HomeMy Public PortalAboutAppendix D - Natural Heritage Study - AODA
Appendix D:
Natural Heritage Study
23 HERRELL AVENUE, BARRIE ON L4N 6T5
WWW.BIRKSNHC.CA
Prepared By:
Natural Heritage Assessment
Town of The Blue Mountains
Drainage Master Plan
Project No. 04-039-2020
September 26, 2022
i
September 26, 2022
Tatham Engineering Limited
115 Sandford Fleming Drive, Suite 200
Collingwood, Ontario
L9Y 5A6
Attention: Daniel Twigger, Tatham Engineering Limited, Senior Engineer
RE: BIRKS NHC 04-039-2020
Natural Heritage Assessment
Town of The Blue Mountains Drainage Master Plan
Dear Mr. Twigger:
Thank you for retaining Birks Natural Heritage Consultants Inc. (Birks NHC) to prepare a Natural
Heritage Assessment (NHA) in support of the production of the Drainage Master Plan for the
Town of the Blue Mountains. It is our understanding that the primary purpose of the NHA is to
provide Tatham Engineering Limited with a natural heritage framework by which they, in
partnership with the Town of The Blue Mountains, may identify and prioritize municipal
drainage improvements within the built area of the Town of The Blue Mountains.
Through review of background information, and applicable policies and regulations, we have
determined that the Study Area contains key natural heritage features and key hydrologic
features and functions relating to the presence of woodlands, wetlands, fish habitat and
candidate habitats for Species at Risk that should be considered with future drainage
improvements.
BIRKS NHC 04-039-2020
BIRKS Natural Heritage Consultants, Inc ii
If you have any questions or concerns regarding this report, please do not hesitate to contact
the undersigned.
Yours truly,
Birks Natural Heritage Consultants Inc.
DRAFT
Melissa Fuller, H.B.Sc.,
Ecologist
https://birksnhc.sharepoint.com/sites/BirksNHCTeamforall/Shared Documents/Project Folders/SBrady Projects/2020/04-039-2020
Town of Blue Mountains Drainage Master Plan/Reporting/Draft #2 to Town/Birks NHC 04-039-2020 TBM DMP NH
Existing Conditions Sept. 2022.docx
Town of The Blue Mountains Drainage Master Plan BIRKS NHC 04-039-2020
Natural Heritage Assessment September 2022
BIRKS Natural Heritage Consultants, Inc 1
Table of Contents
page
Letter of transmittal i
1 INTRODUCTION ............................................................................................ 3
1.1 Purpose .......................................................................................................................... 3
1.2 Study Area ..................................................................................................................... 3
2 ENVIRONMENTAL POLICY FRAMEWORK ............................................ 4
2.1 Provincial Policy Statement (2020) ...................................................................... 4
2.2 Endangered Species Act (2007) ............................................................................. 5
2.3 Fisheries Act (1985) .................................................................................................... 5
2.4 Conservation Authorities Act (1990) ...................................................................... 6
2.5 Niagara Escarpment Plan (2017) ............................................................................ 6
2.6 Greenbelt Plan (2017) ................................................................................................. 7
2.7 Recolour Grey (2019) .................................................................................................. 7
2.8 Town of The Blue Mountains Official Plan (2016) ............................................... 7
3 STUDY APPROACH ...................................................................................... 7
3.1 Background Data Review and Sources ................................................................ 7
3.2 Species at Risk Assessment ...................................................................................8
3.3 Fish and Fish Habitat .................................................................................................8
4 NATURAL HERITAGE FEATURES AND FUNCTIONS .......................... 9
4.1 Blue Mountain Slopes & Delphi Point ANSI ........................................................ 9
4.2 Wetlands ........................................................................................................................ 9
4.3 Significant Woodland ............................................................................................... 10
4.4 Significant Valleylands ............................................................................................ 10
4.5 Significant Wildlife Habitat ..................................................................................... 10
4.6 Fish and Fish Habitat ................................................................................................ 11
4.7 Habitat of Threatened and Endangered Species .............................................. 11
5 SUMMARY OF POTENTIAL NATURAL HERITAGE IMPACTS ........... 12
5.1 Natural Heritage Assessment .............................................................................. 12
5.2 Direct Impacts ............................................................................................................ 12
5.2.1 Tree and Vegetation Removals ................................................................................ 13
5.2.2 Direct or Incidental Impact to Fish and Fish Habitat ............................................... 13
Town of The Blue Mountains Drainage Master Plan BIRKS NHC 04-039-2020
Natural Heritage Assessment September 2022
BIRKS Natural Heritage Consultants, Inc 2
5.2.3 Erosion and Sedimentation into Natural Heritage Features ................................... 13
5.2.4 Loss of and Disturbance to Wildlife and Wildlife habitat ........................................ 13
5.2.5 Loss of Species at Risk Habitat and Incidental Harm ............................................... 13
5.3 Indirect Impacts ......................................................................................................... 14
5.3.1 Anthropogenic Disturbance ..................................................................................... 14
5.3.2 Increased Potential for Invasion of Non-native Species .......................................... 14
5.3.3 Release of Contaminants ......................................................................................... 14
6 RECOMMENDATIONS AND MITIGATION MEASURES ...................... 15
6.1 General Mitigation Plan ........................................................................................... 15
6.2 Fish and Fish Habitat ............................................................................................... 16
6.3 Species at Risk .......................................................................................................... 17
6.4 Migratory Birds .......................................................................................................... 18
6.5 Agency Approvals ..................................................................................................... 18
7 CONCLUSIONS ........................................................................................... 18
8 REFERENCES ............................................................................................. 19
Appendices
Appendix A: Birks NHC Study Area and Key Map
Appendix B: Birks NHC Natural Heritage Mapping
Appendix C: Species at Risk Habitat Assessment
Appendix D: Significant Wildlife Habitat Assessment
Appendix E: Natural Heritage Feature Assessment Tables
Town of The Blue Mountains Drainage Master Plan BIRKS NHC 04-039-2020
Natural Heritage Assessment September 2022
BIRKS Natural Heritage Consultants, Inc 3
1 INTRODUCTION
Birks Natural Heritage Consultants, Inc. (Birks NHC) was retained by Tatham Engineering Limited to
undertake a Natural Heritage Assessment (NHA) for the proposed drainage improvements within the
Town of The Blue Mountains (Appendix A: Study Area).
1.1 PURPOSE
Tatham Engineering Limited (Tatham) has been retained by the Town of The Blue Mountains (Town) to
complete a Drainage Master Plan (DMP) following Approach #2 of the Master Planning process outlined
in the Municipal Engineering Associations (MEA) Municipal Class Environmental Assessment Document
(October 2000, as amended in 2007, 2011 and 2015). This DMP is a broad level assessment detailing the
drainage deficiencies identified in the Study Area. It considers improvement alternatives to address the
drainage deficiencies and completes an evaluation of these alternatives developing a preferred
alternative solution to be implemented moving forward. Approach #2 involves the preparation of a
Master Plan document at the conclusion of Phases 1 and 2 of the Municipal Class EA process fulfilling
the requirements for Schedule B projects.
The objective of this NHA is to identify and characterize natural heritage features present within the
Study Area (as illustrated in Appendix 1) at a high level, in order to (1) assist in the prioritization of
improvements to drainage deficiencies, (2) provide a general natural heritage work plan for each
project, and (3) identify permits that would be required when those projects go to tender. The
assessment is focused on potential ecological impacts which could result from proposed drainage
improvement projects within the Study Area.
This report has been prepared in consideration of natural heritage requirements of the Provincial Policy
Statement (PPS, 2020), Fisheries Act, 1985, Endangered Species Act (ESA, 2007), Niagara Escarpment
Plan (2017), County of Grey Official Plan (2019), and the Town of The Blue Mountains Official Plan
(2016).
1.2 STUDY AREA
The Study Area encompasses the entire Town of The Blue Mountains with a primary focus on the
settlement areas of Lora Bay, Thornbury and Clarksburg, Camperdown, Craigleith and the Blue
Mountain Village area. The general boundaries are Christie Beach Road to the west, Grey Road 21 to
the east and Georgian Bay to the north as illustrated in Appendix 1.
