Environmental Impact Study

Transcription

1 Consent Application: (David Henderson) Environmental Impact Study Species at Risk Consulting and Ecological Services January 2008

2 Executive Summary Species at Risk Consulting and Ecological Services was retained by Mr. David Henderson to complete a scoped Environmental Impact Study to address environmental concerns with regards to the impact the proposal to sever part of lot 35 Concession 1, geographic township of Gibson, Municipality of Georgian Bay, into a total of three lots, could have on the natural heritage features of the property, specifically habitats of Species at Risk (i.e., reptiles in this area) and significant wildlife habitat. Fieldwork was conducted on the subject property in mid October, not the most appropriate time to find and confirm species use of the habitats but within the window to identify the significant habitats of the Species at Risk and rare vegetation communities of the area. Although no Species at Risk were seen during the fieldwork component, likely as a result of the late season fieldwork, a number of potential Significant Habitats of the identified Species at Risk were found. In addition to the Species at Risk Habitat the property was generally assessed using an Ecological Land Classification system design exclusively for the Eastern shore and islands of Georgian Bay. In conclusion, Species at Risk Consulting and Ecological Services has identified natural features worthy of protection and has made recommendations that if agree to and the appropriate planning action taken will ensure the long-term protection of the Significant Habitats of Threatened and Endangered Species, the Significant Wildlife Habitat, and Type 1 Fish Habitat. Environmental Impact Study 2

3 Table of Contents 1 INTRODUCTION BACKGROUND PURPOSE AND SCOPE OF STUDY LOCATION AND DESCRIPTION OF PROPERTY STUDY APPROACH COLLECTION AND REVIEW OF BACKGROUND INFORMATION NATURAL HISTORY OF TARGET SPECIES AT RISK ARIAL PHOTOGRAPH INTERPRETATION WILDLIFE HABITATS LAND CLASSIFICATION BIOPHYSICAL FEATURES LAND CLASSIFICATION SPECIES AT RISK HABITAT FISH HABITAT ATLANTIC COASTAL PLAINS FLORA AREAS ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT SPECIES AT RISK SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS REFERENCES Environmental Impact Study 3

4 Tables Table 1. Assessment of wildlife habitat on the property...29 Figures Figure 1. Map of the subject property showing the Ecological Land Classification..16 Figure 2. Photo illustrating the Common Juniper Acidic Shrub Rock Barren community...17 Figure 3. Photo illustrating a P1, Acidic Open Bedrock Shore community Figure 4. Photo illustrating T119C Sugar Maple - Red Oak Basswood Red Maple community...19 Figure 5. Photo illustrating a W188, White Pine Mineral Coniferous Swamp Figure 6. Photo illustrating a W275, Narrow-leaved Sedge Mineral Meadow Marsh community...21 Figure 7. Photo illustrating W330A, Water-shield Water-lily Floating-leaved Shallow Aquatic with a small fringe of Coastal Meadow Marsh...22 Figure 8. Photo illustrating the narrow strip of Georgian Bay Coastal Acidic Mineral Meadow Marsh community...23 Figure 9. Map of the subject property showing the Species at Risk habitat (SHTES), Significant Wildlife Habitat (SWH), and Type 1 Fish Habitat Figure 10. Photo illustrating a medium quality massasauga gestation site on the subject property Figure 11. Potential eastern foxsnake hibernation and or basking/shedding site...27 Environmental Impact Study 4

5 1 Introduction 1.1 Background A Scoped Environmental Impact Study (EIS) for an application to sever an existing 6 ha property, part of lot 35 Concession 1, geographic township of Gibson, Municipality of Georgian Bay, into a total of three lots, was undertaken at the request of Mr. David Anderson as per the requirements of Township of Georgian Bay Official Plan and the Provincial Policy Statement (2005). 1.2 Purpose and Scope of Study To address the township s concerns, the study determined the potential impacts the proposed severance of the property and subsequent development plans may have on the natural heritage and how any unacceptable impacts can be eliminated or minimized. More specifically, Species at Risk Consulting and Ecological Services was retained to: determine the subject property's significant habitat of threatened and endangered species and ensure its protection, determine the subject property s significant wildlife habitat and ensure its protection, and ensure that the proposed application acts in accordance with policies set out in the Provincial Policy Statement (2005). 1.3 Location and Description of Property The property is located on the mainland north of Beausoleil Island, east of Webber Island, west of McCrae Lake in Southeastern Georgian Bay. The subject property consists of White Pine (Pinus strobus) - Red Oak (Quercus rubra) mixed forest with an understory typical of this common Eastern Georgian Bay community, dominated by Canadian Mayflower (Maianthemum canadense), Wild Sarsaparilla (Aralia nudicaulis), and Low Bush Blueberry (Vaccinium angusitfolium) and both treed and bare Rock Barrens (Figure 1). Environmental Impact Study 5

