draft natural heritage report - whitchurch …€¦ · aft natural heritage report st. ... in order...

DDRRAAFFTT NNAATTUURRAALL HHEERRIITTAAGGEE

RREEPPOORRTT SSTTOOUUFFFFVVIILLLLEE SSUUBB--TTRRUUNNKK ##11 SSAANNIITTAARRYY

SSEEWWEERR CCLLAASSSS EENNVVIIRROONNMMEENNTTAALL AASSSSEESSSSMMEENNTT SSCCHHEEDDUULLEE BB

prepared for

CHISHOLM, FLEMING AND ASSOCIATES

on behalf of

THE TOWN OF WHITCHURCH-STOUFFVILLE

by

AUGUST 2013 LGL PROJECT TA8256

DDRRAAFFTT NNAATTUURRAALL HHEERRIITTAAGGEE RREEPPOORRTT

SSTTOOUUFFFFVVIILLLLEE SSUUBB--TTRRUUNNKK ##11 SSAANNIITTAARRYY SSEEWWEERR

CCLLAASSSS EENNVVIIRROONNMMEENNTTAALL AASSSSEESSSSMMEENNTT SSCCHHEEDDUULLEE BB

PREPARED BY:

Digital signature Digital signature

Erin Blenkhorn, Hons. B.Sc. AQUATIC BIOLOGIST

Allison Featherstone, Hons. B.Sc. SENIOR PLANNING ECOLOGIST,

ASSISTANT MANAGER

LGL Limited environmental research associates

445 Thompson Drive, Unit 2 Cambridge, Ontario N1T 2K7

Tel: 519- 622-3300 Fax: 519-622-3310 email: [email protected]

URL: www.lgl.com

AUGUST 2013 LGL PROJECT TA8256

TABLE OF CONTENTS 1.0 INTRODUCTION ......................................................................................................................................... 1

1.1 EXISTING POLICY FRAMEWORK .................................................................................................................................... 3 1.1.1 Town of Whitchurch Stouffville Official Plan ................................................................................................ 3 1.1.2 Greenbelt Plan ............................................................................................................................................. 3 1.1.3 Oak Ridges Moraine .................................................................................................................................... 3

2.0 EXISTING CONDITIONS .............................................................................................................................. 4

2.1 PHYSIOGRAPHY AND SOILS .................................................................................................................................. 4 2.2 AQUATIC HABITAT AND COMMUNITIES ................................................................................................................. 7

2.2.1 Aquatic Species at Risk ........................................................................................................................... 11 2.2.2 Watercourse Crossings .......................................................................................................................... 11

2.3 DESIGNATED NATURAL AREAS ........................................................................................................................... 15 2.4 VEGETATION AND VEGETATION COMMUNITIES ..................................................................................................... 15

2.4.1 Species At Risk- Vegetation .................................................................................................................... 24 2.5 WILDLIFE HABITAT AND COMMUNITIES ............................................................................................................... 25

2.5.1 Wildlife Species of Conservation Concern .............................................................................................. 26 2.5.1.1 Species at Risk ............................................................................................................................................... 26 2.5.1.2 SAR Habitat Screening ................................................................................................................................... 27 2.5.1.3 Regionally Rare Species................................................................................................................................. 28

3.0 PROJECT DESCRIPTION ............................................................................................................................ 28

3.1 PRELIMINARY IMPACT ASSESSMENT AND CONSTRAINT ANALYSIS .............................................................................. 29

4.0 SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS ............................................................................................................... 31

5.0 REFERENCES ............................................................................................................................................ 32

LIST OF APPENDICES APPENDIX A Working Wildlife Checklist APPENDIX B Representative Photographs APPENDIX C ESG Vegetation Community Mapping APPENDIX D MNR Correspondence

Draft Stouffville Sub-Trunk #1 Sewer Project August 2013 Schedule B Class Environmental Assessment Project No. TA8256

LGL Limited environmental research associates Page 1

1.0 INTRODUCTION

The Town of Whitchurch-Stouffville has initiated a Class Environmental Assessment study for the extension of a sanitary sewer Sub-Trunk #1 from approximately 110m north of Hoover Park Drive on Regional Road #30 to service development lands north of Main Street and east of Tenth Line. Watermain system extensions are also being considered, to extend and improve circulation of the distribution system. As part of the need to identify problems and opportunities with the extension of the Sub-trunk Sanitary Sewer in this area, as it relates to infrastructure needs, future capacity among other Municipal and Regional Strategies and Programs, the Town of Whitchurch-Stouffville retained the consulting team of Chisholm, Fleming and Associates (Chisholm Fleming) to undertake a Schedule B Class EA in accordance with the Municipal Class Environmental Process (June 2000). LGL Limited, as a sub-consultant to Chisholm Fleming, is providing Natural Science Services in support of this Class EA undertaking.

The Sub-Trunk # 1 Sewer (Stouffville TS) extension will consist of a large diameter sewer pipe ranging from 2200- 7500mm internal diameter, and will measure over 3 km in length. This pipe will be placed within a 20m easement (approximate), and serve the future growth forecasted for the northeast end of Stouffville. The method of construction will be a combination of open cut and tunnelled reaches. At the initiation of the study, three locational alternatives were presented in the south end of the study area (Alternatives 1A, 1B, 1C) and 2 alternatives were presented in the north end (Alternatives 2A, 2B).

The study area lies on the east end of the Community of Stouffville, between 10th Line to the west, York-Durham Line to the east, to just north of Bethesda Road to the north and just south of Main Street to the south, as shown on Figure 1. The study limit is within an urban fringe landscape, supporting a mosaic of farmlands, forested areas, wetlands, fallow fields and low density residential, as well as some commercial development.

This report documents the Natural Heritage existing conditions and constraint analysis for the Stouffville TS study area. The sewer alignment route evaluation, as well as the preliminary impact assessment and mitigation plan, will be completed under a separate cover.

Lincolnville GO StationReesor Creek

STOUFFVILLE

Stouffville Creek

10TH LIN

E

YOR

K DU

RH

AM LIN

E

MAIN STREET

BETHESDA SIDEROAD10TH

LINE

KC

Unevaluated Wetlands (LIO)

Provincially Significant Wetlands (LIO)- Goodwood/Glasgow Wetland ComplexLocally Significant Wetlands (LIO)- Stouffville Marsh

Wooded Area (LIO)Environmentally Significant Area- Stouffville Forest

Sub-Trunk 1 Sanitary Sewer EAOverview of Study Area

TA8256

August, 2013

1

EEB1:15,000

Waterbody (LIO)

Study Area

Watercourse (LIO)



1.1 EXISTING POLICY FRAMEWORK

1.1.1 Town of Whitchurch Stouffville Official Plan

The Town of Whitchurch-Stouffville Official Plan Consolidation was compiled in 2000, and includes amendments including OPA 129 which speaks to polices and design for the Phase 2 Development Area- which partially encompasses the Stouffville TS study area. Phase 2, which is currently designated for urban development, encompasses lands west of the stream corridor located adjacent to York-Durham Line, and north of the existing developed estate and retirement community, to just north of the Stouffville Flea Market, as shown on Figure 1. The land located north of Phase 2, to the municipal boundary at Bethesda Sideroad is known as Phase 3. Lands within Phase 3 are not currently designated for Urban development, although lie within the urban boundary of Whitchurch-Stouffville, and have the potential to be developed in the future (Watson and Associates Economists Ltd, 2013).

The Official Plan generally indicates that the existing greenland system shall be maintained, enhanced, and expanded through the addition of a trail system and parkland and in keeping with the directions of the Oak Ridges Moraine Conservation Plan. Schedule F of the Official Plan represents the general location of the Key Natural Heritage and Hydrologically Sensitive Features which comprise the Greenland System. The Greenlands layer encompasses wetlands and wooded areas outlined by the Land Information Ontario (LIO) database obtained from the MNR, as discussed further in Section 2.3, and shown on Figures 1 and 2.

1.1.2 Greenbelt Plan

A review of the Greenbelt Plan (MMAH, 2005) was conducted, and it was determined that the study area lie outside of the Greenbelt Plan Area boundary. The Greenbelt Plan area lies south of 19th Avenue, south of the municipal boundary of the Town of Whitchurch-Stouffville.

1.1.3 Oak Ridges Moraine

The study area is located within the Oak Ridges Moraine Conservation Plan (ORMCP) Area. The ORMCP was established to provide land use management and resource management direction for the Oak Ridges Moraine (MMAH, 2009). The ORMCP divides land use into four designated areas, which are natural core areas, natural linkage areas, countryside areas and settlement areas. Based on the Oak Ridges Moraine Atlas mapping, land use within the study area has been identified as settlement area (MMAH, 2012). No designated ORM land use areas exist within the study area (i.e. Natural Core Area, Natural Linkage Area, Countryside Area, Hamlet Area). Settlement Areas reflects existing and proposed communities planned by municipalities to reflect community needs and values.



2.0 EXISTING CONDITIONS

This section describes the existing conditions of the study area related to natural sciences, including physiography, vegetation and vegetation communities, wildlife and wildlife habitat, aquatic habitat and communities and designated natural areas. Groundtruthing of the study area by LGL was completed in late 2012 (December 14), January 13 and May 26, 2013. LGL’s focus was on aquatic habitat and fisheries as well as general wildlife constraints. All available background resources and agencies were consulted, in order to outline all natural environment constraints with the study limits and vicinity. Figure 2 outlines in detail all available natural environment information available, including some constraint ‘notes’. A detailed photo appendix is found in Appendix B.

The Stouffville TS study area lie within the West Duffins Creek subwatershed; a part of the Duffins Creek Watershed system. The most prominent natural feature within the area is a tributary of Reesor Creek which flows through the study limits, within the vicinity of York-Durham Line, crossing this road twice. Natural habitat associated with the creek corridor, includes deciduous and coniferous dominated forest blocks, wetland (swamp & marsh) communities, and culturally influenced woodlands, thickets and meadows. Apart from the creek corridor, some wooded areas exist around existing rural properties, as well as some wetland pockets; one located at the extreme north end of the study limits (near The Granite Country Club), and another adjacent but connected to the Reesor Creek corridor.

2.1 PHYSIOGRAPHY AND SOILS

The study area falls within the Oak Ridges Moraine Physiographic Region (Chapman and Putnam 1984), an area comprised of hilly relief with a knob-and-basin relief system. This region extends from the Niagara Escarpment to the Trent River, forming the height of land dividing streams that flow north into Georgian Bay and south into Lake Ontario. Most of the hills are composed of sandy or gravelly materials, and in some cases are formed of till which protrudes above the sands. In general, this upland is the source area for many streams. Groundwater recharge, in the form of wetlands and groundwater discharge zones (localized ground water indicators noted), are both evident within the Stouffville TS study area.

Soils within the area consists mainly of Milliken and Wolburn loams (imperfect-good drainage), with a portion of the area comprised of Monoghan clay loam providing imperfect drainage. Alluvial bottomlands are associated with the stream corridor, and support generally poor drainage characteristics (Hoffman & Richards, 1955).