Town of The Blue Mountains Drainage Master Plan BIRKS NHC 04-039-2020
Natural Heritage Assessment September 2022
BIRKS Natural Heritage Consultants, Inc 4
2 ENVIRONMENTAL POLICY FRAMEWORK
The following summarizes the planning policies and regulations related to natural heritage that would
be applicable to the proposed drainage improvements
2.1 PROVINCIAL POLICY STATEMENT (2020)
Ontario's Planning Act requires that planning decisions shall be consistent with the PPS, 2020. Section
2.1 of the PPS specifies policy related to protection of natural heritage features and functions. All
proposed development needs to meet the “no negative impact” test and demonstrate that there will be
no negative impacts to the natural features and their ecological functions per Section 2.1 of the PPS.
According to Section 2.1.4 of the PPS, development and site alteration shall not be permitted in the
following features:
a) Significant wetlands in Ecoregions 5E, 6E, and 7E; and,
b) Significant coastal wetlands.
Section 2.1.5 of the PPS states that, unless it has been demonstrated that there will be no negative
impacts on the natural features or their ecological functions, development and site alteration shall not
be permitted in:
a) Significant woodlands in Ecoregions 6E and 7E;
b) Significant valleylands in Ecoregions 6E and 7E;
c) Significant wildlife habitat (SWH);
d) Significant areas of natural and scientific interest; and,
e) Coastal wetlands in Ecoregions 5E, 6E, and 7E that are not subject to policy 2.1.4(b).
Sections 2.1.6 and 2.1.7 state that development and site alteration is not permitted in fish habitat or
habitat of endangered and threatened species except in accordance with federal and provincial
requirements.
Section 2.1.8 extends protection of those features defined above in policies 2.1.4, 2.1.5 and 2.1.6 to
adjacent lands, typically those within 120 m of the potential impact. Section 2.1.8 states that
development and site alteration shall not be permitted on adjacent lands to natural heritage features
identified in policies 2.1.4, 2.1.5, and 2.1.6 unless the ecological function of the adjacent lands has been
evaluated and it has been demonstrated that there will be no negative impacts on the natural features
or on their ecological function.
While many of these features are mapped and direction is available to allow for candidate features and
functions to be identified, it remains the responsibility of the province and/or the municipality to
designate areas identified within Section 2.1.4 and 2.1.5 of the PPS as significant. The Natural Heritage
Reference Manual (MNR, 2010) and Significant Wildlife Habitat Criteria Schedules for Ecoregion 6E
Town of The Blue Mountains Drainage Master Plan BIRKS NHC 04-039-2020
Natural Heritage Assessment September 2022
BIRKS Natural Heritage Consultants, Inc 5
(MNRF, 2015) were used within this report to identify candidate features and functions not currently
identified by the province and/or municipality.
2.2 ENDANGERED SPECIES ACT (2007)
Ontario’s ESA provides regulatory protection to Endangered and Threatened species, prohibiting
harassment, harm and/or killing of individuals and destruction of their habitats. Habitat is broadly
characterized within the ESA as the area prescribed by a regulation as the habitat of the species, or an
area on which the species depends, directly or indirectly, to carry on its life processes including
reproduction, rearing of young, hibernation, migration or feeding.
Ontario Regulation (O. Reg.) 230/08 of the ESA identifies Species at Risk in Ontario and includes species
listed as Extirpated, Endangered, Threatened, and Special Concern. As noted above, only species listed
as Endangered and Threatened receive species and habitat protection through the ESA. Species
designated as Special Concern may receive protection under the SWH provisions of the PPS.
2.3 FISHERIES ACT (1985)
The purpose of the federal Fisheries Act, 1985 is in part, to provide a framework for the conservation
and protection of fish and fish habitat through the various regulations that protect against serious harm
to fish by death or any permanent or temporary harmful alteration, disruption or destruction (HADD) to
their habitat. Fish habitat is defined within the Fisheries Act, 1985 as “spawning grounds and any other
areas, including nursery, rearing, food supply and migration areas, on which fish depend directly or
indirectly in order to carry out their life processes”. The fish and fish habitat protection provisions of the
Fisheries Act, 1985 include:
A prohibition against causing the death of fish, by means other than fishing (section 34.4);
A prohibition against causing the harmful alteration, disruption or destruction of fish habitat
(section 35);
Establishment of standards and codes of practice in relation to works, undertakings and
activities during any phase of their construction, operation, modification, decommissioning or
abandonment for the avoidance of death to fish, HADD, and for the prevention of pollution
(Section 34.2); and,
Ministerial powers to ensure the free passage of fish or the protection of fish or fish habitat with
respect to existing obstructions (section 34.3).
The interpretation and application of the regulations of the Fisheries Act, 1985 is overseen by Fisheries
and Oceans Canada (DFO). Under the direction of DFO, projects that have potential to affect fish and
fish habitat are to be screened using their online guidance platform, 'Projects Near Water' to determine
if the project will require review under the Fisheries Act, 1985. Projects that can not implement
measures to mitigate impact to fish and fish habitat, and do not qualify under the current standards and
Codes of Practice, require review by DFO prior to any site disturbance or alteration, including vegetation
removal and grading.
Town of The Blue Mountains Drainage Master Plan BIRKS NHC 04-039-2020
Natural Heritage Assessment September 2022
BIRKS Natural Heritage Consultants, Inc 6
2.4 CONSERVATION AUTHORITIES ACT (1990)
Ontario’s Conservation Authorities fall under the jurisdiction of the Conservation Authorities Act, 1990
which was reviewed and modernized in 2017 and again in 2019. The purpose of Conservation
Authorities Act is to “provide for the organization and delivery of programs and services that further the
conservation, restoration, development and management of natural resources in watersheds in
Ontario”. Section 28 of the Conservation Authorities Act states that a Conservation Authority may make
the following regulations applicable in the area under its jurisdiction:
Restricting and regulating the use of water in or from rivers, streams, inland lakes, ponds,
wetlands and natural or artificially constructed depressions in rivers or streams;
Prohibiting, regulating or requiring the permission of the authority for straightening, changing,
diverting or interfering in any way with the existing channel of a river, creek, stream or
watercourse, or for changing or interfering in any way with a wetland;
Prohibiting, regulating or requiring the permission of the authority for development if, in the
opinion of the authority, the control of flooding, erosion, dynamic beaches or pollution or the
conservation of land may be affected by the development; and,
Provide for the appointment of officers to enforce any regulation made under this section or
section 29.
An authority may issue a permit to a person to engage in an activity specified in the permit that would
otherwise be prohibited by Section 28, if, in the opinion of the authority, the activity is not likely to: a)
affect the control of flooding, erosion, dynamic beaches or pollution or the conservation of land; b) the
activity is not likely to create conditions or circumstances that, in the event of a natural hazard, might
jeopardize the health or safety of persons or result in the damage or destruction of property; and, (c)
any other requirements that may be prescribed by the regulations are met.
The Study Area falls within the jurisdiction area of both the Grey Sauble Conservation Authority (GSCA)
and Nottawasaga Valley Conservation Authority (NVCA) with lands regulated due to the presence of
Natural Hazard Areas, wetlands and watercourses.
2.5 NIAGARA ESCARPMENT PLAN (2017)
The Niagara Escarpment Plan (NEP) seeks to protect the geologic feature of the Niagara Escarpment and
lands in its vicinity as a continuous natural environment while allowing only compatible development.
The NEP builds upon other provincial policies (i.e., Provincial Policy Statement, Oak Ridges Moraine Plan,
and the Greenbelt Plan) providing direction regarding accommodation of future growth near sensitive
lands. A portion of the DMP Study Area falls within the plan area of the Niagara Escarpment, with some
of the lands designated Escarpment Recreation Area, Escarpment Natural Area, and Escarpment
Protection Area. The NEP directs that infrastructure shall be sited and designed to minimize negative
impact on the Escarpment environment.
Town of The Blue Mountains Drainage Master Plan BIRKS NHC 04-039-2020
Natural Heritage Assessment September 2022
BIRKS Natural Heritage Consultants, Inc 7
2.6 GREENBELT PLAN (2017)
The Greenbelt Plan, together with the NEP, builds on the PPS to establish a land use planning framework
that supports protection to the agricultural land base and the ecological features and functions
occurring on the ‘Greater Golden Horseshoe’ landscape. The Study Area is located within the Greenbelt
Plan area, which includes the NEP area. The policies of the NEP continue to apply.
