fraxinus pennsylvanica), freeman’s maple (Acer Freemanii), white elm (Ulmus americana), spicebush (Lindera benzoin), sensitive fern (Onoclea sensibilis), and jewelweed (Impatiens capensis). Some of the swamp areas were dominated by drier species such as red baneberry (Actaea rubra ), blue cohosh (Caulophyllum thalictroides ), enchanter's nightshade (Circaea lutetiana )and star flower solomon's seal (Maianthemum stellatum ).

Wetland ID.:

Wetland Manual

WETLAND DATA AND SCORING RECORD

i) WETLAND NAME:

ii) MNR ADMINISTRATIVE REGION: DISTRICT:

AREA OFFICE (if different from District):

iii) CONSERVATION AUTHORITY JURISDICTION:

(If not within a designated CA, check here:

iv) COUNTY OR REGIONAL MUNICIPALITY:

v) TOWNSHIP:

vi) LOTS & CONCESSIONS:(attach separate sheet if necessary)

vii) MAP AND AIR PHOTO REFERENCES

a)

b) UTM grid reference: Zone: Block:Grid:E

c) National Topographic Series:

map name(s)

map number(s) edition

scale

d) Aerial photographs: Date photo taken: Scale:

Flight & plate numbers:

(attach separate sheet if necessary)

e) Ontario Base Map numbers & scale

(attach separate sheets if necessary)

Grid:N

Southern Ontario Wetland Evaluation, Data and Scoring Record March 1993

Latitude: Longitude:


Southern Guelph

Asauble Bayfield Conservation Authority

Huron County

Municipality of Bluewater and Municipality of Huoron East

1745106945 4816425.55

2010

Veg

etat

ion

Wild

life

Com

men

ts

WT

SCI

PR

LR

RM

LEB

LEL

C/L

S/M

Lim

SH

/MF

GH

CD

HD

CTS

LSD

SG

CM

NE

BE

RE

FFF

SUU

SwM

aFe

Bo

1M

12.

31ne

*, ls

, gc

32.

31To

tal

0.00

2.31

0.00

0.00

0.00

0.00

0.00

2M

20.

18ne

*, re

, ls

30.

18To

tal

0.00

0.18

0.00

0.00

0.00

0.00

0.00

3M

30.

49ne

*, g

c2

0.49

Tota

l0.

000.

490.

000.

000.

000.

000.

004

S1

h*, n

e, g

c3

1.13

Tota

l0.

000.

000.

000.

000.

000.

000.

005

S2

h*, l

s, ts

, gc

419

.89

Tota

l0.

000.

000.

000.

000.

000.

000.

006

S3

4.24

h*, l

s, ts

, gc

44.

24To

tal

0.00

0.00

4.24

0.00

0.00

0.00

0.00

7S

410

.90

h*, t

s, gc

321

.29

Tota

l0.

000.

0010

.90

0.00

0.00

0.00

0.00

8U

0.65

Unv

eget

ated

0.65

0.65

0.00

0.00

0.00

0.00

0.00

0.00

Tota

l0.

000.

000.

000.

000.

000.

000.

000.

000.

000.

000.

000.

000.

000.

000.

000.

000.

000.

000.

000.

000.

000.

000.

0046

.55

1.32

0.00

0.00

Fish

Hab

D

ata

?

LOW

HIG

HA

VG

% O

PEN

WA

TER

Wet

land

Typ

eFi

eld

Com

m

Com

m

Cod

eSo

il Ty

peD

omin

ate

Veg

etat

ion

Site

Typ

eN

o. o

f Fo

rms

Veg

etat

ion

Form

s

Wetland Manual

viii) WETLAND SIZE AND BOUNDARIES

a) Single contiguous wetland area: hectares

b) Wetland complex comprised of individual wetlands:

Wetland Unit Number Size of each(for reference) wetland unit

Isolated Palustrine Riverine LacustrineWetland Unit No. 1 haWetland Unit No. 2 haWetland Unit No. 3 haWetland Unit No. haWetland Unit No. haWetland Unit No. haWetland Unit No. haWetland Unit No. haWetland Unit No. haWetland Unit No. haWetland Unit No. haWetland Unit No. haWetland Unit Totals:(Attach additional sheets if necessary)

TOTAL WETLAND SIZE ha

c) Brief documentation of reasons for including any areas less than 0.5 ha in size:

(Attach separate sheets if necessary .)

0.00

4.24Riv. R.M. Lac.E.B. Lac.E.L.


50.18

3

24.65

0.00 35.04 15.14 0.00 0.00

50.18

0.00

10.3910.90

1.0 BIOLOGICAL COMPONENT

1.1 PRODUCTIVITY

1.1.1 GROWING DEGREE-DAYS/SOILS

GROWING DEGREE DAYS SOILS(check one) Estimated Fractional Area1) clay/loam2) 2800 -3200 silt/marl3) 3200 -3600 limestone4) 3600 -4000 sand5) humic/mesic

fibric granite

SCORING:Growing Clay- Silt- Lime- Sand Humic- Fibric GraniteDegree- Loam Marl stone MesicDays<28002800-32003200-36003600-4000>4000

(maximum score 30; if wetland contains more than one soil type, evaluate based on the fractional area)

Steps required for evaluation: (maximum score 30 points)

1. Select GDD line in evaluation table applicable to your wetland;2. Determine fractional area of the wetland for each soil type;3. Multiply fractional area of each soil type by score;4. Sum individual soil type scores (round to nearest whole number).

In wetland complexes the evaluator should aim at determining the percentage of area occupied by the categories for the complex as a whole.

Scoreclay/loamsilt/marllimestone

15 sandhumic/mesicfibric granite

Final Score Growing Degree-Days/Soils (maximum 30 points)

3

131518

Wetland ManualSouthern Ontario Wetland Evaluation. Data and Scoring Record May 1994

1518

1113

1.00

9

2226

13 915

>4000

1330 25

1821 10

Determine the soil type from the appropriate OMAF soils maps

8

12 8

78

159

57

20

118

18

11

15

7

15

0.000.000.00

15.000.000.00

<2800

0.00

x

1.1.2 WETLAND TYPE (Fractional Area = area of wetland type/total wetland area)

Fractional Area

Bog x 3Fen x 6Swamp x 8Marsh x 15

Wetland type score (maximum 15 points) 1.1.3 SITE TYPE (Fractional Area = area of site type/total wetland area)

Fractional Area

Isolated x 1 =Palustrine (permanent orintermittent flow) x 2 =Riverine x 4 =Riverine (at rivermouth) x 5 =Lacustrine (at rivermouth x 5 =Lacustrine (on enclosedbay, with barrier beach) x 3 =Lacustrine (exposed to lake) x 2 =

Sub Total:Site Type Score (maximum 5 points)

1.2 BIODIVERSITY

1.2.1 NUMBER OF WETLAND TYPES

(Check only one)

1) one 9 points2) two 133) three 204) four 30

Number of Wetland Types Score (maximum 30 points)

4

Southern Ontario Wetland Evaluation, Data and Scoring Record May 1994 Wetland Manual

Subtotal:

0.92

Estimate the Wetland Type from air photos or default to "swamp" (8)Score

0.0

0.00

7.40.8

Estimate from air photos

8

0.0

Score

0.058.1

0.30

0.00

0.70

0.00

0.00

1.401.200.00

0.00

0.00

0.00

0.00

0.00

2.603

13

13

Score

1.2.2 VEGETATION COMMUNITIES

Attach a separate sheet listing community (map) codes,vegetation forms and dominant species.Use the form on the following page to record percent area by dominant vegetation form. This informationwill be used in other parts of the evaluation.

Communities should be grouped by number of forms. For example, 2 form communities might appear as follows:

2 forms

Code Forms Dominant Species

M6 re, ff re, Typha latifolia; ff, Lemna minor, Wolffia

S1 ts, gc ts, Salix discolor; gc, lmpatiens capensis, Thelypteris palustris

Note that the dominant species for each form are separated by a semicolon. The dominant species(maximum of 2) within a form are separated by commas.

Scoring:

Total # of communities Total # of communities Total # of communitieswith 1-3 forms with 4 -5 forms with 6 or more forms1 = 1.5 points 1 = 2 points 1 = 3 points2 = 2.5 2 = 3.5 2 = 53 = 3.5 3 = 5 3 = 74 = 4.5 4 = 6.5 4 = 95 = 5 5 = 7.5 5 = 10.56 = 5.5 6 = 8.5 6 = 127 = 6 7 = 9.5 7 = 13.58 = 6.5 8 = 10.5 8 = 159 = 7 9 = 11.5 9 = 16.510 = 7.5 10 = 12.5 10 = 1811 = 8 11 = 13 11 = 19

+.5 each additional +.5 each additional + 1 each additionalcommunity = community = community = e.g., a wetland with 3 one form communities 4 two form communities 12 four form communities and

8 six form communities would score:

6 + 13.5 + 15 = 34.5 = 35 points

Vegetation Communities Score (maximum 45 points)

5

9

Southern Ontario Wetland Evaluation. Data and Scoring Record March 1993

5.0 3.5

Wetland Manual

Wetland Name:

Wetland Size (ha):

Vegetation Form % area in which form is dominant

h

c

dh

dc

ts

ls

ds

gc

m

ne

be

re

ff

f

su

u (unvegetated) Total = 100%

6

Southern Ontario Wetland Evaluation Data and Scoring Record March 1993


50.18

92.77

Wetland Manual

1.29

100.00

5.94

1.2.3 DIVERSITY OF SURROUNDING HABITAT(Check all appropriate items(1))

row croppastureabandoned agricultural landdeciduous forest coniferous forestmixed forest (at least 25% conifer and 75% deciduous or vice versa) abandoned pits and quarriesopen lake or deep riverfence rows with cover, or shelterbelts terrain appreciably undulating,hilly,or with ravines creek flood plain

Diversity of Surrounding Habitat Score (1 for each, maximum 7 points)

1.2.4 PROXIMITY TO OTHER WETLANDS(Check first appropriate category only) Scoring

1) Hydrologically connected by surface water to other wetlands(different dominant wetlaI1d type) or to open lake or deep riverwithin 1.5 km 8 points