6 2 Study Approach 2.1 Collection and Review of Background Information Existing information pertaining to the natural heritage features of the property and the surrounding lands was obtained from the Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources (MNR), and the Natural Heritage Information Centre (NHIC 2007). Additionally, policies of Georgian Bay Township and the District Municipality of Muskoka were considered where relevant to the property. Digital Ontario Base Maps (OBM - scale 1:10,000), and colour aerial photographs were reviewed using ArcMap GIS software. Other sources of information were consulted as necessary (e.g., environmental reports and reference guides for this area), these included; Ecological Survey of the Eastern Georgian Bay Coast (Jalava et al. 2005). A review of existing information (e.g., natural heritage mapping, known flora and fauna, existing site reports, and various remotely sensed images) associated with this area provided an understanding through expert interpretation of the values including, but not limited to, Significant Habitats of Threatened and Endangered Species (SHTES), that may be found on the property. The review and preliminary habitat mapping allowed for identification and confirmation of values efficiently during site visits. A review of the Natural Heritage Information Centre (NHIC 2007) database indicated that the following species area known to the greater general area; eastern massasauga (Sistrurus catenatus catenatus) threatened, eastern foxsnake (Elaphe glodi) threatened, eastern hog-nosed snake (Heterodon platyrhinos) threatened, spotted turtle (Clemmys guttata) endangered, Blanding s turtle (Emydoidea blandingii) threatened, stinkpot (Sternotherus odoratus) threatened, and five-lined skink (Eumeces fasciatus) - special concern Environmental Impact Study 6

7 all considered Species at Risk by both the Province of Ontario and government of Canada are known to the area. The potential habitat for Atlantic Coastal Plains plant species exist primarily within the shoreline habitat along parts of the west and north side of the subject property. 2.2 Natural History of Target Species at Risk Eastern Massasauga Description and Natural History: The eastern massasauga is the only venomous snake species in Ontario. The word massasauga is the Chippewa word for great river-mouth, describing the places these snakes are often found. The massasauga is a thick-bodied snake, tapering towards the tail to produce a well developed rattle in adults. The colour of the massasauga ranges from grey to dark brown, with a row of darker saddle-shaped blotches down the spine, accompanied by several rows of smaller alternating spots on either side. The massasauga has pits between each nostril and eye, capable of detecting thermal radiation. This enables them to detect warmblooded prey, and hunt at night. The eyes of this group are also unique from the circular pupils of non-venomous species, as the pupil is a vertical slit similar to a cat. Adult snakes generally range between 50 and 70 cm in length. A solitary and passive creature, the massasauga prefers to remain camouflaged and motionless. When threatened, they may defend themselves by biting (generally after a warning rattle), and may or may not inject venom, though they tend not to attack by choice. As an ambush predator, the rattlesnake s strategy is to wait and strike, though their striking distance is limited to about one-third to one-half their body length. The massasauga s diet consists largely of small mammals, but may include small birds as well. Mating occurs from mid-july to late-august. Females store the sperm over-winter and thus reproduce every other year, usually starting at the age of five. Habitat: Though they may occupy an extremely diverse range of habitats, massasaugas require protection from predators and natural elements, access to sunlight and warmth, as Environmental Impact Study 7

8 well as sufficient quantities of moisture. In the Georgian Bay area, perched table-rocks in rock-outcrops provide shelter and sunlight to gravid females, tall grasses, forested areas near clearings, wetlands are also suitable habitats for males and non-gravid females. The massasauga shows fidelity to hibernation sites by returning to the same hibernacula each year. The hibernaculum offers protection from the cold and allows respiration and metabolism to slow until warmer temperatures arrive. The massasauga s seasonal migration away from the hibernaculum can range, but is usually close to 1 km. Similarly, females also show fidelity to gestation sites. These areas are crucial to the development of embryos in gravid female snakes that need to provide warm and relatively constant temperatures. This generally involves a perched rock with vegetative covering on several sides. Gestation sites may be shared by several females and are usually found within 500m from the female s hibernation site, and the destruction of a single gestation site can have impacts on the reproductive success of an entire population. Distribution: Locally, the massasauga inhabits areas along the eastern shores and islands of Georgian Bay and inland about 35 km. The Georgian Bay regional population is one of the largest across its range. Threats: Habitat destruction and fragmentation, motor vehicles, and human persecution, are the largest causes of anthropogenic mortality in massasauga populations. Status: The massasauga is designated threatened by both the Committee on the Status of Endangered Wildlife in Canada (COSEWIC) and the Province of Ontario Eastern Hog-nosed Snake Description and Natural History: The eastern hog-nosed snake is a thick-bodied, medium-sized snake approximately cm in length. The characteristically upturned snout and flat head distinguish the eastern hog-nosed from other snake species. Though extremely variant, the body pattern of this species can be a solid colour (such as grey, brown, or black), or a series of dark Environmental Impact Study 8