2.7 RECOLOUR GREY (2019)
Schedules A and C and Appendices A and B of the Recolour Grey – County of Grey Official Plan (County
of Grey 2019) illustrate known natural heritage constraint areas within the County of Grey (County),
which include Hazard Lands, Provincially Significant and Coastal Wetlands, the County’s Natural Heritage
System, Areas of Natural and Scientific Interest, and Significant Woodland. Section 2 of the Official Plan
states that “every attempt should be made to make wise use of existing infrastructure (i.e., roads, water
and sewer services) and to enhance that infrastructure.” Further, Section 7.12.2 states that “the proper
construction, maintenance, and upgrading of infrastructure is essential in maintaining its capacity to
function currently and under the effects of climate change .”
2.8 TOWN OF THE BLUE MOUNTAINS OFFICIAL PLAN (2016)
Appendix 1 of the Town of the Blue Mountain (Town) Official Plan maps illustrate known constraint
areas within the Town boundary, which are primarily associated with natural heritage features,
including Significant Woodlands, Areas of Natural and Scientific Interest, Provincially Significant
Wetlands (PSW), other wetlands and karst. According to Schedule A of the Town’s Official Plan (Blue
Mountains 2016), land uses within the Study Area are a mixture of residential, rural, major open space,
developed (i.e., commercial, institutional and employment areas), and resort/recreational. There are
also hazard lands associated with watercourses, and a harbour area at the lakeshore in the community
of Thornbury.
The Town’s Official Plan lists several guiding principles including ensuring that the construction of all
infrastructure, or expansions to existing infrastructure, occurs in a manner that is compatible with
adjacent land uses and with a minimum of social and environmental impact (Town OP Section A1.1).
3 STUDY APPROACH
The following activities and assessments were undertaken to fulfill the objectives of this study.
3.1 BACKGROUND DATA REVIEW AND SOURCES
Background documents provide information on site characteristics, habitat, wildlife, rare species and
communities, and other aspects of the Study Area. For the purpose of this NHA the following sources
were considered:
Atlas of the Breeding Birds of Ontario (2nd Atlas 2001-2005);
Town of The Blue Mountains Drainage Master Plan BIRKS NHC 04-039-2020
Natural Heritage Assessment September 2022
BIRKS Natural Heritage Consultants, Inc 8
Ontario Reptile and Amphibian Atlas (ORAA; Ontario Nature, accessed 2022);
Land Information Ontario (LIO; NDMNRF, accessed 2022);
Natural Heritage Information Centre (NHIC; NDMNRF, accessed 2022);
Species at Risk in Ontario List (MNR, 2018);
Aquatic Species at Risk Map (DFO, 2019);
County of Grey Official Plan (2019); and
Town of The Blue Mountains Official Plan (2016)
A figure set was created (Appendix A – Figure 1 and Appendix B Figures 2a-2f) to illustrate natural
heritage features (Significant Woodland, Significant Valleyland, Provincially Significant and other
wetlands, ANSI’s) and planning overlays (conservation authority regulated areas, NEP plan designations)
that have been mapped in proximity and may be associated with the Town’s existing and proposed
drainage infrastructure as currently understood. This mapping was utilized to populate a natural
heritage assessment matrix for each of the stormwater management features, floodplain expansion
projects and individual culverts (Appendix E - Tables 1-3) which will assist in identifying design and
approval considerations that may be associated with drainage improvement alternatives.
3.2 SPECIES AT RISK ASSESSMENT
The Species at Risk assessment included an analysis of the habitat requirements of Species at Risk
reported to occur in the region to identify those having potential to occur within the Study Area.
Birks NHC staff reviewed data obtained through a desktop review related to potential habitat for
provincially designated species, notably Species at Risk listed under O. Reg. 230/08 of the ESA as
Threatened or Endangered to determine which species may occur within the Town and Study Area. The
results of the queries are presented in Appendix C. All resultant species were then assessed based on
habitat preference and assigned to a general habitat grouping understood to be present within the
Study Area (open habitats, watercourses, woodland, wetlands). A summary of Species at Risk that may
occur within the various habitat types within the Study Area of the DMP is presented in Appendix C. The
habitat types associated with each of the drainage alternatives is presented in Tables 1-3 of Appendix E.
3.3 FISH AND FISH HABITAT
A characterization of fish habitat was completed through desktop review of available data sources noted
above. Those watercourses without background data relating to flow regime were visited June 16, 2022
in order to tentatively establish permanency of the features and thus ability of those features to provide
fish habitat. Generally, fish habitat identified within the Study Area was assigned one of the following
designations:
• Permanent fish habitat: a feature where flowing or standing water is present year-round and
connected to known fish habitat;
• Seasonal fish habitat: a feature that provides direct habitat for fish under elevated water levels
(during spring freshet and large storm events), but not under low water conditions, due to
insufficient open water and refuge habitat or anoxic water quality conditions; and
Town of The Blue Mountains Drainage Master Plan BIRKS NHC 04-039-2020
Natural Heritage Assessment September 2022
BIRKS Natural Heritage Consultants, Inc 9
• Indirect fish habitat: a feature where there is sufficient water to sustain aquatic invertebrates
and plants and that discharges to direct habitat downstream. Fish cannot directly access the
area as a result of a barrier to upstream fish movement (i.e., steep channel grade, low water
levels, perched culvert).
Direct fish habitat is defined as habitat used by fish for spawning, rearing, feeding or migration. Indirect
fish habitat is aquatic habitat that is generally not used by fish, but that provides base flow and food
inputs for both permanent and seasonal direct fish habitats. Given the high level nature of this report,
indirect habitat has not been identified or quantified herein.
4 NATURAL HERITAGE FEATURES AND FUNCTIONS
The following sections present an examination of our findings as they relate to natural heritage features
and functions within the DMP Study Area based on existing designations/delineations by agencies and
as revealed through the application of provincial guidelines for identification of significant natural
heritage features and functions.
Overall, the following natural heritage features and functions have been identified within the DMP Study
Area:
Blue Mountain Slopes Life Science Area of Natural and Scientific Interest, Delphi Point Earth
Science Area of Natural and Scientific Interest
Silver Creek PSW
Mapped un-evaluated wetlands
Significant Woodlands
Permanent and Seasonal Fish Habitat
Candidate Habitat for Threatened and Endangered Species
Significant Valleylands
Candidate Significant Wildlife Habitat
4.1 BLUE MOUNTAIN SLOPES & DELPHI POINT ANSI
Areas of Natural and Scientific Interest (ANSI) are designated by the province according to standardized
evaluation procedures. There are two ANSIs within the Study Area, located in the northcentral portion
of the Study Area: Blue Mountain Slopes Life Science ASNI and the Delphi Point Earth Science ANSI
present along the Georgian Bay shoreline.
4.2 WETLANDS
Components of the Silver Creek PSW Complex are mapped within the DMP Study Area, which extends
beyond the Town settlement limits. The wetland evaluation completed by the MNRF identified the
presence of Fen, Swamp, and Marsh wetland habitats and is known to contain habitat for Threatened
and/or Endangered species, waterfowl breeding habitat, locally significant migration and staging habitat,
Town of The Blue Mountains Drainage Master Plan BIRKS NHC 04-039-2020
Natural Heritage Assessment September 2022
BIRKS Natural Heritage Consultants, Inc 10
and locally significant fish habitat, including spawning and nursery habitat, likely associated with the
Silver Creek PSW complex unit that are present along Georgian Bay shoreline. A portion of Silver Creek
PSW has been designated as Great Lakes coastal wetlands.
Background mapping (i.e., LIO, NHIC) indicates the presence of un-evaluated wetlands within the DMP
Study Area. Background mapping for un-evaluated wetlands is typically completed as a desktop exercise
based on topographical data and drainage mapping. Therefore, ground truthing is required in order to
confirm the presence of wetland habitats. Note that any un-evaluated wetland features which are
contiguous with the Silver Creek PSW Complex should be regarded as part of the complex for future
planning purposes.
4.3 SIGNIFICANT WOODLAND
The Town Official Plan Appendix 1 Constraint Mapping illustrates Significant Woodlands within the DMP
Study Area. Furthermore, the County of Grey provides Significant Woodlands mapping (Appendix B of
the Official Plan) which was developed by the County of Grey with assistance from the MNRF. The
identification was primarily a desktop-based Geographic Information Systems (GIS) exercise, and the
County acknowledges that inaccuracies or omissions in the mapping may be present. The County of
Grey Significant Woodland mapping is shown on Figures 2a-2f (Appendix B).