2) Hydrologically connected by surface water to other wetlands(same dominant wetland type) within 0.5 km 8

3) Hydrologica11y connected by surface water to other wetlands (different dominant wetland type),or to open lake or deep river from

1.5 to 4 km away 5

4) Hydrologically connected by surface water to other wetlands(same dominant wetland type) from 0.5 to 1.5 km away 5

5) Within 0.75 km of other wetlands (different dominant wetland type)or open water body, but not hydrologically connected bysurface water 5

6) Within 1 km of other wetlands,but not hydrologicallyconnected by surface water 2

7) No wetland within 1 km 0

Proximity to other Wetlands Score (Choose one only, maximum 8 points)

hydrologically connected to the Grand River and associated nearshore marshes

7


1

1

Determine from air photos

Wetland Manual

5

5

1

1

1

Determine from air photos and other wetlands evaluations in the vicinity

Subtotal

5

5

1.2.5 INTERSPERSION

Number of Intersections(Check one) Score

1) 26 or less 32) 27 to 40 63) 41 to 60 50 94) 61 to 80 125) 81 to l00 156) 101 to 125 187) 126 to 150 218) 151 to 175 249) 176 to 200 2710) >200 30

Interspersion Score (Choose one only maximum 30 points) 1.2.6 OPEN WATER TYPES

Permanently flooded:(Check one) Score

1) type 1 82) type 2 83) type 3 144) type 4 205) type 5 306) type 6 87) type 7 148) type 8 39) no open water 0

Open Water Type Score (Choose one only maximum 30 points)

8

Southern Ontario Wetland Evaluation Data and Scoring Record May 1994

9

Optional: Complete as time permits or as scoring dictates.

Wetland Manual

Determine from aerial photos.

14

9

14

1.3 SIZE

hectares Subtotal for Biodiversity

Size Score (Biological Component) (maximum 5O points)

Evaluation Table Size Score (Biological component)Wetlandsize (ha) <37 >132

<21 ha 1 50

21-40 5 50

41-60 6 50

61-80 7 50

81-100 8 50

101-120 9 50

121-140 10 50

141-160 11 50

161-180 13 50

181-200 15 50

201-400 17 50

401-600 19 50

601-800 21 50

801-1000 23 50

1001-1200 25 50

1201-1400 28 50

1401-1600 31 50

1601-1800 34 50

1801-2000 37 50>2000 40 50

9

Southern Ontario wetland Evaluation Data and Scoring Record March 1993

37-48 49-60 61-72 73-84 97- 85-96Total Score for Biodiversity Subcomponent

121-

Wetland Manual

Score may be lower than actual if "Vegetation Community and Interspersion" have not been calculated.

55

9

109-

50.2

10 19

108 132120

9

8

7

5 7 9

21

23

9

10 13

11

11

9

10

13

11

13

15

8

47

25

15

28

31

34

17

19

21

2321

19

17

504643

40

37

40

43

15

13

11

10

37

34

31

28

25

23

25

28

31

34

17

19

21

23

4950 50

50

37

40

43

46

40

37

34

31

50

49

46

43

28

25

23

21

18

15

37

40

43

46

25

28

31

34

50

50

5050

49

50

50

50

50 50 50505050

50 50 50

505050

50 50 50

505050

50 50 50

505050

50 50 50

505050

50 50 50

505049

46 50 50

505043

34 43

43

28

40 49 50

504637

17 258

46

50

494031

34

37

2.0 SOCIAL COMPONENT

2.1 ECONOMICALLY VALUABLE PRODUCTS

2.1.1 WOOD PRODUCTS

Area of wetland forested (ha), i.e. dominant form is h or c. Note that this is not wetland size. (Check oneonly) h: 0.00 c: 0.00

1) <5 ha 02) 5 -25 ha 33) 26 -50 ha 64) 51- l00 ha 95) 101 -200 ha 126) >200 ha 18

Source of information:

Wood Products Score (Score one only, maximum 18 points) 2.1.2 WILD RICE

(Check one) Score (Choose one)Present (minimum size 0.5 ha) 1) 6 pointsAbsent 2) 0


Wild Rice Score (maximum 6 points)

2.1.3 COMMERCIAL FISH (BAIT FISH AND/OR COARSE FISH(Check one) Score (Choose one)Present 1) 12 points

Habitat not suitable for fish 2) 0

Source of infolmation:

Commercial Fish Score (maximum 12 points)

2.1.4 BULLFROGS(Check one) Score (Choose one)Present 1) 1 pointsAbsent 2) 0


Bullfrog Score (maximum 1 point)

10


Score0

Determine the percentage of the wetland area dominated by "h" or "c" by using aerial photograph.

Wetland Manual

Determined through a combination of aerial

0

photography interpretation and field observations

6

0

AECOM field observations

12

6

0

Determined through field investigations

12

Confirmed with AECOM Aquatic Ecologists

0

If any part of the wetland is riverine or the District fisheries files indicate presence of fish score"present"

conducted by AECOM

Wetlands Manual2.1.5 SNAPPING TURTLES

(Check one) Score (Choose one)Present 1) 1 pointAbsent 2) 0


Snapping Turtle Score (maximum 1 point) 2.1.6 FURBEARERS

(Consult Appendix 9)

Name of furbearer Source of information

1)2)3) 4)5)

0

Scoring: 3 points for each species. maximum 12Furbearer Score (maximum 12 points)

2.2 RECREATIONAL ACTIVITIES

8 8 Not possible/NotKnown 0

8 8 0(score one level for each of the three wetland uses; scores are cumulative; maximum score 80 points)Sources of information:

Hunting:

Nature:

Fishing:

Recreational Activities Score (maximum 80 points)

11

Southern Ontario Wetland Evaluation Data and Scoring Record

Type of Wetland-Associated Use

0

0

No evidence observed during AECOM

FishingNature Enjoyment/

0

No evidence observed by AECOM during

Ecosystem StudyIntensity of Use Hunting

8 Moderate

High 40 points

0 08

Totals

Low

16

16

40 points2080

40 points20

AECOM field investigations - Trails observed throughout

field investigations

field observations

SubTotal

20

2.3 LANDSCAPE AESTHETICS

2.3.1 DISTINCTNESS(Check one) Score (Choose one)Clearly distinct 1) 3 pointsIndistinct 2) 0

Landscape Distinctness Score (maximum 3 points) 2.3.2 ABSENCE OF HUMAN DISTURBANCE

(Check one) Score (Choose one)Human disturbances absent or nearly so 1) 7 pointsOne or several localized disturbances 2) 4Moderate disturbance; localized water pollution 3) 2Wetland intact but impairment of ecosystem qualityintense in some areas 4) 1Extreme ecological degradation, or water pollutionsevere and widespread 5) 0


Absence of Human Disturbance Score (maximum 7 points)

2.4 EDUCATION AND PUBLIC AWARENESS

2.4.1 EDUCATIONAL USES(Check one) Score (Choose one)Frequent 1) 20 pointsInfrequent 2) 12No visits 3) 0


Educational Uses Score (maximum 20 points) 2.4.2 FACILITIES AND PROGRAMS

(check one) Score (Choose one)Staffed interpretation centre 1) 8 pointsNo interpretation centre or staff but a system ofself-guiding trails or brochures available 2) 4Facilities such as maintained paths (e.g., woodchips)boardwalks, boat launches or observation towersbut no brochures or other interpretation 3) 2No facilities or programs 4) 0


Facilities and Programs Score (maximum 8 points) 12

AECOM observations

Wetlands Manual

0

2

0

None Known

Southern Ontario Wetland Evaluation, Data and Scoring: Record May 1994

3

3

Score using ortho-aerial photography

0

2

Optional: complete as time and scoring dictates.

Localized water pollution observed

0

None KnownRequires contact with Local Boards of Education.

2.4.3 RESEARCH AND STUDIES(check appropriate spaces) ScoreLong term research has been done 12 pointsResearch papers published in refereed scientificjournal or as a thesis 10One or more (non-research) reports have been writtenon some aspect of the wetland ' s flora faunahydrology etc. 5No research or reports 0

Subtotal:Attach list of known reports by above categories

Research and Studies Score (Score is cumulative, maximum 12 points)

2.5 PROXIMITY TO AREAS OF HUMAN SETTLEMENTCircle the highest applicable score

Distance of wetland from 1) 2) 3) settlement

1) Within or adjoining settlement2) 0.5 to 10 km from settlement 103) 10 to 60 km from settlement4) >60 km from settlement

0 0 10

Name of settlement:

Proximity to Human Settlement Score (maximum 40 points) 2.6 (FA= fraction Area) Score

FA of wetland in public or private ownershipheld under contract or in trust for wetland protection x 10 =FA of wetland area in public ownership,not as above x 8 =FA of wetland area in private ownership,not as above x 4 =


Ownership Score (maximum 10 points)

13

Southern Ontario Wetland Evaluation, Data and Scoring Record May 1994Wetlands Manual

<2,500 or cottage

00

population> 10,000population

2,500 -10,000

0

population

4

Huron County

10

1.00

0.000.00

1040

26

16

2

16

26

40 points

Town of Zurich - population 886

community

4.00

Select a default value of "4" if no other information exists.OWNERSHIP

125

8

Additional Reports

2.7 SIZE

hectares Subtotal for Social

Evaluation Table for Size Score (Social Component)

<31 >150

1 15

1 16

2 16

3 17

3 17

4 18

5 19

5 20

5 20

5 20

6 20

6 20

6 20

6 20

7 20

7 20

7 20

7 20

7 20

8 20

8 20

8 20

8 208 20

Total Size Score (Social Component)

14

76-90 91-105 106-120 121-135

5

12

13

14

10

12


Wetland Size (ha) Total for Size Dependent Score

31-45 46-60 61-75

Wetlands Manual

The score may be lower than actual since economic and recreational values have not been completed.50.2 44

3

4

5

7

136-150

2

2

2

4

4

9

9

9

7

8

8

9

106-137

138-178

12

13

14

9

10

10

10

9

<2 ha

2 - 4ha

5 - 8ha

9 - 12ha

512-665

666-863

179-233

13-17

18-28

29-37

1899-2467

234-302

303-393

394-511

12

>2467

864-1123

1124-1460

14

10

6

7

8

10

1461-1898

38-49

50-62

63-81

82-105

14

14

14

14

12

13

13

13

13

14

14

15

16

17

16

17

18

15

15 17

11

11

11

14

15

13

13

18

18

18

19

18

18

18

18

8

8

9

10

10

11

19

19

17

17

17

17

16

17

17

17

18

1815

16

16

16

15

15

16

17

20

20

20

20

19

19

20

20

20

20

14

14

15

15

16

16

18

18

20

20

20

20

20

20

20

20

20

16

20

20

20

20

20

18

19

19

20

17

14

15

16

17

20

14

14

15

16

20

20

17

17

19

19

20

18

18

19

20

20

20

20

20

20

20

20

20

20

20

20

20

20

20

20

15

1616

18

1818

19

2020

20

2020

8.0

20

2020

20

2020

20

2020

2.8 ABORIGINAL AND CULTURAL HERITAGE VALUES

Either or both Aboriginal or Cultural Values may be scored. However, the maximum score permitted for 2.8 is 30 points. Attach documentation.