KC

Reesor Creek ("small riverinecoldwater" watercourse, TRCA 2003)

kj

Existing hydro line /Future road crossing(disturbed corridor)

Stream within ~4mof road embankment

Small pond supportingbaitfish (LGL 2007) kj

Baitfish habitat confirmed inwest ditchline connectinggolf course pond to small pond

kjDisturbed field(dumping / fill)

Wetland contributingflow to creek (Potentialamphibian habitat)

Pond slated for removal.Direct fish use unlikely inoutlet channel (LGL 2007)

2

4

35

6

5

4

Plowed

Plowed

Plowed

1 2

3

Plowed

FOD7-a

FOC4-1

MAS2-1b

FOD7-3

CUS1-b

FOD7-3

CUS1-b

CUW1-A1

MAM2-2

SWD4-1

FOD8-1

CUT1-ECUP3-H

SAM1-4CUM1-b

CUM1-b

CUS1-b

CUT1-E

SWT2-5CUT1-E

FOD7-3

CUS1-b

FOC4-1

OAO1

TA8256

August, 2013

1:5,500

Wooded Area (LIO)

Thermal Regime: Cold (LIO)

Environmentally Significant Area - StouffvilleForest

Provincially Significant Wetlands (LIO) - Goodwood/GlasgowWetland Complex

Locally Significant Wetlands (LIO) -Stouffville Marsh


0 80 160 240 32040Meters

±

Stouffville Sub-Trunk #1 Sanitary Sewer

2a

Environmental Constraints (DRAFT)

References: A Watershed Plan - Duffins Creek and Carruthers Creek (TRCA 2003) Go Transit North Stouffville Station, Fisheries and Benthic Invertebrate Assessment (LGL 2007)

EEB

Regulation Limit (TRCA)

Path: G:\TA\TA8256 - Stouffville\Figures\Aug2013\Fig2_EnvConstraints_Aug2013.mxd

Watercourse & Waterbodies (LIO)

Vegetation Community Boundary (TRCA)

Study Area (May 2013)

Alternative 2A

Alternative 2B

Alternative 1A

Alternative 1C

PropEasement (May 2013)

Alternative 1B

CUM1-bCUP3-HCUS1-bCUT1-ECUW1-A1FOC4-1FOD7-3FOD7-aFOD8-1MAM2-2MAS2-1bOAO1SAM1-4SWD4-1SWT2-5

Exotic Cool-season Grass Graminoid MeadowMixed Conifer Coniferous PlantationExotic Successional SavannahRed Osier Dogwood Deciduous ThicketWhite Cedar Successional WoodlandFresh-Moist White Cedar Coniferous ForestFresh-Moist Willow Lowland Deciduous ForestFresh-Moist Manitoba Maple Lowland Deciduous ForestFresh-Moist Poplar Deciduous ForestReed Canary Grass Mineral Meadow MarshNarrow-leaved Cattail Mineral Shallow MarshOpen Aquatic (unvegetated)Pondweed Mixed Shallow AquaticWillow Mineral Deciduous SwampRed Osier Dogwood Mineral Thicket Swamp

Vegetation Communities (TRCA)

Potential Watercourse Crossing

Field # (LGL SAR Screening)1

KC

kj

Stream within 3-4m of ROW

Reesor Creek ("small riverinecoldwater" watercourse, TRCA 2003)

kj

Existing hydro line /Future road crossing(disturbed corridor)

kjDisturbed field(dumping / fill)

Wetland contributingflow to creek (Potentialamphibian habitat)

1

2

4

5Plowed

Plowed

Plowed

1 2

3

CUP3-H

CUM1-bSWT2-5

FOD7-3FOC4-1

TA8256

August, 2013

1:5,500

Wooded Area (LIO)

Thermal Regime: Cold (LIO)

Environmentally Significant Area - StouffvilleForest

Provincially Significant Wetlands (LIO) - Goodwood/GlasgowWetland Complex

Locally Significant Wetlands (LIO) -Stouffville Marsh


0 80 160 240 32040Meters

±

Stouffville Sub-Trunk #1 Sanitary Sewer

2b

Environmental Constraints (DRAFT)

References: A Watershed Plan - Duffins Creek and Carruthers Creek (TRCA 2003) Go Transit North Stouffville Station, Fisheries and Benthic Invertebrate Assessment (LGL 2007)

EEB

Regulation Limit (TRCA)

Path: G:\TA\TA8256 - Stouffville\Figures\Aug2013\Fig2_EnvConstraints_Aug2013.mxd

Watercourse & Waterbodies (LIO)

Vegetation Community Boundary (TRCA)

Study Area (May 2013)

Alternative 2A

Alternative 2B

Alternative 1A

Alternative 1C

PropEasement (May 2013)

Alternative 1B

CUM1-bCUP3-HCUS1-bCUT1-ECUW1-A1FOC4-1FOD7-3FOD7-aFOD8-1MAM2-2MAS2-1bOAO1SAM1-4SWD4-1SWT2-5

Exotic Cool-season Grass Graminoid MeadowMixed Conifer Coniferous PlantationExotic Successional SavannahRed Osier Dogwood Deciduous ThicketWhite Cedar Successional WoodlandFresh-Moist White Cedar Coniferous ForestFresh-Moist Willow Lowland Deciduous ForestFresh-Moist Manitoba Maple Lowland Deciduous ForestFresh-Moist Poplar Deciduous ForestReed Canary Grass Mineral Meadow MarshNarrow-leaved Cattail Mineral Shallow MarshOpen Aquatic (unvegetated)Pondweed Mixed Shallow AquaticWillow Mineral Deciduous SwampRed Osier Dogwood Mineral Thicket Swamp

Vegetation Communities (TRCA)

Potential Watercourse Crossing

Field # (LGL SAR Screening)1



2.2 AQUATIC HABITAT AND COMMUNITIES

The Stouffville TS study area lies within the northwestern portion of the West Duffins Subwatershed which includes Reesor Creek and Stouffville Creek. A tributary of Reesor Creek (Reesor Creek) flows through the study limits, originating from two tributaries which arise south of Highway 47, arising from wetlands identified as the Goodwood-Glasgow Wetland Complex located within a few kilometres upstream of the study area. This tributary eventually outlets to Stouffville Creek south of the Concession 9 and York Durham Line intersection. Reesor Creek is managed by the Toronto and Region Conservation Authority (TRCA) and is regulated under Ontario Regulation 166/06. A few additional minor water features exist within the study limits, as described further in Table 3.

Reesor Creek meanders in a southern direction, crossing York-Durham Line twice, the ‘north’ crossing located just south of Bethesda Road, and the ‘south’ crossing located just north of Main Street. Reesor Creek flows parallel to York Durham Line, for approximately 300m downstream of the north crossing, lying within a minimum of 4m from the road embankment. This watercourse crosses an existing hydro corridor/old farmlane, and outlets to a large online pond. Downstream of the pond, the stream appears to be more highly meandering, flowing through fragmented natural areas, through the exterior ends of residential lots, before crossing York Durham Line again (south crossing), just north of Main Street. The TRCA fill extension lines encompass nearly 1.3 kms of York Durham Line, and include both culvert crossings of the tributary.

Within the study area, the watercourse has been dammed a few times, as indicated by the LIO watercourse layer. As noted above, a large online pond exists, measuring approximately 80m wide and 95 m long, formed from a large dam, located directly east of the Stouffville Flea Market property. Another smaller offline pond (potentially with inlet/outlet connection) exists further upstream within the stream corridor, approximately 470m downstream of the northern watercourse crossing of York Durham Line. This ponded area may be somewhat natural in origin, as it is fed from a wetland pocket located immediately south of the stream corridor, although the presence of a berm indicated that it may have been dug out at one time. There is one additional pond which appears dug, that outlets via a channel to this watercourse just upstream of the south crossing. The berm of this pond is visible from York-Durham Line.

Aquatic habitat within the reaches of Reesor Creek within the Stouffville TS study area, appear to support mainly sand substrates, with some cobble and gravel components, and riffle/run morphology. Detailed habitat at the three main ‘crossings’ identified in the study area, is outlined further in Table 3 below. Other smaller (localized) drainage features within the study area, are also described in this table.



Reesor Creek is classified as a 3rd order stream (headwater stream) and is categorized as a ‘small riverine coldwater’ stream, which generally indicates stable temperatures, high baseflow conditions, which currently, or historically supports trout populations (TRCA 2003). Representative species expected in this type of habitat, as identified in the LIO database, include white sucker, mottled sculpin, rainbow darter, brassy minnow, pumpkinseed, common shiner, northern redbelly dace, bluntnose minnow, fathead minnow, eastern blacknose dace, brook trout, redside dace, longnose dace, creek chub, rock bass, slimy sculpin and johnny darter/tessellated darter (LIO 2012). Reesor Creek is being managed to support Brook Trout and Atlantic Salmon within the study limits (TRCA 2003).

Detailed fisheries records exist for the study area and these are summarized in Table 1. These records where obtained from the TRCA, as well as from background studies completed within the vicinity of the Stouffville TS study area. A total of 17 species of generally warmwater, coolwater and coldwater fish species have been recorded in Reesor Creek at 6 stations from Bethesda Road to the Uxbridge-Pickering Townline, located downstream of the study area. The majority of the representative species for Small Riverine Coldwater systems, have been captured within Reesor Creek, although the presence of a large online pond has created habitat for warmwater species like Largemouth Bass. Brook Trout are known in the system, and have been caught at the downstream station noted above.



Table 1: Summary of Fish Species Documented in Reesor Creek, within the vicinity of the Stouffville TS Study Area

COMMON NAME

SCIENTIFIC NAME

THERMAL REGIME/

TOL1 STATUS

80m reach DS of large online pond (‘reach 1’)2

250m reach US of large online pond

(‘reaches 2,3’)1

Near Webb Road and

York-Durham

line (TRCA)

Near Bethesda

Road (north crossing) (TRCA)

At York-Durham

Line north of Main Street

(TRCA)

DS of Uxbridge-Pickering

Line (TRCA)

Bluntnose minnow

Pimephales notatus

warmwater/ intermediate

G5, S5 2000 2000 1984

Brassy minnow

Hybognathus hankinsoni

coolwater/ intermediate

G5, S5 2000 1984

Brook stickleback

Culaea inconstans

coolwater/ intermediate3

2000

Brook trout Salvelinus fontinalis

coldwater/ intolerant

G5, S5 1992, 2000

Central mudminnow

Umbra limi coolwater/ tolerant

Common shiner

Luxilus cornutus


G5, S5 2000 2000 1984 1992

Creek chub Semotilus atromaculatus


G5, S5 2000 2000 1954 1984, 1985 1954, 1987

Fathead minnow

Pimephales promelas

warmwater/ tolerant

G5, S5 1984 1992

Johnny darter Etheostoma nigrum

coolwater/ tolerant6

G5, S5 2000 2000 1984 1954, 1987

Largemouth bass

Micropterus salmoides

warmwater/ tolerant

G5, S5 2000

Longnose dace Rhinichthys cataractae


G5, S5 2000 1984 1987

Mottled sculpin

Cottus bairdi coldwater/ intermediate

G5, S5 1984, 1985 1987

Northern redbelly dace

Phoxinus eos coolwater/ intermediate

G5, S5 1984, 1985 1987

1 Eakins, R. J. 2012. Ontario Freshwater Fishes Life History Database. Version 4.24. On-line database. (http://www.ontariofishes.ca), accessed 21 January 2013 2 Functional Servicing Study Town of Whitchurch-Stouffville NE Quadrant (Ecotec 2004) 3 Tolerant of low DO but intolerant of turbidity. Usually only species found in marginal environments. 4 Tolerant of turbidity 5 Tolerant of pollution, low DO, moderately intolerant of turbidity 6 Tolerant of many organic/inorganic pollutants, but moderately tolerant of turbidity



COMMON NAME

SCIENTIFIC NAME

THERMAL REGIME/

TOL1 STATUS

80m reach DS of large online pond (‘reach 1’)2

250m reach US of large online pond

(‘reaches 2,3’)1

Near Webb Road and

York-Durham

line (TRCA)

Near Bethesda

Road (north crossing) (TRCA)

At York-Durham

Line north of Main Street

(TRCA)

DS of Uxbridge-Pickering

Line (TRCA)

Pumpkinseed Lepomis gibbosus

warmwater/ intermediate

G5, S5 2000 1984, 1985 1987

Rainbow darter

Etheostoma cearuleum

coolwater/ intolerant

G5, S4 2000 1985

Rock bass Ambloplites rupestris


G5, S5 2000 1987

White sucker Catostomus commersoni

coolwater/ tolerant

G5, S5 2000 1954 1984, 1985 1954, 1987

G- Global Rank assigned by consortium of groups; G5—Very common. S – Provincial Rank assigned by the Natural Heritage Information Centre; S3-Vulnerable, S4 – Apparently secure, S5 – Secure.