4.4 SIGNIFICANT VALLEYLANDS
Significant Valleylands within the County of Grey were identified by the GSCA and include 200-metre-
wide corridors. The County recommends that detailed delineations of Significant Valleylands be
evaluated on a site specific basis through an EIS using the following criteria:
The valley must be ≥100 metres wide and ≥2 kilometres long.
The valley banks must be ≥3 metres in height (extrapolated from 5 metre contours at 1:10,000
or better information where available).
Where valley slope is 3:1 on one side with no slope on the opposite side of the watercourse, the
opposite valley limit is delineated using either 100m from centreline of the watercourse or the
limit of the floodplain to create a continuous valley feature.
Where 3:1 valley slopes occur on both sides of the river, but they are not continuous, the
floodplain limit (or contour information and professional judgment) is used to delineate a
continuous valley feature.
Significant Valleylands within the Study Area have been illustrated in Figures 2a-2f of Appendix B.
4.5 SIGNIFICANT WILDLIFE HABITAT
Significant Wildlife Habitat Criteria Schedules for Ecoregion 6E (MNRF, 2015) were reviewed as part of
this NHA to determine whether any portions of the Study Area would meet the criteria. The Significant
Wildlife Habitat assessment is included as Appendix D of this report. The following presents a summary
of Significant Wildlife Habitat functions potentially occurring within the Study Area:
Town of The Blue Mountains Drainage Master Plan BIRKS NHC 04-039-2020
Natural Heritage Assessment September 2022
BIRKS Natural Heritage Consultants, Inc 11
1. Seasonal Concentration Areas of Animals
Colonial Nesting Bird Breeding Habitat (Banks and Cliffs, Trees/Shrubs, and Ground)
Raptor Wintering Area
Bat Maternity Colonies
Turtle Wintering Areas
Reptile Hibernaculum
2. Specialized Habitat for Wildlife
Bald Eagle and Osprey Nesting, Foraging and Perching Habitat
Turtle Nesting area
Seeps and Springs
Amphibian Breeding Habitat (Woodland and Wetland)
Woodland Area-Sensitive Bird Breeding Habitat
Marsh Breeding Bird Habitat
Shrub/Early Successional Bird Breeding Habitat
Terrestrial Crayfish
Special Concern and Rare Wildlife Species – Hart’s-tongue Fern, Snapping Turtle, Eastern
Wood-pewee, Wood Thrush, Bald Eagle, Canada Warbler, Common Nighthawk, Silver Lamprey
(as per O. Reg. 230/08 made under the ESA, currency date of January 26, 2022)
3. Animal Movement Corridors
Amphibian Movement Corridors
4.6 FISH AND FISH HABITAT
Five main watersheds outlet to Georgian Bay within the Study Area: Indian Brook, Beaver River, Little
Beaver River, Boulder Creek, Townline Creek (within the GSCA watershed) and Silver Creek (within the
NVCA watershed). In addition to this, there are numerous drainage features (numbered for the purpose
of this assessment) that originate within the Niagara Escarpment and drain north towards Georgian Bay.
The watersheds vary greatly in size, as does feature permanency. Fish species documented within the
Study Area include numerous species such as Blacknose Dace, Bluntnose Minnow, Brook Stickleback,
Brown Trout, Central Mudminnow, Common Shiner, Creek Chub, Emerald Shiner, Fathead Minnow,
Hornyhead Chub, Johnny Darter, Longnose Dace, Longnose Sucker, Northern Redbelly Dace, Rainbow
Smelt, Rainbow Trout, Rock Bass, Rosyface Shiner, Sand Shiner, Sculpins and White Sucker. Specific
information relating to watercourse characterization can be found in Table 3 of Appendix E.
4.7 HABITAT OF THREATENED AND ENDANGERED SPECIES
The habitat requirements of those species listed as Threatened and Endangered under the ESA were
considered in relation to the habitat features noted within the Study Area.
Town of The Blue Mountains Drainage Master Plan BIRKS NHC 04-039-2020
Natural Heritage Assessment September 2022
BIRKS Natural Heritage Consultants, Inc 12
Based on data available, it was determined that potential habitat for a number of Threatened and
Endangered species may be present in the Study Area. A summary of Species at Risk that may occur
within the various habitat types of the DMP Study Area is presented in Appendix C. The habitat types
associated with each of the drainage alternatives is presented in Tables 1-3 of Appendix E.
5 SUMMARY OF POTENTIAL NATURAL HERITAGE IMPACTS
The intent of this study is to (1) identify natural heritage features and functions associated with the
identified drainage infrastructure within the Study Area, (2) provide a basis by which to address
potential impact to those features and functions should drainage deficiency improvements be addressed
and (3) identify agency permits that would be required to allow the improvements to proceed. Impacts
are evaluated on the current knowledge of the Study Area based on background data collected in 2022
by Birks NHC ecologists and a site visit on June 16, 2022.
5.1 NATURAL HERITAGE ASSESSMENT
Tatham has identified 208 culverts, 9 stormwater features and five floodplain expansion projects to be
considered as part of the DMP within the Study Area, as illustrated on Figures 2a-2f of Appendix B.
Tables 1-3 (Appendix E) identify natural heritage features associated with each individual drainage
infrastructure. A natural heritage sensitivity rating of ‘low’, ‘medium’ and ‘high’ has been assigned to
each drainage infrastructure, based on the number and sensitivity of natural heritage features that are
associated with the location of those features.
5.2 DIRECT IMPACTS
All drainage improvement alternatives have the potential to result in direct impact to natural heritage
features and functions, to varying degrees. Direct impacts are those that are immediately evident as a
result of site alteration and changes to land use. Typically, the adverse effects of direct impacts are
most evident during the site preparation and construction phase of the proposed works. Potential
impacts of the proposed drainage improvements include the following:
Tree and vegetation removals;
Direct or incidental impact to fish and fish habitat
Erosion and sedimentation into natural heritage features;
Loss of and disturbance to wildlife and wildlife habitat; and,
Loss of species at risk habitat and incidental harm.
In the following sections we provide a high level characterization of the potential for negative ecological
impact to the identified natural heritage features and functions.
Town of The Blue Mountains Drainage Master Plan BIRKS NHC 04-039-2020
Natural Heritage Assessment September 2022
BIRKS Natural Heritage Consultants, Inc 13
5.2.1 Tree and Vegetation Removals
Based on current understanding of the proposed drainage improvement projects, removal of treed
areas will be required for the majority of the proposed improvements. Vegetation removal has
potential to impact Significant Wildlife Habitat, Species at Risk and migratory birds, dependant upon the
extent of the removals. General mitigations have been recommended below to ensure that appropriate
consideration for timing and extent of removals occurs for the drainage improvement projects.
5.2.2 Direct or Incidental Impact to Fish and Fish Habitat
Activities proposed within proximity to permanent or seasonal drainage features have the potential to
cause harm or death to fish and create a HADD within their associated habitats. All proposed alterations
of culverts and existing SWMF outlets will at a minimum require review by qualified Ecologist to ensure
that mitigation measures are implemented in design and construction which would negate impact to
fish and their habitat. Should the Ecologist determine that avoidance of impact cannot be avoided, the
project will require approval under the regulations of the Fisheries Act, 1985, as outlined within the
‘Projects Near Water’ directives prepared by DFO. General mitigations have been recommended below
to provide a basis upon which the drainage improvement projects should be designed and implemented
to avoid impact to fish and fish habitat.
5.2.3 Erosion and Sedimentation into Natural Heritage Features
Construction activities, especially operations involving the handling of earthen material, increases the
availability of sediment for erosion and transport by surface drainage. In order to mitigate the adverse
ecological impacts caused by the release of sediment-laden runoff into any potential receiving natural
heritage features (woodlands, wetlands, aquatic habitats) measures for erosion and sediment control
are required for construction sites. An erosion and sediment control plan should be developed and
implemented for each drainage improvement project. General recommendations for the plan are
provided in Section 6 below.