2.8.1 ABORIGINAL VALUES

Full documentation of sources must be attached to the data record.

1) Significant = 30 points2) Not Significant = 03) Unknown = 0

Total:

2.8.2 CULTURAL HERITAGE

1) Significant = 30 points2) Not Significant = 03) Unknown = 0

Total:Aboriginal Values/Cultural Heritage Score (maximum 30 points)

15

0

Wetlands ManualSouthern Ontario Wetland Evaluation, Data and Scoring Record May 1994

0.0

00.0

0.0

3.0 HYDROLOGICAL COMPONENT

3.1 FLOOD ATTENUATION

If the wetland is a complex including isolated wetlands, apportion the l00 points according to area. For example if 10 ha of a l00 ha complex is isolated, the isolated portion receives the maximum proportional score of 10. The remainder of the wetland is then evaluated out of 90.

Step 1: Detennination of Maximum Score

Wetland is located on one of the defined 5 large lakes or 5 major rivers (Go to Step 4)Wetland is entirely isolated (i.e. not part of a complex) (Go to Step 4) All other wetland types (Go through Steps 2,3 and 4B)

Step 2: Determination of Upstream Detention Factor (DF)

(a) Wetland area (ha)(b) Total area (ha) of upstream detention areas

(include the wetland itself)(c) Ratio of (a):(b)(d) Upstream detention factor: (c) x 2 =

(maximum allowable factor = 1)

Step 3: Determination of Wetland Attenuation Factor (AF)

(a) Wetland area (ha)(b) Size of catchment basin (ha) upstream of wetland

(include wetland itself in catchment area)(c) Ratio of (a):(b)(d) Wetland attenuation factor: (c) x 10 =

(maximum allowable factor = 1)

Step 4: Calculation of final score

(a) Wetlands on large lakes or major rivers 0

(b) Wetland entirely isolated l00

(b) All other wetlands --calculate as follows:(c * Complex Formula - Isolated portion

Initial Score 100 *Upstream detention factor (DF) (Step 2) Wetland attenuation factor (AF) (Step 3)Final score: [(DF + AF)/2] x Initial score =

(c * Final score:=*Unless wetland is a complex with isolated portions (see above).

Flood Attenuation Score (maximum l00 points)

16

(0.75)*2 1.00


X

estimate

Wetlands Manual

61.0

100.00

61

0.2

1.000.22

61.00

0.22

calculate

Estimated&Calculated values can be obtained from G.I.S. data layers.

50.18

2306.000.02

50.1866.35

1.00

3.2 WATER QUALITY IMPROVEMENT

3.2.1 SHORT TERM WATER QUALITY IMPROVEMENT

Step 1: Determination of maximum initial score

Wetland on one of the 5 defined large lakes or 5 major rivers (Go to Step 5a)All other wetlands (Go through Steps 2, 3, 4, and 5b)

Step 2: Determination of watershed improvement factor (WIF)Calculation of WIF is based on the fractional area (FA) of each site type that makes up the total area of the wetland.

(FA= area of site type/total area of wetland) FractionalArea

FA of isolated wetland x 0.5 =FA of riverine wetland x 1 =FA of palustrine wetland with no inflow x 0.7 =FA of palustrine wetland with inflows x 1 =FA of lacustrine on lake shoreline x 0.2 =FA of lacustrine at lake inflow or outflow x 1 =

Sub Total:Sum (WIF cannot exceed 1.0)

Step 3: Determination of catchment land use factor (LUF)(Choose the first category that fits upstream landuse in the catchment.)

1) 1.0 Over 50% agricultural and/or urban 1.02) Between 30 and 50% agricultural and/or urban 0.83) Over 50% forested or other natural vegetation 0.6

LUF (maximum 1.0)

Step 4: Determination of pollutant uptake factor (PUT)Calculation of PUT is based on the fractional area (FA) of each vegetation type that makes up the total area of the wetland. Base assessment on the dominant vegetation form for each community except where dead trees or shrubs dominate. In that case base assessment on thedomininant live vegetation. (FA = area of vegetation type/total area of wetland)

FA of wetland with live trees, shrubs, Fractional Areaherbs or mosses (c,h,ts,ls,gc,m) x 0.75 =FA of wetland with emergent, submergentor floating vegetation (re,be,ne,su,f,ff) x 1 =

FA of wetland with little or no vegetation (u) x 0.5 =

Sum (PUT cannot exceed 1.0)

17

0.00

0.300.70

0.00

Southern Ontario Wetland Evaluation, Data and Scoring Record May 1994

X

0.00

Wetlands Manual

0.790.79

1.00

0.92

0.000.300.490.000.00

0.74

0.05

0.01

0.69

0.05

0.00

Estimate FA from air photos or use default factor of "0.75"Subtotal: 0.74


(a) Wetland on large lakes or major rivers 0(b) All other wetlands -calculate as follows

Initial score 60Water quality improvement factor (WQF)Land use factor (LUF)Pollutant uptake factor (PUT)

Final score: 60 x WQF x LUF x PUT =

Short Term Water Quality Improvement Score (maximum 60 points)

3.2.2 LONG TERM NUTRIENT TRAP

Step 1:Wetland on large lakes or 5 major rivers 0 points

X All other wetlands (proceed to Step 2)

Step 2: Choose only one of the following settings that best describes the wetland being evaluated

1) Wetland located in a river mouth 10 points2) Wetland is a bog, fen or swamp with more than

50% of the wetland being covered with organic soil 10

3) Wetland is a bog, fen or swamp with less than50% of the wetland being covered withorganic soil 3

4) Wetland is a marsh with more than50% of the wetland covered with organic soil 3

5) 0 None of the above 0

Long Term Nutrient Trap Score (maximum 10 points)

18

0

35.08

35

Southern Ontario Wetland Evaluation,Data and Scoring Record May 1994

0.791.000.74

Determine wetland type from aerial photos and soil type from OMAF soils maps.

Wetlands Manual

3.2.3 GROUNDWATER DISCHARGE

(Circle the characteristics that best describe the wetland being evaluated and then sum the scores. If the sum exceeds 30 points assign the maximum score of 30.)

Wetland type 1) Bog = 0 2) Swamp/Marsh = 2 2 3) Fen = 5Topography 1) Flat/rolling = 0 0 2) Hilly = 2 3) Steep = 5Wetland Large (>50%) = 0 Moderate (5-50%) Small <(5%) = 5 5Area: Upslope = 2Catchment AreaLagg Development 1) None found = 0 0 2) Minor = 2 3) Extensive = 5Seeps 1) None = 0 0 2) = or < 3 seeps = 2 3) > 3 seeps = 5Surface marl deposits 1) None = 0 0 2) = or < 3 sites = 2 3) > 3 sites = 5Iron precipitates 1) None = 0 0 2) = or < 3 sites = 2 3) > 3 sites = 5Located within 1 km N/A = 0 0 N/A = 0 Yes = 10of a major aquiferTotals 0 2 5

(Scores are cumulative maximum score 30 points)

Groundwater Discharge Score (maximum 30 points)

3.3 CARBON SINK

Choose only one of the following

1) Bog, fen or swamp with more than 50% coverageby organic soil 5 points

2) Bog, fen or swamp with between 10 to 49%coverage by organic soil 2

3) Marsh with more than 50% coverage by organicsoil 3

4) Wetlands not in one of the above categories 0

Carbon Sink Score (maximum 5 points)

19

None to Little Some High

Southern Ontario Wetland Evaluation March 1993

WetlandCharacteristics

Potential for Discharge

The final score will be underestimated since some of the wetland characteristics cannot be scored

Wetlands Manual

0

0

7

3.4 SHORELINE EROSION CONTROLStep 1: Score

Wetland entirely isolated or palustrine 0Any part of the Wetland riverine or lacustrine

(proceed to Step 2)

Step 2:Choose the one characteristic that best describes the shoreline vegetation (see text for a definition of shoreline)

Score1) Trees and shrubs 152) Emergent vegetation 83) Submergent vegetation 64) Other shoreline vegetation 35) No vegetation 0

Shoreline Erosion Control Score (maximum 15 points)

3.5 GROUND WATER RECHARGE

3.5.1 WETLAND SITE TYPEScore

(a) Wetland > 50% lacustrine (by area) or located on one of thefive major rivers 0

(b) Wetland not as above. Calculate final score as follows:(FA= area of site type/total area of wetland)

FractionalArea

FA of isolated or palustrine wetland x 50 =FA of riverine wetland x 20 =FA of lacustrine wetland (wetland <50% lacustrine) x 0 =

Ground Water Recharge Wetland Site Type Component Score (maximum 50 points)

20

6.0

Subtotal:

Wetlands Manual

0.0

41

3

41.0

0.70

3

0.300.00

35.0

Southern Ontario Wetland Evaluation

x

Determine from ortho-aerial photography

3.5.2 WETLAND SOIL RECHARGE POTENTIAL

(Circle only one choice that best describes the hydrologic soil class of the area surrounding thewetland being evaluated.)