22..22..11 AAqquuaattiicc SSppeecciieess aatt RRiisskk

The Natural Heritage Information Centre (Table 2) and available background data from the TRCA indicate historical records of redside dace within Reesor Creek from 1954 to 1987. These records are from stations downstream of the study area. Redside dace is considered a sensitive coolwater fish, which is recognized as “Endangered” in by the Committee on the Status of Endangered Wildlife in Canada (COSEWIC) as well as by the Committee on the Status of Species at Risk in Ontario (COSSARO).

Table 2: Biodiversity Index Species Rare Species Records (Accessed December 2012) Element

ID EO ID Scientific Name

Common Name

Global Rank

Prov Rank

COSEWIC Status

SARO Status

First, Last Observed

180552 7895 Clinostomus elongatus

Redside Dace G3G4 S2 END END 05/06/1987,

28/09/1979

180552 7697 Clinostomus elongatus

Redside Dace G3G4 S2 END END 1954,

29/06/1987

Typically, Redside Dace have stringent habitat requirements and occupy clear, cool streams containing good water clarity. Threats to redside dace include alterations to watercourses due to development and urbanization, water pollution, pesticide and herbicide use, and removal of riparian vegetation, which leads to an increase in erosion and decrease in habitat for their prey (insects). At the time of the publishing of the TRCA 2003 study, it was indicated that although no captures of redside dace were confirmed in an extensive study in 2000 within the Duffins Creek Watershed, it is believed that healthy populations of redside dace still exist within the larger watershed area. However, MNR has indicated that the reaches of Reesor Creek, within the Stouffville TS study area, would not be considered Regulated Habitat (MNR pers. Comm. 2013) (Appendix D).

2.2.2 Watercourse Crossings

Watercourses crossings occur within the study area and the following information in Table 3 characterizes the potential watercourse crossing locations for the sewer installation, based on the current sewer alignment alternatives provided at the time of the completion of this report. Watercourses were characterized on December 14, 2012, January 13, 2013 during reconnaissance level field investigations, followed by spring investigation on May 26, 2013. Six watercourse/drainage feature crossings were identified, three of which are main crossings of Reesor Creek. The locations of all potential crossings are outlined on Figure 2.



Table 3: Summary of Potential Watercourse Crossings by Sewer Alternatives within the Study Limits

WATERCOURSE CROSSING

CULVERT TYPE HABITAT DESCRIPTION REPRESENTATIVE PHOTOS

Reesor Creek Crossing 1 (‘south’ crossing) This crossing is located on York-Durham Line, approx.. 145m north of Main Street. Regulated by TRCA

5m wide open bottomed culvert (50 cm freeboard, skewed crossing

Assessment: December 14, 2012 Channel appears permanent, and was clear and flowing. Channel measured ~ 2m wide (wetted), and 22-30 cm deep, with bankfull width averaging ~2.5m wide, with wider section noted at first bend located DS of road (woody debris jam here). Substrate is dominated by sand and cobble, with sand deposition notable in slower sections. Morphology is dominated by runs and riffles. Riparian habitat upstream is dominated by cattail with some shrub willow, Red-osier dogwood, Purple Loosestrife, and grasses. Tree growth (including ash sp.) present south of culvert and further upstream of culvert. Riparian habitat downstream is more woody, with Eastern White Cedar, Manitoba Maple and a large willow, providing 50-60 % overhead cover. Residential lawn, is cut to edge of north bank. Banks appear to be generally stable in reach.

Reesor Creek Crossing 2 (Proposed road crossing for Phase 2 development) and existing hydro crossing (located ~130m US of online pond) Regulated by TRCA

2 ~900mm CSPs with boulder headwalls Low profile (trail) crossing

Assessment: Jan 13, 2013 (flood conditions). Follow up survey- May 26, 2013. Permanent channel, clear, flowing in May survey (turbid in Jan survey). Wetted widths measured between 2-2.5m wide during May survey, with bankfull width ranging between 1.5-3.0m wide, 0.48-0.65m deep. Upstream: Flats are dominant, with 2 pools – one at inlet (~2.5m x 2m long x 40 cm deep) and another ~60 cm deep pool upstream. Substrate is dominated by sand. Riparian habitat is dominated by cedar with Manitoba Maple, Red-osier Dogwood, Choke Cherry, Horsetail, Water Speedwell. Seepage noted along east bank. Notable large willow growing on the northwest side. Downstream: Morphology dominated by runs within 15-20m downstream, followed by flats. Sand substrate is dominant, with large gravel also present in run reach. Riparian habitat (wetland) comprised of cattail, dogwood, sedges with cedar growing further back from banks.





Culvert outlet perched ~20 cm above water in spring survey (barrier to fish movement most of year). Woody debris also blocking inlet during both surveys and channel overtopped banks, with minimal freeboard in culvert in January survey. Terrestrial habitat at hydro/ trail crossing generally disturbed (cut trees, debris piles, invasive species- Japanese Knotweed, immature Black Locust).

Reesor Creek Crossing 3 (‘north’ crossing) Located ~15m south of Bethesda Road. Regulated by TRCA

~3.5m wide x 1.5m high open-bottomed culvert (freeboard 1.1m)

Assessment: December 14, 2012; Jan 13, 2013 (flood conditions), May 26, 2013. Channel measures ~3m wide (bankfull). Measured, 33 cm deep at outlet in Dec. and 75 cm deep during flood. Fairly straight crossing, bending to south within ~15m DS of culvert. Channel bends again to flow parallel to road, within 30m of culvert. Morphology is dominated by flats upstream, with runs/flats downstream. Woody debris abundant instream. Riparian vegetation includes Reed Canary Grass, shrubs and a large Crack Willow ~8m downstream along south bank, with willow growth dominating corridor further downstream. Upstream riparian habitat is fairly open within ~2m of inlet, and characterized as ‘shrubby’- elm, buckthorn, dogwood, with planted spruce ~10m US of inlet. Some disturbance of vegetation within hydro corridor, which crosses channel in reach (hydro pole instream ~ 80m downstream of crossing).

Crossing 4- wetland pocket/drainage outletting to Reesor Creek Located ~900m north of Main Street, crossing York-Durham Line Habitat downstream (west) of York-Durham Line within TRCA Regulation Limits

plastic pipe (<400 mm)

Assessment: December 14, 2012. Pipe conveys drainage from a small, isolated wetland pocket to Reesor Creek downstream. Wetland is dominated by Phragmites (Common Reed Grass). No defined channel noted, and direct fish use unlikely. Iron floc was observed, therefore appears to function as providing groundwater contributions to creek. Reesor Creek is located ~35m west of Crossing 4.





Crossing 5- SWM outlet channel draining to Reesor Creek Located ~35m west of the Bethesda Rd/York Durham Line intersection. Within TRCA Regulation Limits

SWM outlet (concrete underground pipe), outletting to ~500mm CSP under Bethesda Road

Assessment: Jan 13, 2013 (flood conditions), May 26, 2013 SWM outlet structure is located on the north side of Bethesda Road, conveying flow from SWM system on the GO station property to CSP under Betheda Rd. Flows along south ditchline, then south as a small channel, into Reesor Creek. Natural channel reach has moderate-high gradient, ~0.3m wide, 5 cm deep, supporting runs during May survey. A pond located on the GO property (as shown on air photo) upstream of Bethesda was recently decommissioned and removed (LGL 2007), therefore connection has been severed. Crossing/watercourse unlikely to support direct fish habitat given gradient barrier and upstream altered habitat.

Crossing 6- pond/drainage feature Located on the north side of the GO Station property, across from Granite Club Golf Course Within TRCA Regulation limits

~400mm CSP

Assessment: Jan 13, 2013 (flood conditions), May 26, 2013 ~25m x 30m wetland (pond) located ~30m west of York Durham Line. Area between pond and CSP is low-lying (~20-30m wide), supporting a mix of upland and wetland herbaceous vegetation dominated by Reed Canary Grass with no defined channel observed. Appears that CSP conveys flows from an irrigation pond located on the Granite Club property on the east side of the road. Most of flow remains within the east and west ditchlines, and appears to inundate low area during high flows. Iron floc noted in road ditchlines near crossing. Pond was fished by LGL in 2007, and confirmed presence of Creek Chub and Brook Stickleback. Road ditchline also confirmed to support baitfish habitat, as noted during May 2013 survey. Numerous fish and tadpoles were observed within west ditchline. East ditchline/connection to irrigation pond is choked with Phragmites (as well as portion of ditchline) and appears to support more limited direct habitat opportunities.



2.3 DESIGNATED NATURAL AREAS

According to the Biodiversity Explorer database maintained by NHIC, no designated natural areas exist within the study limits. However, there are three designated areas that lie in close proximity of the study area. The closest wetland unit designated as the Goodwood-Glasglow Provincially Significant Wetland lies within approximately 500m (primarily northeast) of the study area. This wetland complex is comprised of 17 individual wetlands, composed of three wetland types (0.8% fen, 90.9% swamp, 8.3% marsh) on the Oak Ridges Moraine (Huizer et al., 1987) as cited in the LIO natural areas query. This wetland is quite large, measuring 387 ha, comprising 157 vegetation units (MNR 1999). The Goodwood-Glasgow Wetland Complex is identified as a significant and extensive seepage area that acts as the headwater sources for numerous creek systems, including Reesor Creek (MNR 1999).

The two other designated areas are Stouffville Forest Life Science Site/Environmentally Significant Area (MTRCA 1992, LIO 2012), and the Stouffville Marsh, a locally significant wetland (6.6 ha) , found within the boundaries of the ESA, along Stouffville Creek. These areas lie within approximately 450m east of the Stouffville Trunk Sewer study limits.

Other natural areas do exist within the study limits, mainly associated with the Reesor Creek corridor. The LIO database shows a large portion of the corridor as ‘wooded area’, as well as unevaluated wetland pockets. Additional wooded area exists outside of the corridor, adjacent to York-Durham Line and near 10th Line. These additional areas are contiguous with the Greenlands layer in the Town of Whitchurch Stouffville Official Plan. All natural areas are outlined on Figures 1 and 2.

2.4 VEGETATION AND VEGETATION COMMUNITIES

LGL did not complete vegetation community surveys within the study area as part of this study. However, a summary of available background information pertaining to vegetation communities, species composition and associated habitat functions was completed. Reconnaissance level field investigation of natural/semi-natural vegetation (in relation to aquatic habitat functions) was completed within the areas of the watercourse crossings, as outlined in Table 2. In addition, a general terrestrial assessment was completed within areas surveyed for the presence of Species At Risk birds (i.e. within fields), as outlined in Section 2.5 and outlined below in Table 5. For this study, Plan by Design Arborists were retained to complete a tree inventory within the limits of existing ROWs. It should be noted that the Plan by Design did not complete Vegetation Community Assessments, but rather focused on identifying and tagging individual trees within these select areas and noting general condition. Plan By Design Tree Inventory Report has been completed under a separate cover.



The southern portion of the Stouffville Sub-Trunk #1 study limits between the Reesor Creek online pond in the south, and the north end of the Phase 2 Secondary Plan area was surveyed by ESG International (now Stantec Consulting) in 2000, as a requirement for the Functional Servicing Study for the Town of Whitchurch Stouffville Secondary Plan Area, Northeast Quadrant. Digital layers of the vegetation community limits could not be provided, but a copy of their Vegetation Community map is found in Appendix C, for reference. ESG completed Ecological Land Classification Tables for each of the 11 vegetation units, describing the canopy, shrub and ground strata structure of each vegetation unit identified, and commented on any significant natural heritage features present and disturbances. A summary of this information has been summarized by LGL in Table 4. Any notable changes to habitat and additional comments by LGL, has been outlined in BOLD.