9 blotches over a lighter background colour. When threatened, the hog-nosed snake will rear back and flatten its neck out, open its mouth, hiss, play dead, or use any combination of these harmless tactics to ward off predators. During active season, the hog-nosed snake will travel large distances (up to 6 km) to forage and locate mates. The hog-nosed snake hibernates from October to April in mammal or self-constructed burrows, generally along forested slopes. Mating occurs in late summer (August to September). Nesting sites are chosen by females in early July, with preference to loose substrate, such as moist soil or open sandy areas, they are also known to lay under table-rocks. A female will lay eggs in a nest, and young hatch in late August to September. The hog-nosed snake has a very specialized diet, consisting almost entirely of toads, but can include certain species of frog. Habitat: In the Georgian Bay area, populations of hog-nosed snake occur along the coast and inland over to Huntsville and into the Bancroft region. The preferred habitat of the hognosed snake is dry upland areas including sandy soil, mixed forest, long grasses, and rock outcrops, though they are also found in moist forests, and on occasion in wetlands. Threats: Habitat destruction and fragmentation, road mortality, and human persecution, are the leading threats for this species. However, natural predators and collection for the pet industry also impact the viability of the hog-nosed snake. The large distances and relatively slow speeds of movement when crossing roads make the hog-nosed snake particularly vulnerable to road traffic. Unfortunately widespread myths and misconceptions about the hog-nosed snake make it despised. As a completely harmless snake, there is no reason for the persecution. Status: The hog-nosed snake is designated threatened by both COSEWIC and the Province of Ontario Eastern Foxsnake Description and Natural History: Environmental Impact Study 9

10 The eastern foxsnake is Ontario s second largest snake with lengths that reach 91 to 179 cm. Adult foxsnakes are identified by their yellow or brown coloured body with large brown or black blotched on the dorsal side of the body that alternate with smaller blotches along the sides of the body, and weakly keeled scales. The ventral side of this species is yellow with a black checkerboard pattern. A solid orange or brown coloured head may also be present. This species hibernates communally from late September to late April. Mating occurs from mid-may to mid-june; males will travel great distances and actively seek out females. Females deposit between 7 and 20 eggs in rotting word or debris in July. Foxsnakes primarily eat rodents (e.g., voles and mice) and birds. Habitat: The Georgian Bay populations of eastern foxsnakes do not stray far from the open water of the bay. They readily swim in open water from land mass to land mass (islands or main land), traveling large distances over an active season. Foxsnakes are frequently found along the shoreline in rocky areas, marshes, and vegetation. Threats: Eastern foxsnakes main threats are loss of habitat, and fragmentation. Foxsnakes are also commonly mistaken for rattlesnakes and this mistake sometimes results in the unnecessary killing of this harmless snake. Status: The foxsnake is designated threatened by both COSEWIC and the Province of Ontario Spotted Turtle Description and Natural History: The spotted turtle is a relatively small, semi-aquatic turtle, easily recognized by a black carapace with yellow spots. Spotting is also present on the black skin of the face, neck, and limbs. Adults typically measure between 9 and 13 cm. The plastron is yellow to orange in colouration with large black markings. Adult spotted turtles emerge from hibernation sites in mid-april, and congregate in aquatic habitats in May during the mating season. Females nest in mid to late June, and lay 3 to 7 eggs; most females do not Environmental Impact Study 10