1) Sand, loam, gravel, till 2) Clay or bedrock1) Lacustrine or on a major 0 0

river2) Isolated 10 53) Palustrine 7 7 44) Riverine (not a major river) 5 2Totals 7 0

Ground Water Recharge Wetland Soil Recharge Potential Score (maximum 10 points)

21


Dominant Wetland Type

7

Determine from OMAF soils maps.

Wetlands Manual

4.1 RARITY

4.1.1 WETLANDS

Site District 6-1Presence of wetland type (check one or more)

BogFen

X SwampX Marsh

Score for rarity within the landscape and rarity of the wetland type. Score for rarity of wetland type is cumulative (maximum 80 points) based on presence or absence.

Score forRarity withinthe Landscape

6-1 60 6-2 60 6-3 40 6-4 60 6-5 20 6-6 40 6-7 60 6-8 20 6-9 0 6-10 20 6-11 0 6-12 0 6-13 60 6-14 40 6-15 40 7-1 60 7-2 60 7-3 60 7-4 80 7-5 60 7-6 80

Rarity within the Landscape Score (maximum 80 points) 60Rarity of Wetland Type Score (maximum 80 points) 40

22

80

80

40808080

8080806080

80

4080808080800

00000

0000

200

0

000

6000

0000

30

200

30301020

10404020

2010

Marsh Swamp Fen

40 0 80


4.0 SPECIAL FEATURES COMPONENT

8080

Bog

Score for Rarity of Wetland Type

Slte District40 0 80

80808080

80808080

808080

80808080

Wetlands Manual

20 0 80 8080

80

80

4.1.2 SPECIES

4.1.2.1 BREEDING HABITAT FOR AN ENDANGERED OR THREATENED SPECIES

Name of species Source of information

1) 2)3)4)5)

Field InvestigationsAttach documentation.

Scoring:

For each species 250 points

(score is cumulative, no maximum score)

Breeding Habitat for Endangered or Threatened Species Score (no maximum)

Name of species Source of information1) 2)3)4)5)

field investigations

Attach documentation.Scoring:

For one species 150 pointsFor each additional species 75

(score is cumulative, no maximum score)

Traditional Habitat for Endangered Species Score (no maximum)

23

Southern Ontario Wetland Evaluation, Data and Scoring Record December 2002

None observed during

Wetlands Manual

0

0

None observed during0Total:

4.1.2.2 TRADITIONAL MIGRATION OR FEEDING HABITAT FOR AN ENDANGEREDOR THREATENED SPECIES

Total: 0

4.1.2.3 PROVINCIALLY SIGNIFICANT ANIMAL SPECIES

Name of species Source of information

1)2)3)4)5)6)7)8)9)10)11)12)13)14)15)

Attach separate list if necessary; Attach documentation

Scoring:

Number of provincially significant animal species in the wetland:

1 species = 50 points 14 species = 1542 species = 80 15 species = 1563 species = 95 16 species = 1584 species = 105 17 species = 1605 species = 115 18 species = 1626 species = 125 19 species = 1647 species = 130 20 species = 1668 species = 135 21 species = 1689 species = 140 22 species = 170

10 species = 143 23 species = 17211 species = 146 24 species = 17412 species = 149 25 species = 17613 species = 152

Add one point for every species past 25 (for example, 26 species = 177 points, 27 species = 178 points etc.)

(no maximum score)

Provincially Significant Animal Species Score (no maximum)

24


No observations duringfield investigations

Wetlands Manual

0

4.1.2.4 PROVINCIALLY SIGNIFICANT PLANT SPECIES

(Scientific names must be recorded)Common Name Scientific Name Source of information

1)2)3)4)5)6)7)8)9)10)11)12)13)14)15)

Attach separate list if necessary; Attach documentation

Scoring: 80

Number of provincially significant plant species in the wetland:

1 species = 50 points 14 species = 1542 species = 80 15 species = 1563 species = 95 16 species = 1584 species = 105 17 species = 1605 species = 115 18 species = 1626 species = 125 19 species = 1647 species = 130 20 species = 1668 species = 135 21 species = 1689 species = 140 22 species = 17010 species = 143 23 species = 17211 species = 146 24 species = 17412 species = 149 25 species = 17613 species = 152

Add one point for every species past 25 (for example, 26 species = 177 points, 27 species = 178 points etc.)

Provincially Significant Plant Species Score (no maximum)

25

during field investigations

Wetlands ManualSouthern Ontario Wetland Evaluation, Data and Scoring Record March 1993

No observations made

0

4.1.2.5 REGIONALLY SIGNIFICANT SPECIES (SITE REGION)

Scientific names must be recorded for plant species. Lists of significant species must be approved by MNR.

SIGNIFICANT IN SITE REGION:

.Common Name Scientific Name Source of information

1)2)3)4)5)6)7)8)9)10)11)12)13)14)15)

Attach separate list if necessary .Attach documentation.

Scoring: 4

No. of species significant in Site Region

1 species = 20 6 species = 552 species = 30 7 species = 583 species = 40 8 species = 614 species = 45 9 species = 645 species = 50 10 species = 67

Add one point for every species past 10. (no maximum score)

Regionally Significant Species Score (Site Region)(no maximum)

26

Southern Ontario Wetland Evaluation, Data and Scoring Record December 2002


Wetlands Manual


0

Com

mon

Nam

eSc

ienc

tific

Nam

eS

Ran

kG

Ran

kW

et C

oETr

acke

dPo

ly. L

ocC

omm

ents

Plan

ts

Am

phib

ians

Mam

mal

s

Bir

ds

Rep

tiles

Add

ition

al S

peci

es

4.2.1.6 LOCALLY SIGNIFICANT SPECIES (SITE DISTRICT)

Scientific names must be recorded for plant species. Lists of significant species must be approved by MNR.

Common Name Scientific Name Source of information

1234567891011121314151617181920212223242526272829303132333435363738394041424344454647484950

Attach separate list if necessary .Attach documentation.

Scoring:

No. of species significant in Site District

1 species = 10 6 species = 412 species = 17 7 species = 433 species = 24 8 species = 454 species = 31 9 species = 475 species = 38 10 species = 49

For each significant species over 10 in the wetland, add 1 point.

Locally Significant Species Score (Site District) (no maximum)

27

Southern Ontario Wetland Evaluation, Data and ScoringRecord December 2002


0


Wetlands Manual

4.2 SIGNIFICANT FEATURES AND/OR FISH & WILDLIFE HABITAT

4.2.1 NESTING OF COLONIAL WATERBIRDS

1) Currently nesting

2) Known to have nestedwithin past 5 years

3) Active feeding area(Do not include feedingby great blue herons)

4) None known

Attach documentation (nest locations etc., if known)

Score highest applicable category only; maximum score 50 points.

Score for Nesting Colonial Waterbirds (maximum 50 points)

4.2.2. WINTER COVER FOR WILDLIFE

(Check only highest level of significance) Score(one only)

1) Provincially significant l002) Significant in Site Region 503) Significant in Site District 253) Locally significant 104) Little or poor winter cover present 0


Winter Cover for Wildlife Score (maximum l00 points)

28


Name of species Source of Information ScoreStatus

Wetlands Manual

50

0

little winter cover was observed

0

Score "locally significant" if trees & shrubs are present, also consult District deer yard data.

0

Consult the Ontario Heronry database at Bird Studies Canada. Subtotal:

25

0

0 0

15

4.2.3 WATERFOWL STAGING AND/OR MOULTING

(Check only highest level of significance for both staging and moulting; score is cumulativeacross columns, maximum score 150

Staging Score Moulting Score(one only) (one only)

1) Nationally significant 150 1502) Provincially significant 100 l003) Regionally significant 50 504) Known to occur 10 105) Not possible 0 06) Unknown 0 0

Source of information:Waterfowl Moulting and Staging Score (maximum 150 points)

4.2.4 WATERFOWL BREEDING

(Check only highest level of significance) Score

1) Provincially significant l002) Regionally significant 503) Habitat suitable 104) Habitat not suitable 0

Source of information:however no breeing paris were observed

Waterfowl Breeding Score (maximum lOO points)

4.2.5 MIGRATOR PASSERINE, SHOREBIRD OR RAPTOR STOPOVER AREA

(check highest applicable category)

1) Provincially significant l002) Significant in Site Region 503) Significant in Site District 104) Not significant 0


Passerine, Shorebird or Raptor Stopover Score (maximum 100 points)

29


Total: 00

0AECOM field investigations

Potential habitat within ponds,

00

Subtotal: 0

Wetlands Manual

0

0

AECOM field investigations

10

10

4.2.6 FISH HABITAT

4.2.6. Spawning and Nursery Habitat

Table 5. Area Factors for Low Marsh, High Marsh, and Swamp Communities.

No. of ha of Fish Habitat Area Factor< 0.5 ha 0.10.5- 4.9 0.25.0- 9.9 0.410.0- 14.9 0.615.0 -19.9 0.820.0+ ha 1.0

Step 1:

Fish habitat is not present within the wetland (Score = 0)

Fish habitat is present within the wetland (Go to Step 2)

Step 2: Choose only one option

1) Significance of the spawning and nursery habitat within the wetland is known(Go to Step 3)

2) Significance of the spawning and nursery habitat within the wetland is notknown (Go through Steps 4, 5, 6 and 7)

Step 3: Select the highest appropriate category below attach documentation:

1) Significant in Site Region l00 points

2) Significant in Site District 50

3) Locally Significant Habitat (5.0+ ha) 25

4) Locally Significant Habitat (<5.0 ha) 15

Score for Spawning and Nursery Habitat (maximum score 100 points)

30


Consult District Fisheries files. If fish are present in the wetland, score 15 or 25 points depending on the size of the fish habitat present.

Wetlands Manual

0

X

X

Step 4: Proceed to Steps 4 to 7 only if Step 3 was not answered.