Reesor Creek and associated riparian and tableland habitat within the northern portion of the Stouffville Sub-Trunk #1 study limits, within approximately 450m south of Bethesda Sideroad, was surveyed by TRCA in 2009. Once again, it appears that methods outlined in the Ecological Land Classification Guide (latest edition) were followed. Vegetation units were identified, in addition to information on dominant species present within the canopy, mid-layer, lower-layer and ground layers, and general age of each community. TRCA Species of Conservation Concern (L1-L5) were also provided for the areas surveyed. Locational information for these species is not provided in this report, however the list of species documented, are listed in Section 2.4.1 further below.

A total of 24 Ecological Land Classification (ELC) communities have been identified within the Stouffville TS study area, for the area covered by TRCA and ESG surveys. It should be noted that gaps exist in the vegetation data for the site. No ELC data was available downstream of the large online pond, for the deciduous hedgerows running east-west through the agricultural interior of the site, as well as a detailed inventory of the hedgerows adjacent to York-Durham Line or Bethesda Road.



Table 4: Summary of Vegetation Community Data available from background sources for the study area ELC Code Vegetation Type Species Association Comments

Units within Functional Servicing Study (NE quadrant) Study Limits- Summarized from Ecotec 2004 (field work completed in 2000 by ESG International) TERRESTRIAL– Natural/Semi-Natural FOD5-1 Dry-Fresh Sugar

Maple Deciduous Forest Ecosite

Canopy: Sugar Maple (Acer saccharum ssp. saccharum) (90%), White Ash (Fraxinus Americana) (<10%), American Beech (Fagus grandifolia) (<10%). Understorey: Sugar Maple (dominant), American Basswood (Tilia Americana) (Occasional) Ground Cover: Enchanter’s Nightshade (Circaea lutetiana), Jack-in-the-pulpit (Arisaema tripphyllum), Calico Aster (Aster laterifolius)

• This small unit is located east of Hwy 47, just north of the Stouffville Flea Market.

• Young, regenerating Sugar Maple stand with scattered large Sugar Maple and American Beech, and more scrubby growth near west end (dominated by basswood).

• Canopy cover = 60-80% cover; shrub cover= 25-60% cover; ground cover= 10% cover

• Well drained soil (sand/fine loam) with flat/gentle sloped terrain.

TERRESTRIAL-Cultural CUP 2-3 Black Locust-

White Spruce Mixed Cultural Plantation

Canopy: Black Locust (Robina pseudoacacia) (Dominant), White Spruce (Picea glauca) (Abundant). LGL also noted several large Norway Maple (Acer platanoides) along southwest end of the plantation. Understory: Raspberry (occasional), Choke Cherry (Prunus virginiana ssp. Virginiana) (occasional) Ground Cover: Garlic Mustard (Alliaria petiolata), Panicled Aster (Aster lanceolatus), Orchard Grass (Dactylis golmerata), Canada Goldenrod (Solidago altissima)

• Old plantation along west side of the Reesor Creek valley. Old Homestead, with presence of horticultural escapes (i.e. sedum)

• Creek buffered by plantation by presence of Deciduous swamp.

• Canopy cover= 80-100%; shrub cover= <10%; ground cover= 80-100%

• Dry fine loam-sand soils, on gentle slopes (<10%).

• Hydro corridor/farmlane/future subdivision road bisects this unit; fairly open habitat including Manitoba Maple, young Sugar Maple, Eastern White Cedar, Tartarian Honeysuckle, Alternate-leaved Dogwood, with undergrowth of Aegopodium species (likely ornamental escapee from former homestead).



ELC Code Vegetation Type Species Association Comments CUP 3-2 White Pine-White

Spruce Coniferous Cultural Plantation

Canopy: White Pine (Pinus strobus) (Dominant), White Spruce (Dominant), White Ash (occasional) Subcanopy: Eastern White Cedar (Thuja occidentalis), Manitoba Maple (Acer negundo) Understorey: Choke Cherry (Abundant), Eastern White Cedar (Occasional), Manitoba Maple (Abundant). Ground Cover: Enchanter’s Nightshade (Abundant), Hawkweed (Hieracium caespitosum) (Abundant), Orchard Grass (Occasional)

• Narrow unit extending along west edge of the Reesor Creek corridor (adjacent to mixed swamp), north of hydro crossing as well as encompassing hedgerows within cultural meadow habitat west of Reesor Creek.

• canopy cover =>80-10%; shrub cover= <10% cover; ground cover= 25-60% cover.

• Dry fine loam-sand soils, on gentle slopes (<10%).

CUM 1-1 Goldenrod-graminoid mineral old field cultural meadow

Canopy: American Elm (Ulmus Americana) (Occasional) Understorey: Red-osier Dogwood (Cornus stolonifera) (Occasional), Canada Plum (Prunus nigra) (Occasional), Staghorn Sumac (Rhus typhina) (Occasional) Ground Cover: Smooth Brome (Bromus inermis ssp. Inermis) (Dominant), Canada Goldenrod (Dominant), Timothy Grass (Phleum pratense) (Abundant), Wild Carrot (Daucus carota) (Occasional)

• Unit is located east of 10th Concession in a former agricultural field.

• Shrub cover indicated as limited to the edge of the fields

• Note: another CUM 1-1 was identified between Reesor Creek Corridor and Durham Road 30, however it is currently plowed, as noted by LGL in 2012/2013 seasons (as shown on Figure 2).

CUM 1-2 Vetch-Goldenrod mineral old field cultural meadow

Canopy: Scots Pine (Pinus sylvestrus) (Occasional). LGL noted Eastern White Cedar, planted White Spruce and Colorado Spruce (Picea pungens) clusters in south end of unit. Understory: Scots Pine (Occasional), Wild Grape (Vitis riparia) (Occasional). LGL noted buckthorn sp, young willow, Tartarian Honeysuckle (Lonicera tatarica) as well as pockets of Scots Pine, White Spruce, Blue Spruce and Cedar, young ash, scattered amongst meadow habitat. Ground Cover: Cow Vetch (Vicia cracca) (Dominant), Canada Goldenrod (Dominant) Sweet White Clover (Meliotus alba) (Abundant), Wild Carrot (occasional). Percentage of grasses appears to be increasing in unit, representing between 40-60% of ground cover.

• Large meadow area surrounding the Stouffville Flea Market. Scots Pine (originally planted), is starting to colonize throughout unit.

• Disturbance noted directly east of Flea Market- dumping/fill noted.

• LGL noted increase in woody vegetation component in unit, compared to what is described in 2000 survey. Ash regeneration occurring north of hydro corridor/future subdivision road.

CUT 1-7 White Cedar-White Ash Mineral Cultural Thicket

Canopy: White Ash (Occasional), Eastern White Cedar (Occasional), White Spruce (Occasional) Understory: Eastern White Cedar (Dominant), American Elm, Choke Cherry (Abundant), Red-osier Dogwood (Occasional) Ground Cover: Canada Goldenrod (Dominant), Smooth Brome (Abundant), New England Aster (Aster novae-angliae) (Abundant), Wild Carrot (Occasional)

• canopy cover= <25%; shrub cover= 25-60%;ground cover= 80-100%

• Spoil piles from creation of open water (pond) throughout unit. Cedar and White Ash dominant along east side, with planted mature White and Blue Spruce along west side.



ELC Code Vegetation Type Species Association Comments CUW 1-4 Scots Pine

Cultural Woodland

Canopy: Scots Pine (Dominant), White Ash (Occasional) Understory: Scots Pine (Dominant), White Elm (Abundant), Wild Grape (Occasional). Ground Cover: Canada Goldenrod (Abundant), Smooth Brome (Abundant), New England Aster, (Occasional), Wild Carrot (Occasional)

• Planted Scots Pine hedgerow located on west side of study limits spreading across into CUM 1-2, as noted further above.

WETLAND SWM 4-1 White cedar-

Hardwood organic/ mineral mixed swamp

Canopy: Eastern White Cedar (40%), Yellow Birch (Betula alleghaniensis) (20%), Eastern Hemlock (Tsuga canadensis) (20%), Red Ash (Fraxinus pensylvanica) (10%), Black Ash (Fraxinus nigra) (10%). Understory: Dwarf Red Raspberry (Rubus pubescens) (Dominant), Mountain Maple (Acer spicatum) (Abundant), Black/Red Ash Hybrid Fraxinus nigra/pennsylvanica (Abundant), Eastern White Cedar (Abundant). Ground Cover: Bulbet Fern (Cystopteris bulbifera) (Dominant), Sensitive Fern (Onoclea sensibilis) (Dominant), Jewelweed (Impatiens capensis) (Abundant), Lady Fern (Athyrium filix-femina) (Abundant), Spotted Joe-Pye-weed (Eupatorium maculatum) (Abundant)

• Large unit encompassing the majority of the Reesor Creek corridor, north of the large online pond (OAO-1- see below).

• TRCA background info noted unit to be ‘forest’ vs. wetland habitat.

• Hydro corridor/future subdivision road bisects this unit; disturbed riparian dominated by Black Locust in and around the stream crossing.

OAO-1 Open Aquatic Community

Canopy: N/A Understory: N/A Ground Cover: Along edges of pond- Broadleaf Cattail (Typha latifolia), Broadleaf Arrowhead (Sagittaria latifolia, Reed Canary Grass (Phalaris arundinacea), Rush spp. (Eleocharis spp.), Blue Flag (Iris versicolur)

• Man made online pond on Reesor Creek • Instream vegetation restricted to the edges of

the pond, with some submergents. • Foraging swallows and Great Blue Heron

observed.

North end of study limits (Reesor Creek Valley), north of Functional Servicing Study Limits, summarized from TRCA ELC data (Collected in 2009) TERRESTRIAL- Natural/Semi-Natural FOC4-1 Fresh-Moist

White Cedar Coniferous Forest

Canopy: Eastern White Cedar Understory: Eastern White Cedar, Sugar Maple, Common Buckthorn (Rhamnus cathartica) Ground Cover: mosses

• Mid-aged unit; minor amount of exotics present.

• >60% canopy cover and <10% understory.



ELC Code Vegetation Type Species Association Comments FOD7-3 (1)

Fresh-Moist Willow Lowland Deciduous Forest

Canopy: European Tree Willow (Salix x rubens), Manitoba Maple, Basswood (Tilia Americana) Sub-Canopy: Common Buckthorn, Manitoba Maple, Dotted Hawthorn (Crataegus punctate), Understory: Choke Cherry, Common Buckthorn, Garden Red Current (Ribes rubrum), Manitoba Maple Ground Cover: grasses, Common Buckthorn, Choke Cherry, Enchanter’s Nightshade, Thicket Creeper (Parthenocissus inserta)

• Largest FOD 7-3 unit (3 total), located along west bank of stream corridor.

• Mid-aged community, with moderate degree of exotics.

• >60% canopy cover; >60% understory; 35-60% ground cover

FOD7-3 (2 and 3)

Fresh-Moist Willow Lowland Deciduous Forest

Canopy: European Tree Willow (Salix x rubens), Manitoba Maple Sub-Canopy: Common Buckthorn, European Tree Willow, Manitoba Maple, Dotted Hawthorn (Crataegus punctate) Understory: Common Buckthorn, Spotted Joe-Pye Weed, Swamp Aster (Aster puniceus var. puniceus), Manitoba Maple, Ground Cover: Jewelweed, grasses, Marsh Bedstraw (Galium palustre), Ostrich Fern (Matteuccia struthiopteris var. pensylvanica),

• These 2 smaller units surround a shallow aquatic unit, located adjacent to the west side of Reesor Creek.

• Mid-aged community with moderate degree of exotics

• 60% canopy cover; 35-60% understory; 35-60% ground cover

FOD 8-1 Fresh-Moist Poplar Deciduous Forest

Canopy: Trembling Aspen (Populus tremuloides), Sub-Canopy: Trembling Aspen, Common Buckthorn, Understory: Common Buckthorn, Trembling Aspen, apple Ground Cover: Common Buckthorn, Enchanter’s Nightshade, Urban Avens (Geum urbanum), mosses

• Located along west edge of Reesor Creek Corridor.