11 produce eggs every year. Nesting habitat suitable for the spotted turtle in the Georgian Bay area can be found under lichens and leaf litter on rock outcrops. Adults in more terrestrial habitats may undergo a summer dormancy (i.e., inactive) period that takes place from July until September. The spotted turtle is an omnivorous species, the diet of which includes: vegetation such as grasses, algae, and cranberries, earthworms, insect larvae, snails, small crustaceans, tadpoles, salamanders, and fish. Habitat: The populations of spotted turtles are found both inland and in shoreline regions of Georgian Bay. In shoreline regions, spotted turtles can be found in inlets and shallow weedy bays. They can also be found in the slow-moving shallow waters of ponds, bogs, fens, marshes, vernal pools, and sedge meadows, both at the water s edge and further inland. Inland populations spend their lives in marshy waters, swamps, bogs, or other small bodies of still water. Aquatic vegetation such as moss, sedge tussocks, cattails, water lilies, and hydrophilic shrubs are important components of spotted turtle habitat. A soft mucky bottom that is suitable to bury in is also a preference of these turtles. Threats: Loss of habitat is the major factor in the decline of spotted turtles in the Georgian Bay area. The construction of new roads, fragmentation of wetlands, development on lands and shorelines, drainage of wetlands, and the disturbance of sensitive areas are all factors that attribute to habitat loss and the decline of this species. Loss of turtles to road mortalities is also an increasing problem. People are sometimes attracted to spotted turtles as pets and animals are moved from the wild population to a captive environment. Status: The spotted turtle is designated Endangered by both COSEWIC and the Province of Ontario Blanding s Turtle Description and Natural History: The Blanding s turtle is a medium sized freshwater turtle, with an adult length of 12.5 to 27.4 cm. This species is easily recognizable by its large and domed greyish-brown Environmental Impact Study 11

12 to black carapace that is decorated with numerous yellowish spots or streaks. These spots or streaks generally fade as the turtle ages. The plastron is yellow in colour with black blotches or markings on the outer posterior margins. The plastron of this species is hinged allowing the plastron to close upwards protecting the body and head from predators. The most distinguishing characteristic of the Blanding s turtle is the bright yellow lower jaw and throat that adults from both sexes possess. Although both juveniles and adults hibernate in permanent pools, juveniles have been known to hibernate in brush piles on dry land as well. Mating for this species takes place in early spring once the adults emerge from hibernation. Female turtles will lay 3 to 19 eggs in late May to late June. Females may travel multiple kilometers to find a suitable nesting site (sandy area) and frequently cross roads to find a preferred nest site. Blanding s turtles reach sexual maturity around 14 years of age. They are omnivorous and have a diet that consists of crustaceans and other invertebrates, fish, aquatic vegetation, carrion, and vegetable debris. Habitat: The Georgian Bay population of Blanding s turtles is found both inland and along the coast. Turtles found around the shorelines of Georgian Bay prefer a habitat of shallow weedy water but can also be found swimming in shallow sandy or mucky bays. Turtles found both inland and on the islands of Georgian Bay prefer marshes, bogs, ponds, and streams. Juvenile Blanding s turtles prefer a habitat with plenty of over grown vegetation to seek cover in. Threats: The largest threat faced by Blanding s turtles and most other turtles is the destruction of habitat. This includes the drainage of wetlands, building of roads, fragmentation of wetlands, and the development in significant habitat. Blanding s turtles are often and increasingly killed on roads. Typically females searching for a nesting sites will attempt to cross roadways, few make it across. Increasing numbers of predators is also a great threat to nest sites of the Blanding s turtle. Status: Environmental Impact Study 12

13 The Blanding s turtle is designated threatened by both COSEWIC and the Province of Ontario Stinkpot Description and Natural History: The stinkpot is a smaller turtle, measuring 5 to 13 cm in length at maturity. The shell is smooth, highly domed, and light olive to black in colouration. Its head is dark in colouration and has two light stripes on either side; fleshy projections are also present on the chin and throat. This species is highly aquatic and timid, and hibernates communally when water temperatures drop below 10ºC. Peak mating season occurs in early spring when the turtles emerge from hibernacula. Females return to the general area to nest year after year, and lay between 2 and 7 white hard shelled oval eggs in late June to early July. Nest sites must be close to the water and must have a lot of exposure to sunlight. This species is omnivorous but feeds mainly on aquatic insects, carrion, crustaceans, and molluscs. Habitat: Being highly aquatic, stinkpots are rarely observed on land and prefer to live in shallow water. The Georgian Bay population can be found in marshes, as well as along the shoreline, in shallow vegetated back bays, and vegetated streams that feed into the Georgian Bay. Aquatic vegetation such as reeds and lily pads, and a mucky bottom to burrow in are important components in the stinkpot habitat. These turtles are known to walk along the bottom of aquatic habitats rather than swimming. Generally only the domed carapace of the stinkpot is visible buried in the mucky bottom giving the appearance of a rock on the bottom. Threats: Stinkpots are at risk because of destruction to critical habitat, including: drainage of wetlands, fragmentation of wetlands, development, and intensified fishing. Status: The stinkpot is designated threatened by both COSEWIC and the Province of Ontario. Environmental Impact Study 13