5.2.4 Loss of and Disturbance to Wildlife and Wildlife habitat
Alteration of wetland and woodland habitats has the potential to negatively impact Significant Wildlife
Habitat functions within the proposed area of work and adjacent to those areas (120 m, in accordance
with provincial direction). Both the Stormwater Management Feature (SWMF) and Floodplain
Expansion Projects (Appendix E - Tables 1 and 2, Appendix B - Figures 2a-2f) have the potential to
directly or indirectly affect Significant Wildlife Habitat features and functions identified in Appendix D.
As such, it is recommended that a detailed EIS for all SWMF and Drainage Projects occur during the 30%
design stage.
5.2.5 Loss of Species at Risk Habitat and Incidental Harm
Alteration of meadows, wetland and woodland habitat has the potential to negatively impact Species at
Risk and candidate Species at Risk habitat functions within the proposed area of work and adjacent to
those areas. Both the SWMF and Floodplain Expansion Projects (Appendix E - Tables 1 and 2, Appendix
Town of The Blue Mountains Drainage Master Plan BIRKS NHC 04-039-2020
Natural Heritage Assessment September 2022
BIRKS Natural Heritage Consultants, Inc 14
B - Figures 2a-2f) have the potential to directly or indirectly affect both Species at Risk and candidate
Species at Risk habitat. Under the Endangered Species Act, 2007, species that are listed as Threatened or
Endangered receive protection that prohibits the harming, killing, or harassing of the species, and this
protection extends to protect their habitat from damage and destruction. However, there are
authorizations that can be obtained to proceed with work, that would otherwise be prohibited, that
outline conditions that must be met to minimize impacts to species. A detailed EIS for all SWMF and
Drainage Projects that includes a SAR assessment occurs during the 30% design stage which will ensure
that appropriate permits and permissions under the ESA have been acquired prior to tender.
5.3 INDIRECT IMPACTS
Indirect impacts are those that do not always manifest in the core area(s) of disturbance but in the lands
adjacent the drainage improvement projects. Indirect impacts include (but are not limited to):
Anthropogenic disturbance;
Increased potential for invasion of non-native species; and,
Release of contaminants.
5.3.1 Anthropogenic Disturbance
The majority of the proposed drainage improvement projects (i.e., the identified culverts and SWM
improvements) are situated in areas already subjected to anthropogenic disturbance. The activities
most likely to introduce human presence and disturbance above and beyond existing levels are the
Floodplain Expansion Projects (Table 2). Thus, consideration in the design, construction and use of
those features shall limit to all extents possible, ongoing human disturbance in the area. Details
regarding mitigation of anthropogenic disturbance should be established through the completion of an
individual EIS for the specific drainage improvement project.
5.3.2 Increased Potential for Invasion of Non-native Species
Any site disturbance increases the likelihood that non-native and/or invasive vegetation will become
established within the retained vegetation communities. Additionally, if construction equipment is not
properly cleaned before and after use, invasive species transport may occur. Recommended
management and control measures are provided in Section 6 below
5.3.3 Release of Contaminants
Construction activities have the potential to increase concentrations of contaminants (i.e., sediments,
salt, gasoline, oil) in surface runoff, which may affect nearby natural heritage features. In order to
mitigate the impacts of development, stormwater management controls and water quality approaches
are required. Mitigation measures are provided in Section 6 to mitigate potential impacts arising from
runoff.
Town of The Blue Mountains Drainage Master Plan BIRKS NHC 04-039-2020
Natural Heritage Assessment September 2022
BIRKS Natural Heritage Consultants, Inc 15
6 RECOMMENDATIONS AND MITIGATION MEASURES
Mitigation refers to the avoidance or reduction of impacts associated with the proposed drainage
improvement works through best practices. Where applied correctly, mitigation is intended to reduce
the potential for impacts to ensure that the natural heritage features and functions will continue
uninhibited during and after completion of the drainage improvement projects. Thus, mitigation would
be required to ensure that there is no negative impact, and the improvement projects may proceed in
conformity with the relative policy and in compliance with environmental law.
The following general mitigation measures have been provided to minimize the above listed potential
impacts. Please note that this is not an exhaustive list, and that each drainage improvement project
should be reviewed at onset to ensure that appropriate mitigation measures are in place to protect
natural heritage features and functions.
6.1 GENERAL MITIGATION PLAN
1. An environmental consultant that is knowledgeable in terrestrial and aquatic environs and
natural heritage impacts should be retained on a project-by-project basis, to assist with project
detail design and implementation in order to ensure protection of sensitive terrestrial and
aquatic species and their habitats.
2. A site specific EIS should be completed for each of the identified SWMF and floodplain
expansion projects in order to appropriately address potential ecological impacts of these
projects to natural heritage features including wetlands, woodlands, Significant Wildlife Habitat,
fish and fish habitat and Species at Risk and Species at Risk Habitat. The EIS should occur prior
to the 30% design stage in order to fully understand natural heritage impacts associated with
those works. The EIS should be supported by ecological land classification (ELC) vegetation,
breeding bird surveys, amphibian surveys, aquatic feature characterization to ensure that
natural heritage features are appropriately identified and considered.
3. Natural heritage information is typically accepted as current if field assessments have been
completed within five years of the impact assessment and design work. As such, it is
recommended that a five-year project schedule be established during which terrestrial and
aquatic surveys, as deemed necessary, may be completed to support detail design of the
proposed drainage improvement projects. Priority should be focussed upon new expansion into
woodland and wetland communities, as well as on those drainages lacking current information
relating to the thermal regime and fish community.
4. In general, works should be undertaken such that:
a. Materials and chemicals are prevented from entering sensitive habitats including
wetlands, woodlands, and watercourses.
b. All machinery on site is to be maintained in a clean condition and free of fluid leaks to
prevent any deleterious substances from entering sensitive habitats.
Town of The Blue Mountains Drainage Master Plan BIRKS NHC 04-039-2020
Natural Heritage Assessment September 2022
BIRKS Natural Heritage Consultants, Inc 16
c. Washing, refueling and servicing machinery and storage of fuel and other materials for
the machinery should occur in such a way as to prevent any deleterious substances from
entering sensitive areas, a minimum of 30 m from identified sensitive habitats.
d. Should an animal be injured or found injured during the construction phase, they should
be transported to an appropriate wildlife rehabilitation centre.
6.2 FISH AND FISH HABITAT
The following mitigation measures are provided as a baseline to ensure appropriate consideration for
potential ecological impacts to fish and fish habitat occurs at the outset of project planning:
1. It is recommended that those drainage features identified within Table 3, Appendix E that lack
information regarding thermal regime and fish community be subject to additional field
assessments in order to ensure that appropriate considerations for the aquatic habitat are
implemented in design and construction.
2. All work should be completed in the dry. Where works within aquatic environs are required,
work shall occur outside of the in-water work window for watercourses. For the Study Area,
works should generally not occur between September 15 and July 15. This window may be
increased upon a project by project basis, if deemed appropriate by the project Ecologist.
3. Efforts to avoid alteration of riparian vegetation should at a minimum include:
a. Maximizing an undisturbed vegetated buffer zone between areas of on-land activity and
the wetland and/or watercourse; and
b. Avoiding any tree/vegetation removals.
4. Sediment and erosion controls should be implemented for each drainage improvement project.
The control methods should be specific to each project but should at minimum include:
a. Regular inspection and maintenance of the erosion and sediment control measures during
all phases of the project.
b. Keeping the erosion and sediment control measures in place until all disturbed ground has
been permanently stabilized.
c. Disposing of and stabilizing all excavated material above the high-water mark or top of bank
of nearby waterbodies and ensuring sediment re-entry to the watercourse and wetland
areas is prevented.
d. Heeding weather advisories and scheduling work to avoid wet, windy, and rainy periods
that may result in high flow volumes and/ or increase erosion and sedimentation.
e. Regularly monitoring watercourses and wetland features for signs of sedimentation during
all phases of the work and taking corrective action if required.
f. Using biodegradable erosion and sediment control materials whenever possible and
removing all exposed non-biodegradable erosion and sediment control materials once the
site is stabilized.
g. Operating machinery on land in stable dry areas as much as feasibly possible.
h. Stopping work and containing sediment-laden water to prevent dispersal.
5. Deleterious substances should be prevented from entering natural heritage features as follows:
a. Deposition of deleterious substances in the watercourse and wetlands is prohibited.