• Young community, with moderate degree of exotics

• >60% canopy/ understory cover; 35-60% ground cover

FOD 7-a Fresh-Moist

Manitoba Maple Lowland Deciduous Forest

Canopy: Manitoba Maple, White Spruce, Colorado Spruce, apple Sub-Canopy: Manitoba Maple, Common Buckthorn, apple, Dotted Hawthorn Understory: Common Buckthorn, Red-osier Dogwood, Manitoba Maple, Rubus sp. Ground Cover: Common Buckthorn, Enchanter’s Nightshade, Wild Strawberry, Jewelweed,

• Mid-aged community, with moderate degree of exotics.

• 60% canopy/ understory cover; 35-60% ground cover



ELC Code Vegetation Type Species Association Comments North end of study limits (Reesor Creek Valley), north of Functional Servicing Study Limits, summarized from TRCA ELC data (Collected in 2009) TERRESTRIAL- Cultural CUW1-A1 White Cedar

Successional Woodland

Canopy: Eastern White Cedar, Scots Pine Sub-Canopy: Eastern White Cedar, Red-osier Dogwood, Common Buckthorn Understory: Red-osier Dogwood, Eastern White Cedar Ground Cover: grasses, Tall Goldenrod, Red-osier Dogwood, Wild Strawberry

• Young woodland community located along the west portion of the Reesor Creek corridor, within ~190m south of Bethesda Rd.

• 25-35% canopy cover; >60% ground cover.

CUP3-H Mixed Conifer Coniferous Plantation

Canopy: White Spruce, Red Pine, Dotted Hawthorn, Eastern White Cedar Sub-Canopy: Common Buckthorn, Choke Cherry, Eastern White Cedar, Dotted Hawthorn Understory: Common Buckthorn, Choke Cherry, Eastern White Cedar, Manitoba Maple Ground Cover: Dandelion (Taraxacum officinale), Choke Cherry, Wild Strawberry, Panicled Aster

• Unit located around shallow aquatic unit in Reesor Creek Corridor

• Mid-aged community with moderate degree of exotics.

• >60% canopy cover; <10% ground cover

CUT1-E (1) Red Osier Dogwood Deciduous Thicket

Canopy: Scots Pine Sub-Canopy: apple, Eastern White Cedar, Red-osier Dogwood, Black Cherry (Prunus serotina), Understory: Red-osier Dogwood, Wild Black Raspberry (Rubus occidentalis), Choke Cherry Ground Cover: Tall Goldenrod, Wild Black Raspberry, grasses, Wild Strawberry

• Located along the west side of York-Durham Line

• <10% canopy cover; >60% ground cover.


Canopy: Apple, Manitoba Maple, Scots Pine Understory: Red-osier Dogwood, Red Ash, apple Ground Cover: Solidago spp., Swamp Aster, grasses, Canada Anemone (Anemone Canadensis)

• 10% canopy cover; <60% ground cover


Canopy: Red-osier Dogwood, Common Buckthorn, Reed Canary Grass Ground cover: Kentucky Bluegrass (Poa pratensis ssp. Pratensis), Creeping Thistle (Cirsium arvense), Tall Goldenrod, English Plantain (Plantago lanceolata)

• 35-60% canopy cover; <60% ground cover

CUS1-b (1)

Exotic Successional Savannah

Canopy: Apple (Malus pumila), Manitoba Maple Sub-Canopy: Common Buckthorn, Apple Understory: Common Buckthorn, Red-osier Dogwood, Choke Cherry, Apple Ground Cover: Grasses, Common Buckthorn, Tall Goldenrod (Solidago altissima), Wild Strawberry (Fragaria virginiana), Wood Nettle (Laportea Canadensis)

• Unit located along the western fringe of the Reesor Creek corridor, at north end.

• Young community, with a moderate degree of exotics.

• 25-35% canopy cover; >60% ground cover.



ELC Code Vegetation Type Species Association Comments CUS1-b (2, 3, 4)

Exotic Successional Savannah

Canopy: Apple (Malus pumila), European Tree Willow, Manitoba Maple Sub-Canopy: Manitoba Maple, Common Buckthorn, Eastern White Cedar, White Elm Understory: Tall Goldenrod, Common Buckthorn, Manitoba Maple Ground Cover: ferns, Tall Goldenrod, Jewelweed, Wood nettle (Laportea Canadensis

• Units are located adjacent to the west side of York Durham Line, along west and east sides of Reesor Creek.

• Mid-aged units, with moderate degree of exotics.

• 25-35% canopy cover; >60% ground cover

CUM 1-b (1, 2)

Exotic Cool-season Grass Graminoid Meadow

Canopy: Manitoba Maple, Red-osier Dogwood, Common Buckthorn Understory: Smooth Brome Grass, Red-osier Dogwood, Manitoba Maple Ground Cover: grasses, Tall Goldenrod, Cow Vetch (Vicia cracca), Yellow Hawkweed (Hieracium caespitosum ssp. Caespitosum), Wild Strawberry

• Small units located adjacent to the north and west sides of MAS 2-1b

• <10-25% canopy cover

WETLAND SWD4-1 Willow Mineral

Deciduous Swamp

Canopy: Manitoba Maple, European Tree Willow, apple Sub-Canopy: Red-osier Dogwood, Manitoba Maple, Pussy Willow (Salix discolour), Peach-leaved Willow (Salix amygdaloides) Understory: Red-osier Dogwood, Reed Canary Grass, Narrow Heart-leaved Willow (Salix eriocephala), Pussy Willow, Ground Cover: Tall Goldenrod (Solidago altissima), Reed Canary Grass, Jewelweed, Bittersweet Nightshade (Solanum dulcamara)

• Small unit located along the northeast side of marsh community (MAS 2-1b)

• 25-35% canopy cover

SWT2-5 Red Osier Dogwood Mineral Thicket Swamp

Canopy Cover: European Tree Willow Understory: Red-oser Dogwood, Narrow Heart-leaved Willow Ground Cover: Variegated Scouring-rush (Equisetum variegatum ssp. Variegatum), Meadow Sedge (Carex granularis), Columbia Panic Grass (Panicum columbianum var. siccanum)

• Community located along the north side of the shallow aquatic (pond) community within Reesor Creek corridor.

MAS 2-1b Narrow-leaved Cattail Mineral Shallow Marsh

Hybrid Cattail (Typha x glauca), Reed Canary Grass, Common Duckweed (Lemna minor)

• Open water component (in middle of unit), with surrounding meadow marsh and deciduous swamp communities.

• >60% cover by cattail. • Potential amphibian breeding habitat

MAM 2-2

Reed Canary Grass Mineral Meadow Marsh

Reed Canary Grass, Red-osier Dogwood, Jewelweed, Field Horsetail (Equisetum arvense), Wild Cucumber (Echinocystis lobata)

• Meadow marsh fringe surrounding MAS 2-1b unit.

• Standing water (10 cm deep) during LGL survey (May 26, 2013)



ELC Code Vegetation Type Species Association Comments SAM1-4 Pondweed Mixed

Shallow Aquatic

Floating Pondweed (Potamogeton natans), Musk grass (Char asp.)

• Unit located within Reesor Creek corridor, possibly dug (berm noted).

• May have inlet/outlet channel connecting pond to Reesor Creek (not confirmed)

• >60% cover by pondweed



22..44..11 SSppeecciieess AAtt RRiisskk-- VVeeggeettaattiioonn

MNR and TRCA identified the presence of Butternut (Juglans cinerea), within the study limits and vicinity. This species is designated as Endangered by COSEWIC and COSSARO. One Butternut was found by LGL incidentally, while conducting wildlife surveys on site. A minimum of 5 trees have been located within the Stouffville TS study area, however the location of these trees were not be mapped due to sensitivity of data. It should be noted that the majority of these trees lies along the fringes of the Reesor Creek corridor, within at least 40m of the sewer alignment(s) centrelines. Butternut trees were not found by the arborists working along the existing Road Right-of-Ways, although it should be noted that not all trees were inventoried along York-Durham Line and Bethesda Road.

In addition to Butternut, 10 species considered of regional concern (L1-L3 TRCA ranked species) or locally rare/uncommon (Varga, 2000), have been documented by several sources within the study area and vicinity. Some of these species (i.e. White Spruce, Red Pine), are found throughout the study area, the majority of them planted.

These species are:

• Smaller Yellow Lady's Slipper (Cypripedium parviflorum var. makasin) (L3, Rare)

• Blue-eyed Grass (Sisyrinchium montanum) (L3, Uncommon)

• Columbia Panic Grass (Panicum columbianum var. siccanum) (L3)

• White Spruce (Picea glauca) (L3)

• Blue Flag (Iris versicolor) (L3)

• Fringed Black Bindweed (Polygonum cilinode) (L3, Rare)

• Floating Pondweed (Potamogeton natans) (L3, Uncommon)

• Red Pine (Pinus resinosa) (L2)

• LeConte’s Violet (Viola affinis) (Uncommon)

• Canada Plum (Prunus nigra) (Uncommon)



2.5 WILDLIFE HABITAT AND COMMUNITIES

Given that the study area lies within an ‘urban fringe’, remnant natural features comprise the majority of the wildlife habitat. The most prominent natural feature is associated with the Reesor Creek corridor. This corridor supports contiguous habitat, through the northern half of the study area, but becomes somewhat fragmented at the south end, where the creek flows through rural residential properties. As noted in Section 2.4, habitat comprising the Reesor Creek corridor is generally comprised of mixed swamp (White Cedar/hardwood), deciduous, mixed or coniferous forest communities, cultural plantation along the western side of the corridor, with cultural thicket, savannah and meadow habitats along the fringe of the corridor. Some natural habitat (small forest/plantation units) are also present adjacent to Tenth Line.

The creek corridor likely serves as habitat to resident species and also functions as a corridor for wildlife movement between larger tracts of natural habitat located to the north and to the south. Reesor Creek and corridor has been identified as a significant corridor, as part of the Greenlands System for the Stouffville Secondary Plan area (Town of Whitchurch Stouffville, 2000). In addition, some small scale movement may also occur along the east-west oriented hedgerows in the area present between the existing agricultural fields, linking the Reesor Creek corridor to another prominent natural heritage feature, the Stouffville Forest, located to the west.

The wildlife community using the natural features on site are expected to be common species found in urban fringe habitats including skunk, raccoon, grey squirrel, in addition to Coyote, Red Fox and White-tailed Deer which also likely utilize the area. Incidental observations of species noted during LGL’s spring 2013 field work, include, American Goldfinch (Carduelis tristis), Black and White Warbler (Mniotilta varia), Black-capped Chickadee (Poecile atricapillus), Blue Jay (Cyanocitta cristata), Canada Goose (Branta Canadensis), Swallow sp., Great Blue Heron (Ardea Herodias), Red-winged Blackbird (Agelaius phoeniceus), White-tailed Deer (Odocoileus virginianus) and Yellow Warbler (Dendroica petechial). This list is by no way exhaustive, as formal wildlife surveys (i.e. breeding bird surveys, amphibian calling surveys) were not conducted as part of the scope of this study. A wildlife list, including OBBA results for the vicinity, including rankings, is found in Appendix A.

Surrounding the study area, the Goodwood-Glasglow Wetland Complex is known to provide habitat for nesting colonial waterbirds and is an active feeding area for Great Blue Heron (Huizer et al., 1987). This complex also provides winter cover for wildlife, and is of particular significance for Deer (J. Bennett, MNR Maple, referenced) (Huizer et al., 1987). Fish spawning and rearing is also present here (J. Bennet, MNR, Maple, referenced) (Huizer et al., 1987).