14 2.2.7 Five-lined Skink Description and Natural History: The five-lined skink is Ontario s only species of lizard. Skinks can be identified by having five yellowish or cream coloured stripes running longitudinally down the body from the nose to the tail; juveniles can be distinguished from adults by the presence of a bright blue tail. Five-lined skinks hibernate in small groups from early October to mid- May. Suitable hibernation sites include old burrows, rotting stumps, wetland edges, and rock crevices. The breeding season occurs from May to mid-june. During this time male five-line skinks become extremely territorial and aggressively defend a territory. Female skinks make a nesting chamber in rotting logs or may use an area under a large rock. Clutch size ranges between 6 to 12 eggs, and are guarded by the females until the eggs hatch in days. Newly hatched juvenile skinks are 4 to 6 cm long and mature in their second year. In a unique defensive behaviour skinks are able to drop their tails to escape predators. The five-lined skink is a carnivore that spends its days foraging for insects in grass along edges of rock outcrops, or sandy areas. Habitat: In the Georgian Bay area, populations of five-lined skinks can be located inland, along shorelines, and on islands. They require sandy areas (e.g., beaches), or rock barren habitats, and are usually close to wetlands or water. Threats: The most prominent threats to the five-lined skink populations are habitat destruction and fragmentation and collection for the pet trade or personal use. Status: The five-lined skink is designated Special Concern by both COSEWIC and the Province of Ontario. Environmental Impact Study 14

15 2.3 Arial Photograph Interpretation Aerial photographic interpretation of the subject property's biophysical features was undertaken prior to visiting the site to carry out inspections and inventories. A colour aerial photograph (scale 1:30,000) provided the basis for mapping the general ecological features of the property, including vegetation communities, and potential habitats of Species at Risk, and significant wildlife habitats. Preliminary mapping was ground-truthed and boundaries revised as required during site visits. 2.4 Wildlife Habitats The Guidelines for Identifying Significant Habitat, and Significant Wildlife Habitat, for the Massasauga in Eastern Georgian Bay and Bruce Peninsula Populations, Ontario were used to identify habitats of the massasauga (Massasauga Recovery Team 2006). Descriptions of significant habitat for the hog-nosed snake, Blanding s turtle, eastern foxsnake, spotted turtle, stinkpot, and five-lined skink were obtained from the Ministry of Natural Resources general description of the biology and habitat requirements in the Parry Sound District and/or from status reports prepared for the individual species by COSEWIC. Habitats for these species were initially assessed using existing aerial photos and resource data, and confirmed with site visits. Fish habitat was assessed and mapping refined as either Type 1 or Type 2 according to the MNR fish habitat definitions as follows; Type 1 - Significant areas of emergent and/or submergent aquatic vegetation, Type 2 - Highly variable; ranging from detritus substrate to small aquatic vegetation beds to rocky bedrock substrate. Generally abundant non-specific habitat utilized by a wide variety of inhabiting fish species at various life stages (OMNR 1994). 2.5 Land Classification To address the all the natural heritage concerns the subject property was mapped using an ecological classification system developed specifically for the Eastern shore of Georgian Bay (Jalava et al. 2005). This was completed to provide a general inventory of the lands and determine if any significant communities were present that required additional consideration. The fieldwork occurred on 14 October Environmental Impact Study 15

16

17 3 Biophysical Features 3.1 Land Classification T96, White Pine - Red Oak - Bracken Fern Wintergreen A large portion of the subject property consists of this common forest community. The forest is a mix of White Pine and Red Oak, with some White Oak (Quercus alba). The common shrubs were Common Juniper (Juniper communis) and Low-bush Blueberry. The herb layer was comprised of Wild Sarsaparilla, Canada Mayflower, and Bracken Fern (Pteridium aquilinum), with occasional areas of Wood Ferns (Dryopteris sp.). Figure 2. Photo illustrating the Common Juniper Acidic Shrub Rock Barren community P64, Common Juniper Acidic Shrub Rock Barren Type This type of habitat was found in the central area of the subject property (Figure 1) stretching to the south end. This community is relatively open and dominated by Common Juniper, with White Pine and Red Oak, along with Crinkled Hairgrass (Deschampsia flexuosa), and Poverty Oatgrass (Danthonia spicata) (Figure 2). Three Environmental Impact Study 17

