Consent Application: (David Henderson) Environmental ......Species at Risk Consulting and Ecological...

Consent Application:

(David Henderson)

Environmental Impact Study

Species at Risk Consulting and Ecological Services

January 2008

Environmental Impact Study 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.


Table of Contents

1 INTRODUCTION................................................................................................................ 5

1.1 BACKGROUND .................................................................................................................... 5

1.2 PURPOSE AND SCOPE OF STUDY .......................................................................................... 5

1.3 LOCATION AND DESCRIPTION OF PROPERTY ........................................................................ 5

2 STUDY APPROACH........................................................................................................... 6

2.1 COLLECTION AND REVIEW OF BACKGROUND INFORMATION ................................................ 6

2.2 NATURAL HISTORY OF TARGET SPECIES AT RISK................................................................. 7

2.3 ARIAL PHOTOGRAPH INTERPRETATION.............................................................................. 15

2.4 WILDLIFE HABITATS ........................................................................................................ 15

2.5 LAND CLASSIFICATION ..................................................................................................... 15

3 BIOPHYSICAL FEATURES............................................................................................. 17

3.1 LAND CLASSIFICATION ..................................................................................................... 17

3.2 SPECIES AT RISK HABITAT ................................................................................................ 25

3.3 FISH HABITAT .................................................................................................................. 28

3.4 ATLANTIC COASTAL PLAINS FLORA AREAS....................................................................... 28

4 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT................................................................. 30

4.1 SPECIES AT RISK............................................................................................................... 30

5 SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS .................................................................................. 30

6 REFERENCES................................................................................................................... 31


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. .............18

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. .........20

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. ................................24

Figure 10. Photo illustrating a medium quality massasauga gestation site on the

subject property. .....................................................................................................26

Figure 11. Potential eastern foxsnake hibernation and or basking/shedding site. ......27


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).


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


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

2.2.1 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 warm-

blooded 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


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.

2.2.2 Eastern Hog-nosed Snake


The eastern hog-nosed snake is a thick-bodied, medium-sized snake approximately

51-115 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


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 10-30

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 hog-

nosed 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.

2.2.3 Eastern Foxsnake



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.

2.2.4 Spotted Turtle


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


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.

2.2.5 Blanding’s Turtle


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


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:


The Blanding’s turtle is designated “threatened” by both COSEWIC and the Province of

Ontario.

2.2.6 Stinkpot


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.


2.2.7 Five-lined Skink


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 24-55 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.


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 2007.


3 Biophysical Features

3.1 Land Classification

3.1.1 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.

3.1.2 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


potential massasauga gestation sites were found within this type of community;

furthermore this community provides habitat for five-lined skinks.

3.1.3 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.

3.1.4 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.


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.


Figure 5. Photo illustrating a W188, White Pine Mineral Coniferous Swamp.

3.1.6 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 Three-

leaved Solomon’s-seal (Maianthemum trifolium). Massasauga hibernation habitat was

found in this community type (see Species at Risk Habitat section below).


Figure 6. Photo illustrating a W275, Narrow-leaved Sedge Mineral Meadow Marsh community.

3.1.7 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 Blue-

joint (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.


Figure 7. Photo illustrating W330A, Water-shield – Water-lily Floating-leaved Shallow Aquatic

with a small fringe of Coastal Meadow Marsh.

3.1.8 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), Lake-

bank 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.


Figure 8. Photo illustrating the narrow strip of Georgian Bay Coastal Acidic Mineral Meadow

Marsh community.

3.1.9 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.


3.2 Species at Risk Habitat

3.2.1 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).


Figure 10. Photo illustrating a medium quality massasauga gestation site on the subject

property.

3.2.2 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.

3.2.3 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


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.

3.2.4 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.


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.

3.2.6 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.

3.2.7 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


shoreline stabilization, docks, removable of vegetation, etc.), and should be considered

Significant Wildlife Habitat (Figure 9).

3.4.1 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.

Species Status HibernatingNesting/Gestation

Mating ForagingMovementCorridor

massasauga Thr

Potential habitatidentified andprotected fromdevelopment




No habitatidentified

hog-nosed snake Thr No habitat present No habitat presentNo habitat

presentNA NA

eastern foxsnake Thr


No habitat Present NA


No HabitatPresent

Blanding’sturtle

Thr No habitat present No habitat present




spotted turtle End No habitat present No habitat presentNo habitat

presentNo habitat

presentNo habitatidentified

stinkpot Thr


No habitat presentNo habitatidentified



five-lined Skink SC NA




NA


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.


6 References

Jalava, J.V., W.L. Cooper, and J.L. Riley. 2005. 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. 2006. 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. 2007. Natural Heritage Information Centre

element occurrence and natural areas databases. Ontario Ministry of Natural

Resources, Peterborough.

Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources. 1994. Fish Habitat Protection Guidelines for

Developing Areas.

Date post:	30-Sep-2020
Category:	Documents
Upload:	others
View:	0 times
Download:	0 times

Consent Application: (David Henderson) Environmental ......Species at Risk Consulting and Ecological...

Documents