22..55..11 WWiillddlliiffee SSppeecciieess ooff CCoonnsseerrvvaattiioonn CCoonncceerrnn

2.5.1.1 Species at Risk

No records of wildlife Species at Risk were identified by NHIC (Biodiversity Explorer), within the study area and within 1- 2km of these limits. However, one species, Henslow’s Sparrow (Ammodramus henslowii ) was documented in 1970, within at least 2.5 km east of the study limits (NHIC, 2012), possibly using large tracts of fields surrounding the Goodwood Glasgow PSW. This species is listed as Endangered by COSEWIC and COSSARO, and requires dense, tall grasses, and thatch, or decaying plant material, for cover and is found most often in moist old fields or grassland habitat. It is unlikely that this species exists within the Stouffville TS study area or vicinity, given that the majority of fields are actively farmed and where cultural meadow exists, appears to be dominated by non-graminoid species.

MNR has recently identified the presence of two wildlife species at risk (SAR) within the study area and vicinity that are regulated under the provincial Endangered Species Act (ESA), 2007. Bobolink (Dolichonyx oryzivorus) and Eastern Meadowlark (Sturnella magna) have been identified; both species designated as Threatened by COSEWIC and COSSARO, and regulated under ESA, both having habitat regulations. In addition, Bird Studies Canada Point Count information shows the presence of Barn Swallow (Hirundo rustica) (also Threatened), east of the study limits (2008 record). This species is protected under ESA, and is currently provided “general habitat protection” in addition to protection of individuals from harm, harassment, etc.

Potential habitat for Bobolink and Eastern Meadowlark exists within the agricultural fields and cultural meadow habitats abutting the west side of the Reesor Creek corridor. Smaller units of agricultural land occur on the east side of the creek, but may be less suitable habitat given their limited size and shape. Barn swallow use similar types of habitat to forage and breed within under the eaves or inside of sheds, barns, bridges and other structures. The presence of these birds within the agricultural fields in particular, during any given year, will be dictated by the type of crop grown. As stated in MNR’s letter, these species may receive protection under the Endangered Species Act 2007, and thus a permit may be required if the work proposed could cause harm to these species or their habitat. Barn swallow use agricultural field habitat to forage and breed most often within manmade structures (i.e. under the eaves or inside of sheds and barns and under bridges).

In addition, Eastern Wood Pewee has been recorded within the study area and is listed as Special Concern by COSEWIC (recently uplisted species.). This species could be uplisted in the future under the Provincial ESA, and is slated for review by COSSARO in the near future.



2.5.1.2 SAR Habitat Screening

LGL completed a SAR bird screening survey on accessible lands, on May 26, 2013. Surveys were focused in vegetation unit CUM 1-2 (see Appendix C) and other fields within the study area, to confirm the limits and extent of potentially suitable habitat and to complete a review of potential use where suitable habitat was noted. The study area was searched for available habitat and the presence of grassland birds, namely, Bobolink, Eastern Meadowlark and Barn Swallow. In agricultural fields, the type of crop was documented, and general species composition and height of grasses and forbes (in meadow habitats), was documented. Habitat notes are found below in Table 5 and the location of the fields are shown on Figure 2. Photographs of the fields are found in Appendix B. No SAR birds were documented within the study area during this survey. One barn exists within the study area (south of field 4) and although no SAR birds were noted foraging in the vicinity, and formal nesting survey within the barn was not conducted. It is possible that other potential nesting habitat exists for Barn Swallow within barns/structures on the rural properties.

Table 5: Summary of SAR bird Field Observations

Field # Habitat Characteristics Size (approx.)

Birds Observed

1 Anthropogenic- Disturbed, fallow field with debris and fill piles. Future Subdivision lands.

1.96 ha No birds observed

2 Mosaic of cultural meadow habitat with hedgerows/pockets of coniferous growth, adjacent to large online pond. 60% grasses/ 40% forbs (goldenrod, dandelion, vetch), average 40 cm high, thatch present. Future Subdivision lands.

2.7 ha Song Sparrow, American Goldfinch.

3 Cultural meadow with some pocket of Scots Pine in middle, between Reesor Creek corridor and wooded area. Regenerating ash noted in unit, as well as some dogwood, honeysuckle. 40-90% grasses, ~40-75 cm high. Forbs include goldenrod, milkweed. Some fill in middle of unit. Future Subdivision lands.

4.9 ha Song Sparrow, American Goldfinch, Black-capped Chickadee, Catbird (along edge)

4 Cultural meadow (recently fallow- nursery property). Grasses dominant, average 30-40 cm high. Field lies adjacent to small wetland pocket. Barn located south of field.

3 ha Yellow Warbler, Red-winged Blackbird, American Goldfinch, Song Sparrow.

5 Cultural meadow located between Reesor Creek and York-Durham Line. 50% grasses/ 50% forbs (clover, dandelion, goldenrod) with limited thatch. 40 cm- 60 cm high vegetation. Field may be harvested yearly.

1.45 ha Song Sparrow



2.5.1.3 Regionally Rare Species

In addition to the species noted above, 10 species considered of regional concern (L1-L3 TRCA ranked species) have been documented by several sources within the study limits.

These species are:

• Northern Spring Peeper (Pseudacris crucifer crucifer)

• Wood Frog (Lithobates sylvatica)

• Black-billed Cuckoo (Coccyzus erythropthalmus)

• Vesper Sparrow (Pooecetes gramineus)

• Black and White Warbler (Mniotilta varia)

3.0 PROJECT DESCRIPTION

The project involves the construction of a new sewer between just north of Bethesda Road to south of Main Street, along the eastern boundary of the Town of Whitchurch-Stouffville, along the border of York Region and Durham Region limits. A description of route alternatives 1A, 1B, 1C and alternatives 2A, 2B is outlined below. All of the segments are being considered for a combination of open cut, and tunnelling and the alignment of these alternatives are subject to change as the EA progresses. Figure 2 shows the location of each sewer alignment. At the time of the writing of this report, these are the most current alignments.

Section A extends from 600m south of Main Street, to between 720m- 1 km north; Section B extends from Section A terminus to Bethesda Road, and Section C extends from Section B to approximately 540m north of Bethesda Road.

Alternative 1A- Follows along the west side of York Durham Line, crossing Reesor Creek once (Crossing 1), and turns west approximately 730m from Main Street, following an existing hydro corridor/farmline/future subdivision road, crossing another existing crossing of Reesor Creek (Crossing 2).

Alternative 2A- Also follows along west side of York Durham Line, and turns west along Main Street, the north, following Cam Fella Boulevard through existing subdivision, ending in Field 2.

Alternative 1B- Connects with Alternative 1A, before it turns west at the hydro corridor. Follows the west side of York Durham Line, crossing Reesor Creek (Crossing 3) to Bethesda Road.



Alternative 2B- From Alternative 2A, will route through existing fields through the Phase 2 development area (future subdivision lands), then through existing agricultural fields, encroaching a wetland pocket and rural wooded area, ending at Alternative 1C at Bethesda Road.

Alternative 1C- extends from the terminus of Alternative 2B or 1B, following along the west side of York-Durham Line to just south of the railway crossing/ north end of the GO Station property.

3.1 PRELIMINARY IMPACT ASSESSMENT AND CONSTRAINT ANALYSIS

Both direct and direct impacts may occur due to the proposed sewer expansion construction. Direct impacts may include removal of vegetation and disturbance to wildlife habitat and communities due to construction activities. Direct and indirect impacts are also possible to Reesor’s Creek, if crossed or encroached, particularly if open cut methods are used.

Given that Reesor Creek and its vegetated corridor is the most prominent natural feature in the area, it would be preferable to avoid directly impacting this vegetated corridor. If a crossing of this corridor is required, the existing hydro corridor crossing/farmlane/future subdivision road would be considered an opportunity (Alternative 1A), as it has already been disturbed. Reesor Creek flows in close proximity of York Durham Line in a few locations. These areas would also be considered constraints, as these channel reaches would appear to encroach on the proposed sewer alternative present along the road (Alternatives 1A, 1B), and may result in additional challenges or higher mitigation requirements in order to safely construct the sewer alignment.

Other natural habitat constraints in the study limits include a marsh located at the northwest corner of the Reesor Creek corridor. Although it could not be confirmed if this marsh supports amphibian habitat, it is more than likely a potential amphibian breeding area. This wetland (marsh/swamp) contributes flow Reesor Creek; therefore it important from a hydrological perspective.

If the creek and associated natural area is deemed unavoidable, the preferred alternative should consider directional drilling or trenchless construction methodology under crossing(s) of Reesor Creek and associated riparian habitat as well as any wetland communities crossed. Further consideration should be given to siting of the sewer outside of the 100 year meander belt of the creek, as creek channel migration over time may undermine the sewer, thereby requiring sewer rehabilitation works or protection of infrastructure to prevent undermining from the creek meandering. It is standard practice for conservation authorities to recommend avoidance of the 100 year meander belt as hardening of creeks may deflect erosion and create problems elsewhere. Groundwater influences exist within Reesor Creek, and therefore potential groundwater impacts (recharge/discharge zones) should be considered during the route evaluation stage. Mitigation measures, including minimizing longitudinal groundwater movement along



the pipe, should be considered through the detailed design impact analysis. Although MNR has indicated that Reesor Creek is not considered Regulated habitat for Redside Dace, it is important that stringent mitigation measures be employed to protect the creek’s sensitive coolwater and coldwater fish community present downstream, where Redside Dace and Brook Trout have been captured.

The smaller watercourses crossings (crossings ‘4-6’) impacted by various sewer alignments, appear less sensitive and could be crossed using open cut methods, provided that they could crossed in the ‘dry’ or during low flow conditions, and would not result in significant riparian losses.

The route evaluation will consider the presence of potential habitat for SAR and regionally and locally flora and fauna species. However, further work will be required to determine if the preferred alternative will impact the identified Species at Risk (Butternut, Eastern Meadowlark, Barn Swallow) known to exist, or have the potential to exist within the vicinity. Although not observed in 2013 surveys, Bobolink, Eastern Meadowlark and Barn Swallow are known to be present within the vicinity, and given that their presence could change yearly based on the management of the fields in the study limits, additional surveys will be required to determine their presence within the vicinity of the construction zone at detail design or implementation of the project. A detailed Butternut survey should be completed on site at the detail design stage as well. If a butternut tree is found to be located within 25m of the proposed construction disturbance zone, a Butternut Health Assessment (BHA) by a certified Assessor will be required.

Once the preferred alignment and construction impacts are known, and all detailed species and habitat surveys are completed, an Information Gathering Form (IGF) should be completed and distributed to the MNR, so that they can provide feedback on the requirement for permits required under the Endangered Species Act.

As the study progresses and a preliminary preferred alternative is determined, site specific mitigation measures will be developed to protect both terrestrial and aquatic environment. Efforts to reduce impacts through vegetation protection measures, silt/sediment controls to protect aquatic habitat and appropriate timing windows to avoid impacting aquatic and wildlife habitat and communities will be employed. In areas where urban trees or streetscape trees may be impacted, the PlanDesign Report Mitigation measures should be reviewed.



4.0 SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS

The major environmental constraints identified in the study area have been identified as:

• Reesor Creek – which traverses the study area north to south located west of York-Durham Line, it is a well-treed riparian corridor that likely serves as a wildlife movement corridor. Three existing crossings are present; 2 along York Durham Line and one by an existing hydro corridor/farmlane/future subdivision road. The creek supports habitat for coolwater/coldwater fish communities.

• Various woodlots/wide hedgerows have been identified outside of the riparian corridors including adjacent to 10th line, north of the Stouffville Flea Market (although may be partially impacted by future subdivision development), immediately northwest of the Reesor Creek corridor at the north west corner of 10th Line and Bethesda Sideroad, and along the west side of York Durham Line. These wooded areas are generally associated with existing rural/commercial development:

• Constraints are present along York-Durham Line. A dense hedgerow of mainly coniferous trees is present adjacent to York-Durham Line and meandering reaches of Reesor Creek lies within close proximity of the road in several locations.

• There are no ANSIs, PSWs or ESAs identified within the study area, although the Goodwood Glasgow PSW and Stouffville Forest ESA lies just outside of the area.