18 potential massasauga gestation sites were found within this type of community; furthermore this community provides habitat for five-lined skinks P68B, White Pine - Oak Treed Acidic Rock Barren White Pine, and to a lesser extent Red Oak dominant the rock barrens when trees are present. The low shrub layer is dominated by Common Juniper and Low-bush Blueberry. The most common herbaceous plants of the rock barrens on the subject property are Crinkled Hair Grass and Poverty Oat Grass. Lichen and mosses, are also common on these rock barrens P1, Acidic Open Bedrock Shore Type Open bedrock shoreline communities occur along the shores of the subject property. These communities are sparsely vegetated areas comprised of lichen and moss species, and the occasional shrub (e.g., Common Juniper (Juniper communis)), herb, or stunted pine (Figure 1). Figure 3. Photo illustrating a P1, Acidic Open Bedrock Shore community. Environmental Impact Study 18

19 3.1.5 T119C, Sugar Maple - Red Oak Basswood Red Maple This forest community was a mix of Sugar Maple, and Red Oak, with some Basswood (Tilia americana). The sampling layer consists of Sugar Maple and Red Maple (Acer rubrum). Striped Maple (Acer pensylvanicum) occurs as a tall shrub along with other deciduous tree seedlings. The herb layer was comprised of Wild Sarsaparilla, Canada Mayflower, Bracken Fern, and Wood Fern. Figure 4. Photo illustrating T119C Sugar Maple - Red Oak Basswood Red Maple community. Environmental Impact Study 19

20 Figure 5. Photo illustrating a W188, White Pine Mineral Coniferous Swamp W188, White Pine Mineral Coniferous Swamp White Pine is the dominant tree species, the shrub layers are comprised of Mountain Holly (Nemopanthus mucronatus), Speckled Alder (Alnus incana), and Sheep Laurel (Kalmia angustifolia). The few herbs present usually consist of Wood Ferns, and Threeleaved Solomon s-seal (Maianthemum trifolium). Massasauga hibernation habitat was found in this community type (see Species at Risk Habitat section below). Environmental Impact Study 20

21 Figure 6. Photo illustrating a W275, Narrow-leaved Sedge Mineral Meadow Marsh community W275, Narrow-leaved Sedge Mineral Meadow Marsh A meadow marsh with mineral substrate occurs along and adjacent to the eastern boundary of the subject property (Figure 1). The area was quite dry due to the low Georgian Bay water levels; consequently a well developed shrub layer of Sweet Gale (Myrica gale) and Speckled Alder occurs at the upland-wetland ecotone. The dominant plants in this community include, Tussock Sedge (Carex stricta), and Woolgrass (Scirpus cyperinus). Other graminoids, included Beaked Sedge (Carex utriculata), Canada Bluejoint (Calamagrostis canadensis), and Lake-bank Sedge (Carex lacustris). This area would be used by massasaugas, foxsnakes, and Blanding s turtles thus the area should be protected from development. Environmental Impact Study 21

22 Figure 7. Photo illustrating W330A, Water-shield Water-lily Floating-leaved Shallow Aquatic with a small fringe of Coastal Meadow Marsh W330A, Water-shield Water-lily Floating-leaved Shallow Aquatic with a small fringe of Coastal Meadow Marsh Water-shield is dominant with White Water-lily (Nymphaea odorata) in a small community on the north side of the subject property. Co-dominants and secondary species include Canada Blue-joint, Three-way Sedge (Dulichium arundinaceum), Lakebank Sedge, Beaked Sedge, Creeping Spike-rush (Eleocharis smallii), Sweet Gale, Pickerel Weed (Pontederia cordata), Floating-leaved Burreed (Sparganium fluctuans), and Cardinal Flower (Lobelia cardinalis)(figure 7). This area could be used by Blanding s turtles, stinkpots, massasauga, foxsnakes, and spotted turtles thus the area should be protected from development. Environmental Impact Study 22

23 Figure 8. Photo illustrating the narrow strip of Georgian Bay Coastal Acidic Mineral Meadow Marsh community W271B, Georgian Bay Coastal Acidic Mineral Meadow Marsh A meadow marsh with mineral substrate occurs in a couple areas along the north shores of the subject property and a narrow strip occurs along the west shore (Figure 1). The area was quite dry due to the low Georgian Bay water levels; consequently a shrub fringe of Sweet Gale occurs at the upland-wetland ecotone. The dominant plants in this community are Canada Blue-joint and Soft Rush (Juncus effuses). Co-dominants and secondary species include, Tussock Sedge, Blueflag (Iris versicolor), Three-way Sedge, Lake-bank Sedge, Spoon-leaved Sundew (Drosera intermedia). Within this community are habitats where Atlantic Coastal Plaines Flora can be found, these areas are identified in Figure 9. Environmental Impact Study 23