(Low Marsh: marsh area from the existing water line out to the outer boundary of the wetland)

Low marsh not present (Continue to Step 5)Low marsh present (Score as follows)

Scoring for Presence of Key Vegetation Groups

Scoring is based on the one most clearly dominant plant species of the dominant form in each Low Marsh vegetation community. Check the appropriate Vegetation Group (see Appendix 16 Table 16-2) for eachLow Marsh community. Sum the areas of the communities assigned to each Vegetation Group and multiply by the appropriate size factor from Table 5.

Vegetation Vegetation PresentGroup Number Group Name as a Score

Dominant (areaForm (see factor(check) Table 5) x score)

1 Tallgrass 6 pts2 Shortgrass-Sedge 113 Cattail-Bulrush-Burreed 54 Arrowhead-Pickerelweed 55 Duckweed 26 Smartweed-Waterwillow 67 Waterlily-Lotus 118 Waterweed-Watercress 99 Ribbongrass 10

10 Coontail-Naiad-Watermilfoil 1311 Narrowleaf Pondweed 512 Broadleaf Pondweed 8

Step 5: (High Marsh: area from the water line to the inland boundary of marsh wetland type. This is essentially what is commonly referred to as a wet meadow, in that there is insufficient standing water to provide fisheries habitat except during flood or high water conditions.)

High marsh not present (Continue to Step 6) High marsh present (Score as follows)

31

Score Final

X

0.00.00.00.0


TotalArea(ha)

AreaFactor

0.00.00.00.0

0.00.00.00.0

Wetlands Manual

X

0.00.0

Sub Total Score (maximum 75 points)Total Score (maximum 75 points)

Scoring for Presence of Key Vegetation Groups

Scoring is based on the one most clearly dominant plant species of the dominant form in each High 1Marsh vegetation community. Check the appropriate Vegetation Group (see Appendix 16 Table 16-2) for each HighMarsh community. Sum the areas of the communities assigned to each Vegetation Group and multiply by the appropriate size factor from Table 5.

Vegetation Vegetation Present Total Area Score FinalGroup Number Group Name as a Area Factor Score

Dominant (ha) (see (areaForm Table 5) factor(check) x score)

1 Tallgrass 6 pts2 Shortgrass-Sedge 113 Cattail-Bulrush-Burreed 54 Arrowhead-Pickerelweed 5

Step 6: (Swamp: Swamp communities containing fish habitat,either seasonally or permanently.Determine the total area of seasonally flooded swamps and permanently flooded swamps containing fish habitat.)

Swamp containing fish habitat not present (Continue to Step 7)Swamp containing fish habitat present (Score as follows)

Swamp containing fish Present Total Area Factor Score TOTAL SCOREHabitat (check) area (ha) (see Table 5) (factor x score)

Seasonally flooded 10Permanently flooded 10


Score for Spawning and Nursery Habitat (Low Marsh) (maximum 75) =

Score for Spawning and Nursery Habitat (High Marsh) (maximum 25) =

Score for Swamp Containing Fish Habitat (maximum 20) =

Sum (maximum score 100 points) =

32

0.0

2.0

0.0

0.0


0.0

0.00.0

Sub Total Score (maximum 25 points)

0.2

2.0

Sub SCORE (maximum 20 points)SCORE (maximum 20 points)

0.02.02.0

0.00.0

0

Subtotal: 2.0

2.0

Wetlands Manual

1.59

x

Total Score (maximum 25 points)

4.2.6.2 Migration and Staging Habitat

Step 1:

1) Staging or Migration Habitat is not present in the wetland (Score = 0)

2) Staging or Migration Habitat is present in the wetland significance of the habitat is known (Go to Step 2)

3) X Staging or Migration Habitat is present in the wetland significance of the habitat is not known (Go to Step 3)

NOTE: Only one of Step 2 or Step 3 is to be scored.

Step 2: Select the highest appropriate category below, attach documentation:Score

1) Significant in Site Region 25 points

2) Significant in Site District 15

3) Locally Significant 10

4) Fish staging and/or migration habitatpresent,but not as above 5

Score for Fish Migration and Staging Habitat (maximum score 25 points) Step 3: Select the highest appropriate category below based on presence of the designated site type (does not have to be dominant). See Section 1.1.3. Note name of river for 2) and 3).

Score1) Wetland is riverine at rivermouth or lacustrine at rivermouth 25 points

2) Wetland is riverine,within 0.75 km of rivermouth 15

3) Wetland is lacustrine,within 0.75 km of rivermouth 10

4) 5 Fish staging and/or migration habitatpresent, but not as above 5

Score for Staging and Migration Habitat (maximum score 25 points)

33


0

5

Score only if information on fish migration and staging exists, e.g. migration of northern pike through a wetland to access spawning areas.

Wetlands Manual

4.3 ECOSYSTEM AGE

(Fractional Area = area of wetland/total wetland area)

FractionalArea Scoring

Bog x 25 =Fen, treed to open on deep soilsfloating mats or marl x 20 =Fen, on limestone rock x 5 =Swamp x 3 =Marsh x 0 =

Ecosystem Age Score (maximum 25 points)

4.4 GREAT LAKES COASTAL WETLANDS

Score for coastal (see text for definition) wetlands only

Choose one only

wetland < 10 ha = 0 pointswetland 10- 50 ha = 25wetland 51 -lOO ha = 50wetland > 100 ha = 75

Great Lakes Coastal Wetlands Score (maximum 75 points)

34

0.00

0.920.05


0.0

0.00.0

Wetlands Manual

Sub Total: 2.8

0

2.8

2.80.0

5.0 EXTRA INFORMATION

5.1 PURPLE LOOSESTRIFE

Absent/Not seen

X Present (a) One location in wetland XTwo to many locations

Abundance code(b) (l < 20 stems X

(2 20-99 stems(3 100-999 stems(4 >1000 stems

5.2 SEASONALLY FLOODED AREAS

Check one or more

Ephemeral (less than 2 weeks) XTemporal (2 weeks to 1 month)Seasonal (1 to 3 months) XSemi-permanent (>3 months)No seasonal flooding

5.3 SPECIES OF SPECIAL SIGNIFICANCE

5.3.1 Osprey

Present and nestingKnown to have nested in last 5 yr Feeding area for ospreyNot as above X

5.3.2 Common Loon

Nesting in wetlandFeeding at edge of wetland Observed or heard on lake or

river adjoining the wetland Not as above X

35

Southern Ontario Wetland Evaluation, Data and Scoring Record March 1993Wetlands Manual

INVESTIGATORS AFFILIATION

DATES WETLAND VISITED

DATE THIS EVALUATION COMPLETED:

ESTIMATED TIME DEVOTED TO COMPLETING THE FIELD SURVEY IN "PERSON HOURS"

WEATHER CONDITIONS

i) at time of field work(Continue in the space below if necessary)

ii) summer conditions in general this summer has been warm and dry

OTHER POTENTIALLY USEFUL INFORMATION:

CHECKLIST OF PLANT AND ANIMAL SPECIES RECORDED IN THE WETLAND:

Attach a list of all flora and fauna observed in the wetland.

*Indicate if voucher specimens or photos have been obtained, where located, etc.

36


Jessica PietteTom Shorney

Terrestrial and Wetland Ecologist, AECOMEcologist, AECOM

Wetlands Manual

20

Terrestrial and Wetland Ecologist, AECOMJillian deMan

20ºC, and dry, on the 26th and approximately 25ºC on the 27th

Wetland was visited by AECOM Ecologists on June, 26th and 27th, 2012

July 24, 2012

WETLAND NAME AND/OR NUMBER

1.1 PRODUCTIVITY

1.1.1 Growing Degree-Days/Soils 1.1.2 Wetland Type1.1.3 Site Type

Total for Productivity

1.2 BIODIVERSITY

1.2.1 Number of Wetland Types1.2.2 Vegetation Communities (maxixmum 45) 1.2.3 Diversity of Surrounding Habitat (maximum 7) 1.2.4 Proximinty to Other Wetlands1.2.5 Interspersion1.2.6 Open Water Type

Total for BiodiversitySub Total for Biodiversity

1.3 SIZE (Biological Component)

TOTAL FOR BIOLOGICAL COMPONENT (not to exceed 250) 89

8.12.6

26

13.0

5.05.0

89.21

55


14.0

15.0

Wetlands Manual

55


1.0 BIOLOGICAL COMPONENT

9.0

8.5

WETLAND EVALUATION SCORING RECORD

Sub Total:

9

2.1 ECONOMICALLY VALUABLE PRODUCTS

2.1.1 Wood Products 2.1.2 Wild Rice2.1.3 Commercial Fish 2.1.4 Bullfrogs2.1.5 Snapping Turtles 2.1.6 Furbearers

Total for Economically Valuable Products

2.2 RECREATIONAl ACTIVITIES (maximum 80)

2.3 LANDSCAPE AESTHETICS

2.3.1 Distinctness2.3.2 Absence of Human Disturbance

Total for Landscape Aesthetics

2.4 EDUCATION AND PUBLIC AWARENESS

2.4.1 Educational Uses2.4.2 Facilities and Programs 2.4.3 Research and Studies

Total for Education and Public Awareness

2.5 PROXIMITY TO AREAS OF HUMAN SETTLEMENT

2.6 OWNERSH1PSubtotal for Social Component

2.7 SIZE (Social Component)

2.8 ABORIGINAL AND CULTURAL VALUES

TOTAL FOR SOCIAL COMPONENT (not to exceed 250)

10

0

0

61

0

8

4

61Sub Total:

5

23

Southern Ontario Welland Evaluation March 1993

2.0 SOCIAL COMPONENT

6

16

18

00

Wetlands Manual

44.0

0120

00

3.1 FLOOD ATTENUATION

3.2 WATER QUALITY IMPROVEMENT

3.2.1 Short Term Improvement 3.2.2 Long Term Improvement3.2.3 Groundwater Discharge (maximum 30)

Total for Water Quality Improvement

3.3 CARBON SINK

3.4 SHORELINE EROSION CONTROL

3.5 GROUNDWATER RECHARGE

3.5.1 Site Type3.5.2 Soils

Total for Groundwater Recharge

TOTAL FOR HYDROLOGICAL COMPONENT (not to exceed 250)Sub Total:

3.0 HYDROLOGICAL COMPONENT

Southem Ontario Wetland Evaluation, Score Summary March 1993

35.1

41.007.0

0.07.0

48

Wetlands Manual

154

61

3

42

0

154

4.1 RARITY

4.1.1 Wetlands4.1.1.1 Rarity within the Landscape4.1.1.2 Rarirty of Wetland Type (maximum 80)

Total for Wetland Rarity

4.1.2 Species4.1.2.1 Endangered or Threatened Species Breeding4.1.2.2 Traditional Use by Endangered or Threatened Species 4.1.2.3 Provincially Significant Animals4.1.2.4 Provincially Significant Plants 4.1.2.5 Regionally Significant Species 4.1.2.6 Locally Significant Species

Total for Species Rarity

4.2 SIGNIFICANT FEATURES OR HABITAT

4.2.1 Colonial Waterbirds4.2.2 Winter Cover for Wildlife4.2.3 Waterfowl Staging and Moulting4.2.4 Waterfowl Breeding4.2.5 Migratory Passerine, Shorebird or Raptor Stopover 4.2.6 Fish Habitat

Total for Significant Features and Habitat

4.3 ECOSYSTEM AGE

4.4 GREAT LAKES COASTAL WETLANDS

TOTAL FOR SPECIAL FEATURES (maximum 250) 120

0.07.0

17

3

120Sub Total:

0

0.00.00.0

10.0

0

0.00.00.00.00.00.0

Southern Ontario Wetland Evaluation, Score Summary December 2002

4.0 SPECIAL FEATURES

60.040.0

Wetlands Manual

100

Wetland

TOTAL FOR 1.0 BIOLOGICAL COMPONENT

TOTAL FOR 2.0 SOCIAL COMPONENT

TOTAL FOR 3.0 HYDROLOGICAL COMPONENT

TOTAL FOR 4.0 SPECIAL FEATURES COMPONENT

WETLAND TOTAL

INVESTIGATORS

AFFILIATION

DATE

Terrestrial and Wetland Ecologist, AECOM

61

154

120

424

Southern Ontario Wetland Evaluation, Score Summary March 1993

SUMMARY OF EVALUATION RESULT


89

Wetlands Manual

July 24, 2012

00

0

Terrestrial and Wetland Ecologist, AECOMEcologist, AECOM

Jessica PietteTom ShorneyJillian deMan

0

Com

m S

p C

ode

Com

m N

u C

ode

Veg

etat

ion

Form

s#

Form

sSp

ecie

sC

omm

ents

M1

ne*,

ls, g

c3

ne*

, Jun

cus c

anad

ensi

s; J

uncu

s spe

cies

, Car

ex lu

pulin

a,

ls, F

raxi

nus p

enns

ylva

nica

; Cor

nus s

eric

ea, S

ambu

cus r

acem

osa,

gc

, Asc

lepi

as in

carn

ata;

Sym

phyo

trich

um p

unic

eum

M2

ne*,

re, l

s2

ne*,

Pha

lari

s aru

ndin

acea

; Sch

oeno

plec

tus t

aber

naem

onta

ni, J

uncu

s can

aden

sis,

Eleo

char

is sp

.ls

, Fra

xinu

s pen

nsyl

vani

ca

M3

ne*,

gc

2ne

*, P

hala

ris a

rund

inac

ea; B

rom

us in

erm

isgc

, Asc

lepi

as sy

riac

a; S

ymph

yotr

ichu

m n

ovae

-ang

liae,

Urt

ica

dioi

ca

S1h*

, ne,

gc

3h*

, Fra

xinu

s pen

nsyl

vani

ca; P

opul

us tr

emul

oide

s, Sa

lix e

rioc

ephe

lane

, Jun

cus c

anad

ensi

s; C

arex

lupu

lina,

Sch

oeno

plec

tus t

aber

naem

onta

nigc

, Asc

lepi

as in

carn

ata,

Sym

phyo

tric

hum

pun

iceu

m

S2h*

, ls,

ts, g

c4

h*, A

cer f

reem

anii;

Fra

xinu

s pen

nsyl

vani

ca, U

lmus

am

eric

ana

ls, L

inde

ra b

enzo

in;

Frax

inus

pen

nsyl

vani

ca, C

ornu

s alte

rnifo

liats

, Lin

dera

ben

zoin

gc, O

nocl

ea se

nsib

ilis;

Impa

tiens

cap

ensi

s, Bo

ehm

eria

cyl

indr

ica,

Vio

la sp

ecie

s

S3h*

, ls,

ts, g

c4

h*, A

cer f

reem

anii;

Fra

xinu

s pen

nsyl

vani

ca, U

lmus

am

eric

ana

ls, L

inde

ra b

enzo

in; F

raxi

nus p

enns

ylva

nica

ts, F

raxi

nus p

enns

ylva

nica

; Cor

nus a

ltern

ifolia

, Ulm

us a

mer

ican

agc

, Mat

teuc

cia

stru

thio

pter

is;T

halic

trum

pub

esce

ns, A

risa

ema

trip

hyllu

m, I

mpa

tiens

cap

ensi

s

S4h*

, ts,

gc3

h*, F

raxi

nus p

enns

ylva

nica

, Fra

xinu

s nig

ra, U

lmus

am

eric

ana,

Ace

r fre

eman

iits

, Fra

xinu

s nig

ra; F

raxi

nus p

enns

ylva

nica

gc, A

ctae

a ru

bra,

Tha

lictr

um p

ubes

cens

; Cir

caea

lute

tiana

, Ari

saem

a th

riph

yllu

m, G

eum

can

aden

se

Veg

etat

ion

Com

mun

ities

Prop

erty

of

Min

istry

of N

atur

al R

esou

rces

- G

uelp

h D

istri

ctN

ovem

ber ,

200

4

Sta

nley

Big

Dra

in W

etla

nd E

valu

atio

n P

lant

Lis

t

BO

TAN

ICA

L N

AM

EC

OM

MO

N N

AM

E

CO

EFF

ICIE

NT

OF

CO

NS

ER

VAT

ISM

WE

TNE

SS

IN

DE

XW

EE

DIN

ES

S

IND

EX

PR

OV

INC

IAL

STA

TUS

OM

NR

S

TATU

SC

OS

EW

IC

STA

TUS

GLO

BAL

S

TATU

S

LOC

AL

STA

TUS

H

UR

OM

1M

2M

3S

1S

2S

3S

4S

OU

RC

EO

LDH

AM E

T AL

OLD

HAM

ET

ALO

LDH

AM E

T AL

NEW

MAS

TER

NEW

MAS

TER

OLD

HAM

199

3

PTER

IDO

PHYT

ESFE

RN

S &

ALL

IES

Dry

opte

ridac

eae

Woo

d Fe

rn F

amily

Dry

opte

risca

rthus

iana

Spi

nulo

se W

ood

Fern

5-2

S5

G5

Xx

Mat

teuc

cia

stru

thio

pter

isO

stric

h Fe

rn5

-3S

5G

5X

xO

nocl

ease

nsib

ilis

Sen

sitiv

e Fe

rn4

-3S

5G

5X

xx

GYM

NO

SPER

MS

CO

NIF

ERS

Cup

ress

acea

eC

edar

Fam

ilyTh

uja

occi

dent

alis

Eas

tern

Whi

te C

edar

4-3

S5

G5

Xx

xTs

uga

cana

dens

isE

aste

rn H

emlo

ck7

3S

5G

5X

xx

DIC

OTY

LED

ON

SD

ICO

TSAc

erac

eae

Map

le F

amily

xA

cer

rubr

umR

ed M

aple

40

S5

G5

XA

cer X

freem

anii

Free

man

's M

aple

xx

xx

Toxi

code

ndro

nra

dica

nsP

oiso

n-iv

y5

-1S

5G

5TX

xx

xx

Ascl

epia

dace

aeM

ilkw

eed

Fam

ilyA

scle

pias

inca

rnat

a S

wam

p M

ilkw

eed

6-5

S5

G5T

5X

xx

Asc

lepi

assy

riaca

Com

mon

Milk

wee

d0

5S

5G

5X

xx

Aste

race

aeC

ompo

site

or A

ster

Fam

ilyA

rctiu

mm

inus

C

omm

on B

urdo

ck5

-2S

E5

G?T

?I

xS

ymph

yotri

chum

lanc

eola

tum

Tall

Whi

te A

ster

3-3

S5

G5T

?X

xx

xS

ymph

yotri

chum

late

riflo

rum

Cal

ico

Aste

r3

-2S

5G

5T5

Xx

Sym

phyo

trich

umno

vae-

angl

iae

New

Eng

land

Ast

er2

-3S

5G

5X

xx

Sym

phyo

trich

umpu

nice

umP

urpl

e-st

emm

ed A

ster

S5

G5T

?X

xC

irsiu

mar

vens

eC

anad

a Th

istle

3-1

SE

5G

?I

xE

riger

onan

nus

Eas

tern

Dai

sy F

leab

ane

01

S5

G5

xE

riger

onph

ilade

lphi

cus

Phi

lade

lphi

a Fl

eaba

ne1

-3S

5G

5T?

Xx

Tara

xacu

mof

ficin

ale

Com

mon

Dan

delio

n3

-2S

E5

G5

Ix

Bal

sam

inac

eae

Touc

h-m

e-no

t Fam

ilyIm

patie

nsca

pens

isS

potte

d To

uch-

me-

not

4-3

S5

G5

Xx

xx

xB

erbe

ridac

eae

Bar

berr

y Fa

mily

Cau

loph

yllu

mth

alic

troid

esB

lue

Coh

osh

65

S5

GX

xx

xP

odop

hyllu

mpe

ltatu

mM

ay-a

pple

53

S5

G5

Xx

Bet

ulac

eae

Birc

h Fa

mily

Bet

ula

alle

ghan

iens

isYe

llow

Birc

h6

0S

5G

5X

xx

xB

rass

icac

eae

Mus

tard

Fam

ilyA

lliar

iape

tiola

taG

arlic

Mus

tard

0-3

SE

5G

5I

xx

Sam

bucu

sra

cem

osa

var.

race

mos

a R

ed-b

errie

d E

lder

berr

y5

2S

5G

5T4T

5X

xx

Cor

nace

aeD

ogw

ood

Fam

ilyC

ornu

sal

tern

ifolia

Alte

rnat

e-le

aved

Dog

woo

d6

5S

5G

5X

xx

xC

ornu

sse

ricea

Red

-osi

er D

ogw

ood

2-3

S5

G5

Xx

xV

icia

crac

caTu

fted

Vet

ch5

-1S

E5

G?