• A total of 4 Species At Risk, Butternut, Eastern Meadowlark, Bobolink and Barn Swallow are likely to existing within the vicinity of the study limits; Butternut have been confirmed.

• A number of regionally/locally rare flora and fauna have been identified in the study area.

The evaluation of sewer alignment alternatives will be completed once the alignments have been refined, and as more information becomes available through additional public and agency consultation. All available natural environment information will be considered for the evaluation. An impact assessment and mitigation plan will be completed on the preferred sewer alignment chosen.



5.0 REFERENCES

Ecotech 2004. Functional Servicing Study. Northeast Quadrant, Community of Stouffville, Town of Whitchurch-Stouffville, September 2004.

Hoffman, D.W. & N.R. Richards. Soil Survey of York County.

Lee, H.T., W.D. Bakowsky, J. Riley, J. Bowles, M. Puddister, P. Uhlig and S. McMurray. 1998. Ecological Land Classification for Southern Ontario: First Approximation and Its Application. Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources, Southcentral Science Section, Science Department and Transfer Branch. SCSS Field Guide FG-02 North Bay, Ontario.225 pp.

LGL Limited. 2007. GO Transit North Stouffville Station. Fisheries and Benthic Invertebrate Assessment.

LGL Limited. 2006. Stouffville Water Supply Class EA Schedule B Natural Sciences Investigation. Prepared for MACVIRO CONSULTANTS INC.

Ministry of Municipal Affairs and Housing. 2002. Oak Ridges Moraine Conservation Plan. Accessed on January 21, 2012 from website http://www.mah.gov.on.ca/Page1707.aspx

Ministry of Municipal Affairs and Housing (2005). The Greenbelt Plan. Accessed on September 22, 2009 from website http://www.mah.gov.on.ca/Page189.aspx#intro.

Ministry of Natural Resources. Personal Communication via email with Danielle Aulenback, February 26, 2013; January 28, 2013.

Ministry of Natural Resources. 2012. Biodiversity Explorer Database. Element Occurrence, and Natural Area Query https://www.biodiversityexplorer.mnr.gov.on.ca/nhicWEB/mainSubmit.do

Ministry of Natural Resources. 1999. Wetland Evaluation Records of the Provincially Significant Goodwood-Glasgow Wetland Complex. Unpublished report on file at the OMNR Aurora District Office.

Toronto Region Conservation Authority. 2003. A Watershed Plan- Duffins Creek and Carruther's Creek. Accessed from website http://trca.on.ca/dotAsset/25961.pdf

Toronto and Region Conservation Authority and Ministry of Natural Resources. 1992. The Rouge River Fisheries Management Plan. Parts I (Management Strategy) and II (Assessment and Rehabilitation).

Town of Whitchurch Stouffville. 2000. Office Consolidation of the Town of Whitchurch-Stouffville Official Plan http://www.townofws.com/official_plan.asp

Varga, S., D. Leadbeater, J. Webber, J. Kaiser, B. Crins, J. Kamstra, D. Banville, E. Ashley, G. Miller, C. Kingsley, C. Jacobsen, K. Mewa, L. Tebbym E, Mosley and E. Zajc. 2000. Distribution and Status of the Vascular Plants of the Greater Toronto Area. Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources. Aurora, Ontario. 103 pp..

Watson and Associates Economists Ltd. 2013. Town of Whitchurch-Stouffville Growth Management Strategy.

http://www.townofws.com/official_plan.asp



APPENDIX A WORKING WILDLIFE CHECKLIST

Appendix A: Working Wildlife list for Stouffville Trunk Sewer Study Area and vicintiy

G Rank S Rank COSEWIC SARA SARO FWCA MBCA TRCA TRCA 2009

OBBA 2007 LGL 2013

Amphibian SPPE Hylidae Pseudacris crucifer Spring Peeper G5 S5 L2 xAmphibian GRFR Ranidae Rana clamitans Green Frog G5 S5 L4 xAmphibian WOFR Ranidae Rana sylvatica Wood Frog G5 S5 L2 xBird AMCR Corvidae Corvus brachyhrynchos American Crow G5 S5B L5 xBird AMGO Fringillidae Carduelis tristis American Goldfinch G5 S5B X L5 x xBird AMRO Turdidae Turdus migratorius American Robin G5 S5B X L5Bird BAWW Parulidae Mniotilta varia Black and White Warbler G5 S5B X L3 xBird BARS Hirundinidae Hirundo rustica Barn Swallow G5 S4B THR THR X L5 xBird BBCU Cuculidae Coccyzus erythropthalmus Black-billed Cuckoo G5 S5B X L3 x xBird BCCH Paridae Poecile atricapillus Black-capped Chickadee G5 S5 X L5 xBird BLJA Corvidae Cyanocitta cristata Blue Jay G5 S5 P L5 x xBird BHCO Icteridae Molothrus ater Brown-headed Cowbird G5 S4B L5 xBird CAGO Anatidae Branta canadensis Canada Goose G5 S5 X L5 x xBird CEWA Bombycillidae Bombycilla cedrorum Cedar Waxwing G5 S5B X L5 xBird COYE Parulidae Geothlypis trichas Common Yellowthroat G5 S5B X L4 xBird EAKI Tyrannidae Tyrannus tyrannus Eastern Kingbird G5 S4B X L5 xBird EAME Icteridae Sturnella magna Eastern Meadowlark G5 S4B THR THR X L4 xBird EAWP Tyrannidae Contopus virens Eastern Wood Pewee G5 S4B SC X L4 xBird EUST Sturnidae Sturnus vulgaris European Starling G5 SNA L+ xBird GRCA Mimidae Dumetella carolinensis Gray Catbird G5 S4B X L4 x xBird GRAJ Corvidae Perisoreus canadensis Gray Jay G5 S5 PBird GTBH Ardedidae Ardea herodias Great Blue Heron G5 S4 X L3 xBird GCFL Tyrannidae Myiarchus crinitus Great Crested Flycatcher G5 S4B X L4 xBird GREG Ardedidae Ardea alba Great Egret G5 S2B XBird GRHE Ardedidae Butorides virescens Green Heron G5 S4B L3 xBird HOSP Fringillidae Passer domesticus House Sparrow G5 SNA L+ xBird INBU Cardinalidae Passerina cyanea Indigo Bunting G5 S4B X L4 xBird NRWS Hirundinidae Stelgidopteryx serripennis Northern Rough-winged Swallow G5 S4B X L4 xBird RBNU Sittidae Sitta canadensis Red-breasted Nuthatch G5 S5 X L4 xBird REVI Vireonidae Vireo olivaceus Red-eyed Vireo G5 S5B X L4 xBird RWBL Icteridae Agelaius phoeniceus Red-winged Blackbird G5 S4 L5 x xBird SAVS Emberizidae Passerculus sandwichensis Savannah Sparrow G5 S4B X L4 x xBird TRES Hirundinidae Tachycineta bicolor Tree Swallow G5 S4B X L4 xBird WIFL Tyrannidae Empidonax traillii Willow Flycatcher G5 S5B X L4 xBird YEWA Parulidae Dendroica petechia Yellow Warbler G5 S5B X L5 xMammals SNMO Talpidae Condylura cristata Star-nosed Mole G5 S5 xMammals WTDE Cervidae Odocoileus virginianus White-tailed Deer G5 S5 G L4 x

Legend

RANKINGS SOURCESType Fauna Code Family Name Scientific Name Common Name

COSEWIC ‐ status assigned by the Committee on the Status of Endangered Wildlife in Canada; NAR not at risk; THR threatened; END endangered; EXT extirpated; SC special concern; DD data deficientMNR ‐ status assigned by MNR‐ NAR not at risk; THR threatened; END‐R endangered regulated; END endangered; EXT extinct; EXP extirpated; SC special concern; DD data deficientSARA Species at Risk Act ‐ Schedule 1 Official list of Wildlife Species at Risk; THR threatened; END endangered; EXT extirpated; SC special concernSARO Species at Risk in Ontario ‐ END endangered, EXP extirpated; THR threatened; SC special concernFWCA Fish and Wildlife Conservation Act, P = protected; G ‐ gameMBCAMigratory Birds Convention Act, MBCA = regulateTRCA Toronto Region Conservation Authoirity L‐ranked species ‐ L5‐ Generally secure, may be a conservation concern in a few specific situations. Contributes to natural cover; L4‐ Generally secure in rural matrix, of conservation concern in the urban matrix; L3‐ of regional concern; restricted in occurence and/or requires specific site conditions; generally occurs in natural r rather than cultural areas.; L2‐ of regional concern; typcially occurs in high‐quality natural areas and under highly specific site conditions; probably at risk in the Toronto Area; L1‐ of regional concern in TRCA jurisdiction due to rarity, stringent habitat needs and/or threat to habitat; L+ ‐Community defined by alien species., contributes to natural cover at least to some extent.S Rank ‐ SX extirpated; SH possibly extirpated; S1 critically imperiled; S2 imperiled; S3 vulnerable; S4 apparently secure; S5 secure; SNR unranked; SU unrankable; SNA not applicable; S#S# range of uncertainty in rank; C captive; S? not ranked yet; SA accidental, SAB breeding accidental; SE exotic; SR reported; SX apparently extirpated; SZ not of practicalconservation concern; SZB breeding migrants/vagrant; SZN non‐breeding migrant/vagrant1‐3)G‐Rank ‐ G1 extremely rare; G2 very rare; G3 rare to uncommon; G4 common; G5 very common; GH historic; GU status uncertain; GX globally extinct; ? Inexact rank; G? unranked; Q subspecies questionable; T subspecies.

Page 1 of 1



APPENDIX B REPRESENTATIVE PHOTOGRAPHS

PHOTO APPENDIX

Natural Environment

TA8256Aug 2013

Photo 1: Looking north along the east side of York Durham Line, near southern boundary of study area.

Photo 2: Same location as photo 1- old orchard habitat on east side of road.

Photo 3: Looking north along west side of York Durham Line, along west side, in vicinity of Alts 1A/2A.

Photo 4: Existing farm at the SW corner of York Durham Line and Main Street. Small cattail dominated wetland present near Main Street.

PHOTO APPENDIX

Natural Environment

TA8256Aug 2013

Photo 5: Phragmites (invasive species) dominatedditchline at NW corner of Main Street/York Durham Line, draining to Cattail marsh on south side (farm property).

Photo 6: Looking north along east side of York Durham Line- showing choked Phragmites ditchline.

Photo 7: Reesor Creek (south crossing of York Durham Line)- looking downstream (east) from road.

Photo 8: Reesor Creek (south crossing of York Durham Line), looking upstream from road.

PHOTO APPENDIX

Natural Environment

TA8256Aug 2013

Photo 9: Reesor Creek (Crossing 1), looking at culvert inlet.

Photo 10: Reesor Creek (Crossing 1), looking north on upstream (west) side of York Durham Line.

Photo 11: Reesor Creek (Crossing 1), looking south at riparian habitat south of crossing, along west side of York Durham Line.

Photo 12: Reesor Creek (Crossing 1), looking upstream at typical channel section, located approx. 25m upstream of culvert.

PHOTO APPENDIX

Natural Environment

TA8256Aug 2013

Photo 13: Crossing 4- localized drainage (Phragmites dominated wetland pocket), draining to Reesor Creek via CSP culvert (some evidence of groundwater inputs.)

Photo 14: Looking at west side of York-Durham Line-at Crossing 4, with surrounding cedar forest (north view)

Photo 15: Showing dense cedar hedgerow adjacent to York Durham Line (photo taken from plowed field), south of Webb Road.

Photo 16: Row of Red Pine and Scots Pine adjacent to west side of York Durham Line, north of Webb Road.

PHOTO APPENDIX

Natural Environment

TA8256Aug 2013

Photo 17: Small (~1.45 ha) field located between Reesor Creek and York Durham Line (Cultural meadow habitat-Field 5).