24

25 3.2 Species at Risk Habitat Eastern Massasauga Massasaugas in the Georgian Bay region can be found hibernating in the following types of habitats, conifer, mixed, or shrub swamps and swales, poor fens, or depressions in bedrock terrain where water saturated soils have supported the development of vegetation communities characterized by sparse trees or shrubs with sphagnum moss or sedge hummock ground cover (Massasauga Recovery Team 2006). The property was assessed for these types of habitats. One of these habitat types was identified during fall fieldwork. The potential massasauga hibernation habitat was assessed as a medium quality perched bog massasauga hibernation site (Figure 5, Figure 9). Species at Risk Consulting and Ecological Services recommends that High and Medium quality habitats be considered Significant Habitat of Threatened and Endangered species (SHTES), and Low quality habitats be considered Significant Wildlife Habitat (SWH). This area has been classed as medium quality and thus should be protected from development and be zoned Environmental Protection (Table 1). Massasaugas also require gestations sites to successfully reproduce. Gestation sites are often found in Rock Barren habitats in the Georgian Bay region (Massasauga Recovery Team 2006). The preliminary assessment of the subject property identified a number of Rock Barren habitats, field visits in the fall confirmed the existence of potential gestation sites (Table 1, Figure 10), however a large portion of the Rock Barren habitat do not contain the necessary micro habitats to be considered Significant Habitat of the massasauga. The potential gestation sites are identified in Figure 9 along with a 10m non development buffer around them, it is recommended that these buffered areas be protected from devolvement and be zoned Environmental Protection. Wetlands on or adjacent to the property, large enough to be considered as mating habitat (Significant Wildlife Habitat) for massasaugas using the habitat guidelines, do occur (Table 1, Figure 9), these habitats also represent Significant Habitat for other Species at Risk found in the area (see below). Environmental Impact Study 25

26 Figure 10. Photo illustrating a medium quality massasauga gestation site on the subject property Eastern Hog-nosed Snake No known hibernation sites for hog-nosed snakes occur on this property. There are no natural open dry sandy areas for nesting opportunities for the hog-nosed snake on the subject property (Table 1). Furthermore, there are no coniferous covered slopes large enough to potentially be hibernation sites for hog-nosed snakes. Therefore, no significant habitat as it relates to the eastern hog-nosed snake exists on this property Eastern Foxsnake There are no known hibernation sites for foxsnakes on this property. The property was thoroughly searched for potential habitat characteristics of foxsnake hibernation sites (e.g., deep cracks in rocks, rocky ledges, etc.). One area was located along the southern edge of the subject property (Figure 9, Figure 11) this area also contains habitats that could function as a shedding site or basking site. Because of the difficulty in building in these types of areas, these steep sloped areas are often removed from development by local by-laws, this type of habitat is rarely impacted. However, this habitat should receive Environmental Impact Study 26

27 additional protection and be protected from incompatible development. The area that should be considered SHTES and protected is identified in Figure 9. The wetlands adjacent to the property at the north end (Figure 6, Figure 7) of the property represents foraging habitat of the foxsnake and should be protected from incompatible development as well (Table 1, Figure 9). Figure 11. Potential eastern foxsnake hibernation and or basking/shedding site Blanding s Turtle No Blanding s turtles were found during site inspections. There are no natural open dry sandy areas for nesting opportunities for Blanding s turtles on the subject property (Table 1). The wetlands habitat in the northeast section of the subject property (Figure 6, Figure 7) identified in Figure 9 should be considered foraging, basking, and mating habitat of the Blanding s turtle and should be considered Significant Habitat of Threatened and Endangered Species (SHTES), and should be protected from incompatible developments. Environmental Impact Study 27