Town of The Blue Mountains Drainage Master Plan BIRKS NHC 04-039-2020
Natural Heritage Assessment September 2022
BIRKS Natural Heritage Consultants, Inc 17
b. Follow recommendations provided within the emergency response document for the
project which includes:
i. Keeping an emergency spill kit on site.
ii. Stopping work and containing deleterious substances to prevent dispersal.
iii. Reporting any spills of sewage, oil, fuel or other deleterious material (including
sediment) whether near or directly into a water body to MECP and/or DFO.
iv. Ensuring clean-up measures are suitably applied so as not to result in further alteration
of the bed and/or banks of the watercourse.
v. Cleaning up and appropriately disposing of the deleterious substances.
6.3 SPECIES AT RISK
Given the dynamic character of the natural environment, as well as changes to policy (i.e., new species
listing), annual consideration of Species at Risk and Species at Risk habitat impact is recommended in
the interpretation of potential presence of Threatened or Endangered species as protected under the
Endangered Species Act, 2007.
This report was produced based on the most up-to-date policy information however, it is not intended
to act as a long-term assessment of potential species at risk. The Endangered Species Act, 2007 is
recognized as being a ‘proponent-driven’ piece of legislation and therefore it is the responsibility of the
landowner/developer to ensure compliance with the regulations made under this act. Should a
considerable length of time and/or sudden change in policy occur prior to construction, it is
recommended that a review of the assessment provided within this report be undertaken by a qualified
ecologist to ensure compliance with the Endangered Species Act, 2007 at that time.
All current Threatened or Endangered species listed under O. Reg. 230/08 made under the Endangered
Species Act, 2007 with a currency date of January 26, 2022 have been considered within this report.
General Species at Risk mitigation measures for project planning consideration are as follows:
1. To prevent accidental harm to wildlife during the construction phases of the project, exclusion
fencing for reptiles shall be installed along identified sensitive areas including wetland and
watercourse setbacks prior to any site alteration.
a. Weekly inspection of the exclusion fence should occur during the spring nesting (May –
July) and fall migration (September – October) seasons to ensure that the exclusion
measures remain effective during the species’ active periods.
b. Appropriate sediment erosion fencing can be utilized as reptile exclusion fencing.
2. To prevent accidental harm site alteration should occur outside of the active
breeding/roosting/nesting season for all potential Species at Risk that may utilize the Study
Area. Tree cutting should be timed to occur during the calendar months of November 1 to
March 31. This will ensure that no bats actively roosting in trees will be killed or harmed as a
result of clearing activities and is outside of the breeding bird season. If the work schedule
requires that site alteration be completed during the active season, screening by an ecologist
Town of The Blue Mountains Drainage Master Plan BIRKS NHC 04-039-2020
Natural Heritage Assessment September 2022
BIRKS Natural Heritage Consultants, Inc 18
with knowledge of species present in the area should be undertaken to ensure that the risk of
impacting Species at Risk has been evaluated and assumed to be low to non-existent.
6.4 MIGRATORY BIRDS
Construction activities involving the removal of vegetation should be restricted from occurring during
the bird breeding season. Migratory birds, nests, and eggs are protected by the Migratory Birds
Convention Act, 1994 and the Fish and Wildlife Conservation Act, 1997. Environment Canada outlines
dates when activities in any region have potential to impact nests at the Environment Canada Website
(https://www.canada.ca/en/environment-climate-change/services/avoiding-harm-migratory-birds.html)
For this location, vegetation removal should be avoided between April 1st and August 30th of any given
year. If vegetation clearing is required between these dates, screening by an ecologist with knowledge
of bird species present in the area should be undertaken to ensure that the vegetation has been
confirmed to be free of nests prior to clearing.
6.5 AGENCY APPROVALS
The following agency approvals are likely to be required given the policy context within the Study Area
and the inherent nature of proposed works associated with drainage improvements. That is, the
majority of the identified projects have the potential to impact fish and fish habitat and be located in
lands regulated by the respective Conservation Authority. The following summarizes all agencies that
will require natural heritage related permits within the Study Area. Agency permitting requirements are
specifically outlined within the Natural Heritage Assessment Tables 1-3 of Appendix E, for each of the
identified drainage projects.
1. GSCA permit for works within lands regulated under Ontario Regulation 151/06 –
Development, Interference with Wetlands and Alterations to Shorelines and Watercourses; or
NVCA permit for works within land regulated under Ontario Regulation 172/06 -
Development, Interference with Wetlands and Alterations to Shorelines and Watercourses;
2. DFO Request for Review under the Federal Fisheries Act, 1985:
3. Development Permit under Niagara Escarpment Plan, 2017
7 CONCLUSIONS
This NHA was prepared to support recommendations presented within the Town of The Blue Mountains
DMP. The intent of the NHA was to identify the presence of natural heritage features and functions
within the Study Area that have the potential to be impacted by the drainage improvement projects.
The mitigation measures recommended in this report have been developed to avoid and mitigate any
potential negative ecological impacts associated with the drainage improvement projects.
Consideration of natural heritage features and functions identified herein is paramount in fiscal planning
for the Town of The Blue Mountains drainage improvement projects and development of design
alternatives into the future.
Town of The Blue Mountains Drainage Master Plan BIRKS NHC 04-039-2020
Natural Heritage Assessment September 2022
BIRKS Natural Heritage Consultants, Inc 19
8 REFERENCES
Birds Canada. 2022. Ontario Breeding Bird Atlas. Square Resources. Accessed December 2022.
https://www.birdscanada.org/naturecounts/onatlas/findsquare.jsp
Department of Fisheries and Oceans Canada (DFO). 2019. Aquatic Species at Risk Map.
https://www.dfo-mpo.gc.ca/species-especes/sara-lep/map-carte/index-eng.html
Greenbelt Plan. 2017. https://files.ontario.ca/greenbelt-plan-2017-en.pdf
Grey County. 2019. Recolour Grey: County of Grey Official Plan.
https://docs.grey.ca/share/public?nodeRef=workspace://SpacesStore/faddf07b-9915-4617-
b5ff-96de2e36092b
Ministry of Municipal Affairs and Housing (MMAH). 2020. Provincial Policy Statement.
https://files.ontario.ca/mmah-provincial-policy-statement-2020-accessible-final-en-2020-02-
14.pdf
Ministry of Natural Resources (MNR). 2010. Natural Heritage Reference Manual for Natural Heritage
Policies of the Provincial Policy Statement, 2005. Second Edition.
Ministry of Natural Resources and Forestry (MNRF). 2015. Significant Wildlife Habitat Criteria Schedules
for Ecoregion 6E.
Ministry of Northern Development, Mines, Natural Resources and Forestry (NDMNRF). Accessed January
2022. Land Information Ontario. https://www.ontario.ca/page/land-information-ontario
Ministry of Northern Development, Mines, Natural Resources and Forestry (NDMNRF). Accessed January
2022. Natural Heritage Information Centre Database. https://www.ontario.ca/page/natural-
heritage-information-centre
Niagara Escarpment Plan. 2017. https://files.ontario.ca/appendix_-_niagara_escarpment_plan_2017_-
_oc-10262017.pdf
Ontario Nature. Accessed January 2022. Ontario Reptile and Amphibian Atlas.
https://ontarionature.org/programs/citizen-science/reptile-amphibian-atlas/
Town of The Blue Mountains. 2016. The Town of The Blue Mountains Official Plan.