Ix

Ger

ania

ceae

Ger

aniu

m F

amily

Ger

aniu

mro

berti

anum

Her

b-ro

bert

5-2

SE

5G

5I

xx

xG

ross

ular

iace

aeC

urra

nt F

amily

Rib

esla

cust

reS

wam

p B

lack

Cur

rant

7-3

S5

G5

xJu

glan

dace

aeW

alnu

t Fam

ilyJu

glan

sci

nere

aB

utte

rnut

62

S3?

G4

XLa

urac

eae

Laur

el F

amily

Lind

era

benz

oin

Spi

cebu

sh6

-2S

5G

5X

xO

leac

eae

Oliv

e Fa

mily

Frax

inus

nigr

aB

lack

Ash

7-4

S5

G5

Xx

Frax

inus

penn

sylv

anic

aG

reen

Ash

3-3

S5

G5

Xx

xx

xx

xx

Ona

grac

eae

Even

ing-

prim

rose

Fam

ilyC

ircae

alu

tetia

na s

sp. c

anad

ensi

sEn

chan

ter's

Nig

htsh

ade

33

S5

G5T

5X

xx

xR

umex

cris

pus

Cur

ly-le

af D

ock

-1-2

SE

5G

?I

xR

anun

cula

ceae

But

terc

up F

amily

Act

aea

rubr

aR

ed B

aneb

erry

55

S5

G5

Xx

xA

nem

one

acut

iloba

Sha

rp-lo

bed

Hep

atic

a6

5S

5G

5X

xR

anun

culu

sab

ortiv

usK

idne

y-le

af B

utte

rcup

2-2

S5

G5

Xx

Ran

uncu

lus

acris

Tall

But

terc

up-2

SE

5G

5I

xx

Ran

uncu

lus

pens

ylva

nicu

sB

ristly

But

terc

up3

-5S

5G

5X

xx

Thal

ictru

mpu

besc

ens

Tall

Mea

dow

-rue

5-2

S5

G5

Xx

Rha

mna

ceae

Buc

ktho

rn F

amily

Rha

mnu

sca

thar

tica

Com

mon

Buc

ktho

rn3

-3S

E5

G?

xR

osac

eae

Ros

e Fa

mily

Agr

imon

iagr

ypos

epal

aTa

ll H

airy

Agr

imon

y2

2S

5G

5X

xFr

agar

iavi

rgin

iana

V

irgin

ia S

traw

berr

y2

1S

UG

5T?

Xx

Geu

mca

nade

nse

Whi

te A

vens

30

S5

G5

Xx

xx

Pru

nus

virg

inia

na s

sp. v

irgin

iana

Cho

ke C

herr

y2

1S

5G

5T?

Xx

Rub

usid

aeus

ssp

. ida

eus

Red

Ras

pber

ryS

E1

G5T

5x

xSa

licac

eae

Will

ow F

amily

Sta

nley

Big

Dra

in W

etla

nd E

valu

atio

n P

lant

Lis

t

Pop

ulus

delto

ides

ssp

. del

toid

esE

aste

rn C

otto

nwoo

d4

-1S

UG

5T?

Xx

Pop

ulus

trem

uloi

des

Trem

blin

g As

pen

20

S5

G5

Xx

xS

alix

erio

ceph

ala

Mis

sour

i Willo

w4

-3S

5G

5X

xS

alix

exig

uaS

andb

ar W

illow

3-5

S5

G5

Xx

Ver

onic

aan

agal

lis-a

quat

ica

Wat

er S

peed

wel

l-5

-1S

E5

G5

Ix

Sola

nace

aeN

ight

shad

e Fa

mily

Sol

anum

dulc

amar

aB

itter

Nig

htsh

ade

0-2

SE

5G

?I

xx

Tilia

ceae

Lind

en F

amily

Tilia

amer

ican

aAm

eric

an B

assw

ood

43

S5

G5

Xx

xx

Ulm

acea

eEl

m F

amily

Cel

tisoc

cide

ntal

isC

omm

on H

ackb

erry

81

S4

G5

Xx

Ulm

usam

eric

ana

Whi

te E

lm3

-2S

5G

5?X

xx

xU

rtic

acea

eN

ettle

Fam

ilyB

oehm

eria

cylin

dric

aFa

lse

Net

tle4

-5S

5G

5X

xx

Lapo

rtea

cana

dens

isW

ood

Net

tle6

-3S

5G

5X

xx

Urti

cadi

oica

ssp

. dio

ica

Eur

opea

n S

tingi

ng N

ettle

-1-1

SE

2G

5T?

xx

xx

Viol

acea

eVi

olet

Fam

ilyV

iola

cons

pers

aAm

eric

an D

og V

iole

t4

-2S

5G

5X

Vio

la

spec

ies

Vio

let s

peci

esx

xx

Vita

ceae

Gra

pe F

amily

Par

then

ocis

sus

inse

rtaIn

serte

d V

irgin

ia-c

reep

er3

3S

5G

5X

xx

xx

Viti

srip

aria

Riv

erba

nk G

rape

0-2

S5

G5

Xx

xx

MO

NO

CO

TYLE

DO

NS

MO

NO

CO

TSAr

acea

eAr

um F

amily

Aris

aem

atri

phyl

lum

Sm

all J

ack-

in-th

e-pu

lpit

5-2

S5

G5T

5X

xx

Cyp

erac

eae

Sedg

e Fa

mily

Car

exbe

bbii

Beb

b's

Sed

ge3

-5S

5G

5X

xC

arex

lupu

lina

Hop

Sed

ge6

-5S

5G

5X

xx

Ele

ocha

rispa

lust

risS

mal

l's S

pike

-rus

h6

-5S

5G

5?X

Sch

oeno

plec

tus

tabe

rnae

mon

tani

Amer

ican

Gre

at B

ulru

sh/s

ofts

tem

bul

rush

5-5

S5

G?

Xx

xx

Irida

ceae

Iris

Fam

ilyIri

ssp

ecie

sIri

s sp

ecie

sx

Junc

ussp

ecie

sR

ush

spec

ies

xx

Junc

usca

nade

nsis

Can

ada

Rus

h6

-5S

5G

5x

xLi

liace

aeLi

ly F

amily

Liliu

mm

ichi

gane

nse

Mic

higa

n Li

ly7

-1S

5G

5X

xx

Mai

anth

emum

stel

latu

mS

tar-

flow

ered

Sol

omon

's S

eal

61

S5

G5

Xx

xE

pipa

ctis

helle

borin

eC

omm

on H

elle

borin

e5

-2S

E5

G?

Ix

xPo

acea

eG

rass

Fam

ilyB

rom

usin

erm

is s

sp. i

nerm

isAw

nles

s B

rom

e5

-3S

E5

G4G

5T?

Ix

Gly

ceria

stria

taFo

wl M

eado

w G

rass

3-5

S5

G5

Xx

xx

xP

hala

risar

undi

nace

aR

eed

Can

ary

Gra

ss0

-4S

5G

5X

xx

xTy

phac

eae

Cat

tail

Fam

ilyTy

pha

latif

olia

Bro

ad-le

aved

Cat

tail

3-5

S5

G5

Xx

FLO

RIS

TIC

SU

MM

ARY

& A

SSES

SMEN

T

Spec

ies

Div

ersi

tyTo

tal S

peci

es:

73N

ativ

e Sp

ecie

s:59

80.8

2%Ex

otic

Spe

cies

1419

.18%

Tota

l Tax

a in

Reg

ion

(Lis

t Reg

ion,

Sou

rce)

1000

0%

Reg

iona

l Tax

a R

ecor

ded

0.73

%R

egio

nally

Sig

nific

ant S

peci

es0

S1-S

3 Sp

ecie

s0

S4 S

peci

es1

S5 S

peci

es56

Co-

effic

ient

of C

onse

rvat

ism

and

Flo

ral Q

ualit

y In

dex

Co-

effic

ient

of C

onse

rvat

ism

(CC

) (av

erag

e)4.

07C

C 0

to 3

low

est s

ensi

tivity

2440

.68%

CC

4 to

6m

oder

ate

sens

itivi

ty30

50.8

5%C

C 7

to 8

high

sen

sitiv

ity5

8.47

%C

C 9

to 1

0hi

ghes

t sen

sitiv

ity0

0.00

%Fl

oral

Qua

lity

Inde

x (F

QI)

31.2

5

Pres

ence

of W

eedy

& In

vasi

ve S

peci

esm

ean

wee

dine

ss-1

.93

wee

dine

ss =

-1lo

w p

oten

tial i

nvas

iven

ess

428

.57%

wee

dine

ss =

-2m

oder

ate

pote

ntia

l inv

asiv

enes

s7

50.0

0%w

eedi

ness

= -3

high

pot

entia

l inv

asiv

enes

s3

21.4

3%

Pres

ence

of W

etla

nd S

peci

esav

erag

e w

etne

ss v

alue

-0.5

8up

land

1013

.70%

facu

ltativ

e up

land

1115

.07%

facu

ltativ

e16

21.9

2%fa

culta

tive

wet

land

2331

.51%

oblig

ate

wet

land

1216

.44%

UTM

Zon

e 17

N, N

AD

83

Map Document: (O:\GIS_Utilities\ArcGIS_MapTemplates\AECOM_Templates\November09\11x17-Landscape_AECOM.mxt)11/10/2009 -- 8:17:49 AM

Figu

re 1

OW

ES E

valu

atio

n

Augu

st 2

012

Proj

ect 6

0155

032

Blue

wat

er W

ind

Ener

gy C

entre

This

dra

win

g ha

s be

en p

repa

red

for t

he u

se o

f AE

CO

M’s

clie

nt

and

may

not

be

used

, rep

rodu

ced

or re

lied

upon

by

third

par

ties,

exce

pt a

s ag

reed

by

AE

CO

M a

nd it

s cl

ient

, as

requ

ired

by la

w

or fo

r use

by

gove

rnm

enta

l rev

iew

ing

agen

cies

. AE

CO

M a

ccep

ts

no re

spon

sibi

lity,

and

den

ies

any

liabi

lity

wha

tsoe

ver,

to a

ny p

arty

that

mod

ifies

this

dra

win

g w

ithou

t AE

CO

M’s

exp

ress

writ

ten

cons

ent.