28 3.2.5 Spotted Turtle The type of wetlands that occur on and around the subject property are not indicative of the spotted turtle s preferred habitat (Table 1). However, the habitat areas that may occasionally be used by spotted turtles are proposed for protection due to the presence of a number of other species at risk that are known to utilize the available types of wetland habitat extensively Stinkpot No stinkpots were recorded along the shorelines of the subject property during the fieldwork; however the adjacent wetlands along the northeast section (Figure 6, Figure 7) of the subject property identified in Figure 9 may provide stinkpots with foraging and hibernation habitat and should be considered SHTES (Table 1). The presence of stinkpot habitat is another factor in determining that the wetland habitats occurring along the north side of property require protection from incompatible development Five-lined Skink No skinks were documented on this property during the fieldwork component. However, skink habitat exists in association with Massasauga habitat and will consequently receive habitat protection (Table 1). 3.3 Fish Habitat The Township of Georgian Bay had identified a large section of Type 1 Fish Habitat along the northern shoreline (Figure 9), this work has confirmed that area and included some additional areas that should be mapped as Type 1, the rest of the shoreline of the subject property should be considered Type 2; in order not to complicate the map of significant habitats, Type 2 Fish Habitat was not included. Currently a portion of the Type 1 Fish Habitat is at or above the present water level, but if or when the water levels increase this exposed area has a lot of potential to be fish habitat, currently the exposed area is a mineral coastal meadow marsh. 3.4 Atlantic Coastal Plains Flora Areas The areas identified as potential habitats for these rare plants should be protected from incompatible developments (i.e., dredging, infilling, beach creation, unwarranted Environmental Impact Study 28

29 shoreline stabilization, docks, removable of vegetation, etc.), and should be considered Significant Wildlife Habitat (Figure 9) Prairie Warbler The property has a limited amount of Prairie Warbler habitat; with most of the habitat found on the south-eastern half. Because Prairie Warblers prefer White Pine Red Oak Rock Barren habitat, the bird is relatively common in Southern Georgian Bay. The habitat on this property is away from potential development areas and corresponds well with the proposed habitat protection for the massasauga (Figure 9). Thus this rare species of bird will receive habitat protection through indirect means on this subject property. Table 1. Assessment of wildlife habitat on the property. Status Hibernating massasauga Thr Potential habitat identified and protected from development Nesting/ Gestation Potential habitat identified and protected from development hog-nosed snake Thr No habitat present No habitat present Thr Potential habitat identified and protected from development Species eastern foxsnake Mating Foraging Movement Corridor Potential habitat identified and protected from development No habitat present Potential habitat identified and protected from development No habitat identified NA NA No habitat Present NA Potential habitat identified and protected from development Potential habitat identified and protected from development No habitat present Blanding s turtle Thr No habitat present No habitat present Potential habitat identified and protected from development spotted turtle End No habitat present No habitat present No habitat present stinkpot Thr Potential habitat identified and protected from development No habitat present No habitat identified five-lined Skink SC NA Potential habitat identified and protected from development Potential habitat identified and protected from development Environmental Impact Study 29 Potential habitat identified and protected from development Potential habitat identified and protected from development No Habitat Present No habitat identified No habitat identified No habitat identified NA

30 4 Environmental Impact Statement 4.1 Species at Risk The areas identified as Significant Habitat of Threatened and Endangered Species (SHTES) should be protected from all development and habitat alteration (e.g., filling any of the identified areas, dredging in any of the identified areas, removing of vegetation from the shoreline/wetland edge, trails of any kind within this habitat, buildings, structures (i.e., docks), and facilities). If the areas identified as potential Species at Risk habitats and associated buffers are protected from incompatible developments (Figure 9), then the proposed application including the severing of the existing lot, and the building of residences and associated facilities (e.g., septic system, docks, etc.), will result in no significant habitat or populations of the identified threatened and endangered species being impacted, nor will any significant negative effects occur on the identified Significant Wildlife Habitat or species identified as potentially occurring on the subject property. 5 Summary and Conclusions In conclusion, Species at Risk Consulting and Ecological Services has identified a number of habitats and natural features worthy of protection on the subject property and has made recommendations that if agree to and the appropriate planning action taken will ensure the long-term protection of the Significant Habitats of the identified Threatened and Endangered Species, and the Significant Wildlife Habitat. Environmental Impact Study 30

31 6 References Jalava, J.V., W.L. Cooper, and J.L. Riley Ecological Survey of the Eastern Georgian Bay Coast. Nature Conservancy of Canada, Toronto, and Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources, Peterborough, Ontario. 180pp. Massasauga Recovery Team Guidelines for Identifying Significant Habitat, and Significant Wildlife Habitat, for the Massasauga in Eastern Georgian Bay and Bruce Peninsula Populations, Ontario.Version 1.1, p. 34. Natural Heritage Information Centre Natural Heritage Information Centre element occurrence and natural areas databases. Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources, Peterborough. Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources Fish Habitat Protection Guidelines for Developing Areas. Environmental Impact Study 31