Photo 18: Reesor Creek, meander within vicinity of York-Durham Line (bank within 4m of road embankment toe)

Photo 19: Wooded habitat along west side of York Durham Line, located within approx. 250m south of Bethesda Road.

Photo 20: Another reach of Reesor Creek located in close proximity to York Durham Line , located approx. 120m south of Bethesda Road.

PHOTO APPENDIX

Natural Environment

TA8256Aug 2013

Photo 21: Reesor Creek (Crossing 3) of York Durham Line), looking upstream from road.

Photo 22: Reesor Creek (Crossing 3) showing culvert inlet on Dec 14, 2012

Photo 23: Reesor Creek (Crossing 3), looking downstream from culvert on Dec 14, 2013, showing flooded conditions.

Photo 24: Reesor Creek (Crossing 3), looking downstream from culvert on May 26, 2013.

PHOTO APPENDIX

Natural Environment

TA8256Aug 2013

Photo 25: Reesor Creek (Crossing 3), looking north at riparian habitat on north side of creek (Dec 14, 2012).

Photo 26: Reesor Creek (Crossing 3), looking south at riparian habitat on south side of creek on Dec 14, 2012.

Photo 27: Reesor Creek (Crossing 3) culvert inlet, showing lower flow conditions on May 26, 2013.

Photo 28: Crossing 5- Drainage from GO Station lands (via storm outlet to CSP under Bethesda Rd,). Ditch reach west of CSP outlet.

PHOTO APPENDIX

Natural Environment

TA8256Aug 2013

Photo 29: Crossing 5- moderate gradient channel outletting to Reesor Creek approximately 12m downstream of York-Durham Line.

Photo 30: Looking north at entrance of ‘moderate gradient’ channel (Crossing 5), showing flooded conditions on Dec 14, 2012.

Photo 31: Pond located on GO Station Property, located on the west side of York Durham Line, near north end of study limits (May 26, 2013)

Photo 32: Linear wetland feature connect Go Station pond and Irrigation Pond/wetland upstream on the Granite Club property (May 26, 2013)

PHOTO APPENDIX

Natural Environment

TA8256Aug 2013

Photo 33: Crossing 6- ditchline adjacent to the west side of York Durham Line (confirmed to support baitfish and amphibian habitat) within vicinity of GO Station pond. (May 26, 2013)

Photo 34: Crossing 6- ditchline adjacent to east side of York Durham Line, adjacent to Granite Club property (May 26, 2013)

Photo 35: Irrigation pond on Granite Club property (Dec 14, 2012).

PHOTO APPENDIX

Natural Environment

TA8256Aug 2013

Photo 36: Crossing 2- Looking west, across existing hydro corridor/lane crossing), dominated by invasives-Japanese Knotweed, Black Locust)

Photo 37: Reesor Creek (Crossing 2) showing flooded conditions, looking upstream on Jan 13, 2013.

Photo 38: Reesor Creek (Crossing 2) - habitat immediately upstream (showing seepy east bank, woody debris instream).

Photo 39: Crossing 2-existing dual CSP outlet (~900mm), with minimal freeboard, during flood on Jan 13, 2013.

PHOTO APPENDIX

Natural Environment

TA8256Aug 2013

Photo 40: Crossing 2- dual CSP inlet during May 26 survey- woody debris blocking inlet.

Photo 41: Crossing 2- habitat immediately downstream of crossing, through wetland riparian.

Photo 42: Crossing 2- looking upstream of dual CSP outlet, showing bend immediately downstream (May 26, 2013).

Photo 43: Black Locust Plantation along south side of existing hydro corridor (CUP 2-3).

PHOTO APPENDIX

Natural Environment

TA8256Aug 2013

Photo 44: Online pond located downstream of hydro corridor (OAO-1).

Photo 45: Hydro corridor looking east in between Units CUP 3-2 and CUP 2-3.

Photo 46: CUM 1-2, looking south, from south of hydrocorridor (Field 2).

Photo 47: Fill adjacent to Flea Market property, within CUM 1-2 (between Fields 1 and 2).

PHOTO APPENDIX

Natural Environment

TA8256Aug 2013

Photo 48: CUM 1-2 , looking northeast, north of hydro corridor (Field 3).

Photo 49: Fallow field (Field 4) with wetland (MAM/MAS) in background, looking north.

Photo 50: MAS 2-1b located along the northwest corner of the Reesor Creek corridor, south of Bethesda Road.



APPENDIX C ESG VEGETATION COMMUNITY MAPPING



APPENDIX D MNR CORRESPONDENCE

1

From: ESA Aurora (MNR) <[email protected]>Sent: Monday, January 28, 2013 9:35 AMTo: Erin BlenkhornSubject: RE: Natural Heritage Information Request- Stouffville Trunk Sewer Attachments: LGL_Stouffville Trunk Sewer_Jan_28_2013.pdf; Information Gathering Form.pdf; IGF_Guide.pdf;

AuroraInfoRequest.pdf

Ms Blenkhorn

Please find attached a screening letter in response to your Species at Risk Data Request. More information is required on yourproject to determine whether the proposed works would require an authorization under the Endangered Species Act. This information can be provided via the attached information Gathering Form.

Fish dot records can be obtained from our office by contacting Karen Golby at [email protected], 905-713 7403. You can also contact the local CA for fish habitat information, and management plans Natural Heritage information can be obtained by accessing LIO www.mnr.gov.on.ca/en/Business/LIO/index.html and the NHIC http://nhic.mnr.gov.on.ca/nhic_.cfm

For future Data requests please used the attached Aurora Information Request Form. Please feel free to contact me should you have any further questions

Regards, Danielle AulenbackAssistant Species at Risk BiologistMinistry of Natural Resources50 Bloomington Rd. WestAurora, ON, L4G 0L8 Ph: 905-713-7732E-mail: [email protected]

From: Erin Blenkhorn [mailto:[email protected]]Sent: 21-Dec-12 11:19 AM To: Thompson, Melinda (MNR) Cc: Golby, Karen (MNR) Subject: Natural Heritage Information Request- Stouffville Trunk Sewer

Hello Melinda,

I have attached an information request letter for a project that LGL Limited is working on in the Stouffville area. We arerequesting the standard aquatic and terrestrial data, as well as Species At Risk information for the Study Area and vicinity. Thisis an EA for a trunk sewer extension within the NE quadrant of Stouffville. I have cc/d Karen on this request as well, in case thisrequest needs to be redistributed to other staff.

IF you have any questions/concerns, please do not hesitate to follow up with me. A similar background request has been sent toSuzanne Bevan at the TRCA. Thank you in advance for your help!

Happy Holidays

Sincerely,

2

Erin Blenkhorn, B.Sc. Aquatic Biologist

LGL Limitedenvironmental research associatesVisit us on the web at www.lgl.com

445 Thompson Drive, Unit 2Cambridge Ontario N1T 2K7Tel 519 622 3300 Fax 519 622 3310

Southern Region Aurora District Office 50 Bloomington Road West Aurora, ON L4G 0L8 Ministry of Ministere des Natural Resources Richesses Naturelles

January 28, 2013 Erin Blenkhorn, Aquatic Biologist LGL Limited 445 Thompson Drive, Unit 2 Cambridge Ontario N1T 2K7 Tel 519-622-3300 [email protected] Re: Stouffville Sub-Trunk #1 Sanitary Sewer EA Data Request Dear Ms. Blenkhorn, In your email dated December 21, 2012 you requested information on natural heritage features and element occurrences occurring on or adjacent to the above mentioned location. There are Species at Risk recorded for your study area. We have records of Butternut, Bobolink, and Eastern Meadowlark. These species may receive protection under the Endangered Species Act 2007, and thus a permit may be required if the work you are proposing could cause harm to these species or their habitat. Please provide additional information on your proposal to our office, and we will assess it to determine whether a permit under the ESA 2007 is required for the works to proceed. Natural heritage features recorded in the vicinity for your area include the Duffins Headwaters Provincially significant ANSI, Environmentally Significant Areas, Stouffville Marsh, Goodwood Glasgow Wetland Complex, and other identified wetlands. This species at risk information is highly sensitive and is not intended for any person or project unrelated to this undertaking. Please do not include any specific information in reports that will be available for public record. As you complete your fieldwork in these areas, please report all information related to any species at risk to the NHIC and to our office. This will assist with updating our database. If you have any questions or comments, please do not hesitate to contact me at [email protected] or 905-713-7425 Sincerely,

Melinda Thompson Species at Risk Biologist Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources, Aurora District

mailto:[email protected]

From: ESA Aurora (MNR) <[email protected]>Sent: Tuesday, February 26, 2013 2:11 PMTo: Erin BlenkhornSubject: RE: Stouffville Trunk Sewer Screening

Hi Erin,

Based on our records Reesor Creek is not considered to be Regulated habitat for Redside Dace.

Please contact me should you have any further questions.

Regards, Danielle AulenbackAssistant Species at Risk BiologistMinistry of Natural Resources50 Bloomington Rd. WestAurora, ON, L4G 0L8 Ph: 905-713-7732E-mail: [email protected]

From: Erin Blenkhorn [mailto:[email protected]]Sent: 1-Feb-13 9:59 AM To: Aulenback, Danielle (MNR) Subject: Stouffville Trunk Sewer Screening

Hello Danielle,

Thank you very much for the information you sent to LGL on January 28, with regards to the background information request Isent with regards to the Stouffville Trunk Sewer study area.We are currently at the EA stage, therefore we cannot fill out the IGFs accurately, given that a sewer alignment have not yetbeen determined. The information on Species at Risk in the area is very helpful though.

Is it possible to provide feedback on whether Reesor Creek is considered Regulated habitat for Redside Dace within the limits ofour study area? You didn’t mention Redside Dace, however we know that there are historical records downstream, and wouldlike to know if these reaches would be considered as ‘contributing’ or ‘recovery’ habitat.

Thank you for sending on the standard data request form. I was not aware that this Form existed.

Thanks for your time and I look forward to hearing from you.

Sincerely,

Erin Blenkhorn, B.Sc. Aquatic Biologist

LGL Limitedenvironmental research associatesVisit us on the web at www.lgl.com

445 Thompson Drive, Unit 2Cambridge Ontario N1T 2K7

1

From: Andrea Carroll <[email protected]>Sent: Thursday, May 23, 2013 3:04 PMTo: Erin BlenkhornSubject: FW: Fish DataAttachments: Sub-Trunk #1 Fisheries Locations.jpg; Sub_Trunk #1 Fisheries Data.xls; 48525 TNH Data - Sub-

Trunk 1 Sanitary Sewer - January 15, 2013.jpg

Hi Erin,

Please see attached data from the TRCA.

Andrea

From: Suzanne Bevan [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: Thursday, May 23, 2013 1:50 PM To: Andrea Carroll Subject: Fish Data

Please ensure you contact the Ministry of Natural Resources too.

Suzanne Bevan | Senior Planner, Environmental Assessment Planning |Toronto and Region Conservation | 5 Shoreham Drive | Toronto, ON | M3N 1S4 | 416-661-6600 ext. 5759 | [email protected] | www.trca.on.ca |

Please consider the environment before printing this email

From: Andrea Carroll <[email protected]>To: Suzanne Bevan <[email protected]>, Date: 05/22/2013 04:41 PMSubject: RE: Letter from Suzanne Bevan regarding CFN 48525 - Response to Notice of Commencement for the Sub-Trunk #1 Sanitary Sewer, Whitchurch-Stouffville

Hi Suzanne,

Please forward the GIS information and information requested in the attached E-mail by LGL by the end of this week (Friday March 24, 2013).

The Town just informed us that payment was sent to the TRCA on March 19, 2013 (a copy of the transmittal is attached) and our project is being delayed as a result of obtaining this information.

Please let us know if you anticipate any delays in providing this information.

Andrea

draft natural heritage report - whitchurch …€¦ · aft natural heritage report st. ... in order...

Documents