https://www.thebluemountains.ca/official-plan.cfm
BIRKS NHC 04-039-2020
Appendix A
Birks NHC Study Area and Key Map
0 1,000 2,000 3,000 4,000500
Meters
FILE LOCATION:
Path: C:\Users\S_Brady\BirksNHC\Birks NHC Team for all - Documents\Project Folders\SBrady Projects\ArcGIS - Projects here\Projects -
here\TOB_Drainage
PROJECT: 04-039-2020 STATUS: DRAFT DATE: 21/09/2022
MAP DRAWING INFORMATION:
DATA PROVIDED BY: ESRI CANADA
MAP CREATED BY: HM
MAP CHECKED BY: MF
MAP PROJECTION: NAD 1983 UTM ZONE 17N
S
W E
NFigure 1:
Overview Map
Town of The Blue Mountains
Drainage Master Plan
Natural Heritage Evaluation
Maxar
Figure 2a
Figure 2b
Figure 2c
Figure 2d
Figure 2e
Figure 2f
Study Area
Watercourse (LIO)
Wetland Significance
Unevaluated
Provincially Significant
BIRKS NHC 04-039-2020
Appendix B
Birks NHC Natural Heritage Feature Mapping
Town of the Blue Mountains
Drainage Master Plan
Natural Heritage Evaluation
Figure 2a:
Study Area
!_ 1 Study Area Wetland Significance
Watercourse Unevaluated
Provincially Significant
Tatham NH Data
Culvert/Bridge Improvements
SWMF Retrofits
SWMF Creation
Q Creation of Floodplain Storage/Improved Quantity Control
Grey County Official Plan (2018)
�j NHS Core
MI Significant Valleylands
NHS Linkage
ANSI
Significant Woodlands
MAP DRAWING INFORMATION
DATA PROVIDED BY: ESRI CANADA
MAP CREATED BY: HM
MAP CHECKED BY: MF
MAP PROJECTION: NAD 1983 UTM ZONE 17N
0 190 380 760
1,140
Meters
1,520
FILE LOCATION:
Path: C:\Users\5_Brady\BirksNHC\Birks NHC Team for alt - Documents \Project Folders\SBrady Projects \ArcGIS - Projects here \Projects -
here \TOB_O rainage
PROJECT: 04-039-2020
STATUS: DRAFT DATE: 21/09/2022
Town of the Blue Mountains
Drainage Master Plan
Natural Heritage Evaluation
Figure 2c:
Study Area
i_ 1 Study Area Wetland Significance
Watercourse Unevaluated
Provincially Significant
BIRKS
Tatham NH Data
Grey County Official Plan (2018)
Culvert/Bridge Improvements NHS Core
SWMF Retrofits MI Significant Valleylands
SWMF Creation NHS Linkage
Q Creation of Floodplain Storage/Improved Quantity Control ANSI
Significant Woodlands
MAP DRAWING INFORMATION
DATA PROVIDED BY: ESRI CANADA
MAP CREATED BY: HM
MAP CHECKED BY: MF
MAP PROJECTION: NAD 1983 UTM ZONE 17N
0 190 380 760
1,140
Meters
1,520
FILE LOCATION:
Path: C:\Users\5_Brady\BirksNHC\Birks NHC Team for alt - Documents \Project Folders\SBrady Projects \ArcGIS - Projects here \Projects -
here \TOB_O rainage
PROJECT: 04-039-2020
STATUS: DRAFT
DATE: 21/09/2022
Town of the Blue Mountains
Drainage Master Plan
Natural Heritage Evaluation
Figure 2d:
Study Area
r-1 Study Area Wetland Significance
Watercourse Unevaluated
Provincially Significant
BIRKS
Tatham NH Data
Culvert/Bridge Improvements
SWMF Retrofits
SWMF Creation
® Creation of Floodplain Storage/Improved Quantity Control
Grey County Official Plan (2018)
77 NHS Core
MO Significant Valleylands
NHS Linkage
ANSI
Significant Woodlands
MAP DRAWING INFORMATION
DATA PROVIDED BY: ESRI CANADA
MAP CREATED BY: HM
MAP CHECKED BY: MF
MAP PROJECTION: NAD 1983 UTM ZONE 17N
0
190 380 760
1,140
Meters
1,520
FILE LOCATION:
Path: C:\Users\5_Brady\BirksNHC\Birks NHC Team for alt - Documents \Project Folders\SBrady Projects \ArcGIS - Projects here \Projects -
here \TOB_O rainage
PROJECT: 04-039-2020
STATUS: DRAFT
DATE: 21/09/2022
Town of the Blue Mountains
Drainage Master Plan
Natural Heritage Evaluation
Figure 2e:
Study Area
r-1 Study Area Wetland Significance
Watercourse Unevaluated
Provincially Significant
BIRKS
Tatham NH Data
Culvert/Bridge Improvements
SWMF Retrofits
SWMF Creation
® Creation of Floodplain Storage/Improved Quantity Control
Grey County Official Plan (2018)
77 NHS Core
MO Significant Valleylands
NHS Linkage
ANSI
Significant Woodlands
MAP DRAWING INFORMATION
DATA PROVIDED BY: ESRI CANADA
MAP CREATED BY: HM
MAP CHECKED BY: MF
MAP PROJECTION: NAD 1983 UTM ZONE 17N
0 187.5 375 750
1,125
Meters
1,500
FILE LOCATION:
Path: C:\Users\5_Brady\BirksNHC\Birks NHC Team for alt - Documents \Project Folders\SBrady Projects \ArcGIS - Projects here \Projects -
here \TOB_O rainage
PROJECT: 04-039-2020
STATUS: DRAFT
DATE: 21/09/2022
Town of the Blue Mountains
Drainage Master Plan
Natural Heritage Evaluation
Figure 2f:
Study Area
1
Study Area Wetland Significance
Watercourse Unevaluated
Provincially Significant
Tatham NH Data
Culvert/Bridge Improvements
SWMF Retrofits
SWMF Creation
® Creation of Floodplain Storage/Improved Quantity Control
Grey County Official Plan (2018)
77 NHS Core
=II Significant Valleylands
NHS Linkage
ANSI
Significant Woodlands
MAP DRAWING INFORMATION
DATA PROVIDED BY: ESRI CANADA
MAP CREATED BY: HM
MAP CHECKED BY: MF
MAP PROJECTION: NAD 1983 UTM ZONE 17N
0 225 450 900
1,350
Meters
1,800
FILE LOCATION:
Path: C:\Users\S_Brady\BirksNHC\Birks NHC Team for all - Documents \Project Folders\SBrady Projects\ArcGIS - Projects here \Projects -
here \TOB_Drainage
PROJECT: 04-039-2020
STATUS: DRAFT
DATE: 21/09/2022
BIRKS NHC 04-039-2020
Appendix C
Species at Risk Habitat Assessment
Town of The Blue Mountains DMP Appendix C. Species at Risk Summary
Natural Heritage Technical Memorandum Birks NHC 04-039-2020
BIRKS Natural Heritage Consultants, Inc 1
Appendix C: Town of The Blue Mountains Species at Risk Summary
This appendix was produced based on the most up-to-date policy and background information 1,
however, is not intended to act as a long-term assessment of potential Species at Risk within the Town
of The Blue Mountains Drainage Master Plan Study Area. The Endangered Species Act, 2007 (ESA) is
recognized as being a ‘proponent-driven’ piece of legislation and therefore it is the responsibility of the
landowner/developer to ensure compliance with the regulations made under this act. Given the
dynamic character of the natural environment, as well as potential future changes to policy (i.e., new
species listing, changes to legislation), consideration is recommended in the interpretation of potential
presence of Threatened or Endangered species as protected under the ESA at project initiation to
ensure compliance with the ESA at that the time of construction. All current Special Concern,
Threatened or Endangered species listed under Ontario Regulation 230/08 (currency date of January 26,
2022) that may intercept the Study Area, as illustrated in Appendix A of this report, have been
considered.