S2 S4

S4

S3

M1

S1 UU

S1

M1

S1U

M2

U

M2

BLW

1676

BLW

1036

BLW

1660

BLW

1658

BLW

1602

BLW

1601

BLW

1657

BLW

1659 BL

W10

84

BLW

1603

BLW

1679

BLW

1600

BLW

1656

BLW

1680

BLW

1010

BLW

1598

BLW

1606

BLW

1042

BLW

1607

BLW

1605

BLW

1589

BLW

1661

BLW

1436

BLW

1041

BLW

1662

BLW

1437

BLW

1590 BL

W14

38

BLW

1591

BLW

1451

BLW

1450

BLW

1608

BLW

1588

BLW

1439

BLW

1005

BLW

1587

BLW

1604

BLW

1599

BLW

1654

BLW

1073

BLW

1678

BLW

1683

Parr Line

Cen

tenn

ial R

oad

Babylon Line

.20

00

200

100

Met

res

Base

map

ping

from

Ont

ario

Min

istry

of N

atur

al R

esou

rces

Lege

ndO

WES

Cod

eU M

1

M2

S1

S2

S3

S4

Prop

ertie

s

OW

ES C

ode

HaM

10.

264

M1

2.04

2M

20.

118

M2

0.07

8S1

0.32

8S1

0.67

5S1

0.14

1S2

19.8

9S3

4.24

2S4

10.3

8S4

10.9

07U

0.08

2U

0.04

3U

0.25

2U

0.27

6To

tal

49.7

18

m

2,3

06

ha

2

,30

6 h

a


Appendix I Woodland Breeding Bird Species List

Appe

ndix

I.

Bre

edin

g B

irds

Surv

ey D

ata

Visit 1

Visit 2

Visit 3

P.C. # 1

P.C # 2

P.C. # 3

P.C. # 4

P.C. # 1

P.C # 2

P.C. # 3

P.C. # 4

P.C. # 1

P.C # 2

P.C. # 3

P.C # 4

P.C. # 1

P.C. # 2

P.C. # 1

P.C. # 2

P.C. # 1

P.C. # 2

P.C. # 1

P.C. # 1

P.C. # 1

Tota

l No.

In

divi

dual

s O

bser

ved

Am

eric

an C

row

Cor

vus

brac

hyrh

ynch

osS

5B1

11

21

13

23

11

17A

mer

ican

Gol

dfin

chC

arde

ulis

tris

tisS

5B1

24

31

11

114

Am

eric

an R

edst

art

Set

opha

ga ru

ticill

aS

5BA

11

Am

eric

an R

obin

Turd

us m

igra

toriu

sS

5B1

11

11

12

21

31

11

11

11

21B

altim

ore

Orio

leIc

teru

s ga

lbul

aS

4B1

12

21

12

11

113

Bel

ted

Kin

gfis

her

Meg

acer

yle

alcy

onS

4B1

1B

lack

-cap

ped

Chi

ckad

eeP

oeci

le a

trica

pillu

sS

51

11

14

Blu

e Ja

yC

yano

citta

cris

tata

S5

11

11

13

19

Bro

wn-

head

ed C

owbi

rdM

olot

hrus

ate

rS

4B2

21

31

9C

edar

Wax

win

gB

omby

cilla

ced

roru

mS

5B2

2C

omm

on G

rack

leQ

uisc

alus

qui

scul

aS

5B1

73

11

13C

omm

on Y

ello

wth

roat

Geo

thly

phis

tric

has

S5B

11

11

4C

oope

r's H

awk

Acc

ipite

r coo

peri

S4

A1

1D

owny

Woo

dpec

ker

Pic

oide

s pu

besc

ens

S5

11

11

11

17

Eas

tern

Pho

ebe

Say

orni

s ph

oebe

S5B

11

Eas

tern

Woo

d-P

ewee

Con

topu

s vi

rens

S4B

22

11

11

11

11

22

11

119

Gra

y C

atbi

rdD

umet

ella

car

olin

ensi

sS

4B2

21

11

7G

reat

Cre

sted

Fly

catc

her

Myi

arch

us c

rinitu

sS

4B1

11

11

12

11

11

11

11

16H

ouse

Wre

nTr

oglo

dyte

s ae

don

S5B

23

11

21

23

22

22

23

12

31In

digo

Bun

ting

Pas

serin

a cy

anea

S4B

22

15

Leas

t Fly

catc

her

Em

pido

nax

min

imus

S4B

A2

11

4M

ourn

ing

Dov

eZe

naid

a m

acro

ura

S5

11

13

Mou

rnin

g W

arbl

erO

poro

rnis

phi

lade

lphi

aS

4B1

1N

orth

ern

Car

dina

lC

ardi

nalis

car

dina

lisS

51

11

11

5N

orth

ern

Flic

ker

Col

apte

s au

ratu

sS

4B2

2O

venb

irdS

eiur

us a

uroc

apill

usS

4BA

11

22

11

8P

ileat

ed W

oodp

ecke

rD

ryoc

opus

pile

atus

S5

A1

1R

ed-b

ellie

d W

oodp

ecke

rM

elan

erpe

s ca

rolin

usS

41

1R

ed-e

yed

Vire

oV

ireo

oliv

aceu

sS

5B2

13

21

31

34

21

21

22

11

32R

ed-ta

iled

Haw

kB

uteo

jam

aice

nsis

S5

11

13

Red

-win

ged

Bla

ckbi

rdA

gela

ius

phoe

nice

usS

51

12

Ros

e-br

east

ed G

rosb

eak

Phe

uctic

us lu

dovi

cian

usS

4B2

21

22

11

21

22

18S

carle

t Tan

ager

Pira

nga

oliv

acea

S4B

A1

12

Son

g S

parro

wM

elos

piza

mel

odia

S5B

22

13

11

12

14

119

Turk

ey V

ultu

reC

atha

rtes

aura

S5B

11

War

blin

g V

ireo

Vire

o gi

lvus

S5B

11

2W

hite

-bre

aste

d N

utha

tch

Sitt

a ca

rolin

ensi

sS

5A

11

13

Wild

Tur

key

Mel

eagr

is g

allo

pavo

S5

22

Woo

d D

uck

Aix

spo

nsa

S5

11

Woo

d Th

rush

Hyl

ocic

hla

mus

telin

aS

4B3

21

21

11

32

21

12

21

25Y

ello

w W

arbl

erD

endr

oica

pet

echi

aS

5B3

33

9Y

ello

w-b

ellie

d Fl

ycat

cher

eE

mpi

dona

x fla

vive

ntris

S5B

44

Yel

low

-bel

lied

Sap

suck

erS

phyr

apic

us v

ariu

sS

5BA

11

12

5Y

ello

w-b

illed

Cuc

koo

Coc

cyzu

s am

eric

anus

11

Yel

low

-thro

ated

Vire

oV

ireo

flavi

frons

S4B

A1

1N

umbe

r of S

peci

es:

1010

1214

714

1213

129

1219

913

168

712

158

5N

umbe

r of I

ndiv

idua

ls16

1416

2110

1916

2026

1722

3010

1821

1113

1720

85

KE

Y a N

atio

nal S

peci

es a

t Ris

k ar

e th

ose

liste

d by

CO

SE

WIC

= C

omm

ittee

on

the

Sta

tus

of E

ndan

gere

d W

ildlif

e in

Can

ada:

EN

D =

End

ange

red,

TH

R =

Thr

eate

ned,

SC

= S

peci

al C

once

rnb P

rovi

ncia

l Spe

cies

at R

isk

are

thos

e lis

ted

by C

OS

SA

RO

= C

omm

ittee

on

the

Sta

tus

of S

peci

es a

t Ris

k in

Ont

ario

: EN

D =

End

ange

red,

TH

R =

Thr

eate

ned,

SC

= S

peci

al C

once

rnc S

Ran

k (fr

om N

atur

al H

erita

ge In

form

atio

n C

entre

): S

1 (C

ritic

ally

Impe

riled

), S

2 (Im

peril

ed) o

r S3

(Vul

nera

ble)

, S4

(app

aren

tly s

ecur

e, u

ncom

mon

), or

S5

(sec

ure,

com

mon

).d

Are

a S

ensi

tive

Spe

cies

acc

ordi

ng to

OM

NR

(200

0) S

igni

fican

t Wild

life

Hab

itat T

echn

ical

Gui

de (A

ppen

dix

G)

Visit 1

Visit 2

Visit 3

Prov

inci

al

Spec

ies

at

Ris

k b

Prov

inci

al

Stat

us

(S R

ank)

c

Area

Se

nsiti

ve

Spec

ies

d

Visit 2

Visit 3

Stat

us

555

(SC

B-0

3)51

4 (S

CB

-01)

BLW1603

Com

mon

Nam

eSc

ient

ific

Nam

e

551

(SC

B-0

2)

BLW1329

BLW1658

BLW1603

BLW1658

BLW1603

BLW1658

BLW1371

Visit 1

Nat

iona

l Sp

ecie

s at

R

isk

a

B3. Species of Conservation Concern (SOCC) Vascular Plant Surveys · 2018-06-22 · Ecological Land...

Documents

Transcript of B3. Species of Conservation Concern (SOCC) Vascular Plant Surveys · 2018-06-22 · Ecological Land...