Generalist
The following Species at Risk are adapted to anthropogenic environs and have the potential to occur
throughout the Town of The Blue Mountains:
Barn Swallow (Threatened)
Little Brown Myotis (Endangered)
Woodland
The following Species at Risk have the potential to occur within woodland and forested environments of
the Town of The Blue Mountains:
Bald Eagle (Special Concern)
Butternut (Endangered)
Canada Warbler (Special Concern)
Eastern Wood-peewee (Special Concern)
Wood Thrush (Special Concern)
Hart’s-tongue Fern (Special Concern)
Louisiana Waterthrush (Threatened)
Northern Myotis, Tri-colored Bat, Eastern Small-footed Myotis, Little Brown Myotis (all
Endangered)
1 Fisheries and Oceans Canada. Species at Risk Mapping. Accessed June 2022
Natural Heritage Information Centre Information Request. Accessed April 2022
Ministry of the Environment, Conservation and Parks Species at Risk Information Request. May 20, 2022
Ontario Reptile and Amphibian Atlas. Accessed June 2022
Town of The Blue Mountains DMP Appendix C. Species at Risk Summary
Natural Heritage Technical Memorandum Birks NHC 04-039-2020
BIRKS Natural Heritage Consultants, Inc 2
Wetland
The following Species at Risk have the potential to occur within wetland environments within the Town
of The Blue Mountains:
Blanding’s Turtle (Threatened)
Restricted Species
Snapping Turtle (Special Concern)
Open Habitats (meadows, shrub thickets)
The following Species at Risk have the potential to occur within open meadows and fields within the
Town of The Blue Mountains:
Barn Swallow (Threatened)
Bobolink (Threatened)
Eastern Meadowlark (Threatened)
Butternut (Endangered)
Common Nighthawk (Special Concern)
Eastern Whip-poor-will (Threatened)
Watercourses
The following Species at Risk have the potential to occur within or may be associated with creeks and
rivers of the Town of Blue Mountains:
Bank Swallow (Threatened)
Barn Swallow (Threatened)
Silver Lamprey (Great Lakes - Upper St. Lawrence River Population) (Special Concern)
BIRKS NHC 04-039-2020
Appendix D
Significant Wildlife Habitat Assessment
Town of The Blue Mountains Drainage Master Plan Appendix D
Natural Heritage Assessment BIRKS NHC 04-039-2020
Page 1 of 26
Significant Wildlife Habitat Criteria Schedule for Ecoregion 6E
Seasonal Concentrations of Areas of Animals
Wildlife Habitat Wildlife Species Candidate SWH Confirmed SWH Assessment
ELC Ecosite Codes Habitat Criteria and Information Sources Defining Criteria
Waterfowl
Stopover and
Staging Areas
(Terrestrial)
Rationale:
Habitat important
to migrating
waterfowl.
American Black Duck
Wood Duck
Green-winged Teal
Blue-winged Teal
Mallard
Northern Pintail
Northern Shoveler
American Wigeon
Gadwall
CUM1
CUT1
Plus evidence of annual
spring flooding from
melt water or run-off
within these Ecosites.
Fields with sheet water during Spring (mid-March to May).
Fields flooding during spring melt and run-off provide
important invertebrate foraging habitat for migrating
waterfowl.
Agricultural fields with waste grains are commonly used
by waterfowl, these are not considered SWH unless
they have spring sheet water available.
Information Sources
Anecdotal information from the landowner, adjacent
landowners or local naturalist clubs may be good
information in determining occurrence.
Reports and other information available from
Conservation Authorities
Sites documented through waterfowl planning
processes
Field Naturalist Clubs
Ducks Unlimited Canada
Natural Heritage Information Centre (NHIC) Waterfowl
Concentration Area
Studies carried out and verified presence of
an annual concentration of any listed species,
evaluation methods to follow “Bird and Bird
Habitats: Guidelines for Wind Power Projects”
Any mixed species aggregations of 100 or
more individuals required.
The flooded field ecosite habitat plus a
100-300m radius area, dependant on
local site conditions and adjacent land
use is the significant wildlife habitat.
Annual use of habitat is documented
from information sources or field studies
(annual use can be based on studies or
determined by past surveys with species
numbers and dates).
Significant Wildlife Habitat Mitigation
Support Tool Index #7 provides
development effects and mitigation
measures.
ELC Ecosite Codes not provided at
this stage.
NHIC records do not list Waterfowl
Concentration Area in the Study
Area.
No further consideration is
warranted.
Waterfowl
Stopover and
Staging Areas
(Aquatic)
Rationale:
Important for
local and migrant
waterfowl
populations
during the spring
Canada Goose
Cackling Goose
Snow Goose
American Black Duck
Northern Pintail
Northern Shoveler
American Wigeon
Gadwall
Green-winged Teal
Blue-winged Teal
Common Merganser
MAS1
MAS2
MAS3
SAS1
SAM1
SAF1
SWD1
SWD2
SWD3
SWD4
SWD5
Ponds, marshes, lakes, bays, coastal inlets, and
watercourses used during migration. Sewage treatment
ponds and storm water ponds do not qualify as a SWH,
however a reservoir managed as a large wetland or
pond/lake does qualify.
These habitats have an abundant food supply (mostly
aquatic invertebrates and vegetation in shallow water)
Information Sources
Environment Canada.
Naturalist Hooded Merganser
Studies carried out and verified presence of:
Aggregations of 100 or more of listed
species for 7 days, results in > 700
waterfowl use days.
Areas with annual staging of ruddy ducks,
canvasbacks, and redheads are SWH
The combined area of the ELC ecosites
and a 100m radius area is the SWH
Wetland area and shorelines associated
with sites identified within the Significant
ELC Ecosite Codes not provided at
this stage.
Suitable habitats are not present
within the Study Area for waterfowl
stopover and staging (aquatic); no
ponds of suitable size, swamp, lakes
or coastal inlets are present.
SWM features are not considered to
be SWH.
Town of The Blue Mountains Drainage Master Plan Appendix D
Natural Heritage Assessment BIRKS NHC 04-039-2020
Page 2 of 26
Wildlife Habitat Wildlife Species Candidate SWH Confirmed SWH Assessment
ELC Ecosite Codes Habitat Criteria and Information Sources Defining Criteria
or fall migration
or both periods
combined. Sites
identified are
usually only one
of a few in the
eco-district.
Lesser Scaup
Greater Scaup
Long-tailed Duck
Surf Scoter
White-winged Scoter
Black Scoter
Ring-necked duck
Common Goldeneye
Bufflehead
Redhead
Ruddy Duck
Red-breasted Merganser
Brant
Canvasback
Ruddy Duck
SWD6
SWD7
clubs often are aware of staging/stopover areas.
OMNRF Wetland Evaluations indicate presence of
locally and regionally significant waterfowl staging.
Sites documented through waterfowl planning
processes
Ducks Unlimited projects
Element occurrence specification by Nature Serve:
http://www.natureserve.org
Natural Heritage Information Centre (NHIC) Waterfowl
Concentration Areas
Wildlife Habitat Technical Guide Appendix
K are significant wildlife habitat.
Evaluation methods to follow “Bird and
Bird Habitats: Guidelines for Wind Power
Projects”
Annual Use of Habitat is Documented
from Information Sources or Field Studies
(Annual can be based on completed
studies or determined from past surveys
with species numbers and dates
recorded).
Significant Wildlife Habitat Mitigation
Support Tool Index #7 provides
development effects and mitigation
measures.
NHIC records do not list Waterfowl
Concentration Areas within the
Study Area.
No further consideration is
warranted.
Shorebird
Migratory
Stopover Area
Rationale: High
quality shorebird
stopover habitat
is extremely rare
and typically has
a long history of
use.
Greater Yellowlegs
Lesser Yellowlegs
Marbled Godwit
Hudsonian Godwit
Black-bellied Plover
American Golden-Plover
Semipalmated Plover
Solitary Sandpiper
Spotted Sandpiper
Semipalmated Sandpiper
Pectoral Sandpiper
White-rumped Sandpiper
Baird’s Sandpiper
Least Sandpiper
Purple Sandpiper
Stilt Sandpiper
Short-billed Dowitcher
Red-necked Phalarope
Whimbrel
Ruddy Turnstone
Sanderling
BBO1
BBO2
BBS1
BBS2
BBT1
BBT2
SDO1
SDS2
SDT1
MAM1
MAM2
MAM3
MAM4
MAM5
Shorelines of lakes, rivers and wetlands, including
beach areas, bars and seasonally flooded, muddy and
un-vegetated shoreline habitats.
Great Lakes coastal shorelines, including groynes and
other forms of armour rock lakeshores, are extremely
important for migratory shorebirds in May to mid-June
and early July to October.
Sewage treatment ponds and storm water ponds do
not qualify as a SWH.
Information Sources
Western hemisphere shorebird reserve network.
Canadian Wildlife Service (CWS) Ontario Shorebird
Survey.
Bird Studies Canada
Ontario Nature
Local birders and naturalist clubs
Natural Heritage Information Center (NHIC) Shorebird
Migratory Concentration Area
Studies confirming:
Presence of 3 or more of listed species
and > 1000 shorebird use days during
spring or fall migration period (shorebird
use days are the accumulated number of
shorebirds counted per day over the
course of the fall or spring migration
period)
Whimbrel stop briefly (<24hrs) during
spring migration, any site with >100
Whimbrel used for 3 years or more is
significant.
The area of significant shorebird habitat
includes the mapped ELC shoreline
ecosites plus a 100m radius area
Evaluation methods to follow “Bird and
Bird Habitats: Guidelines for Wind Power
Projects”
Significant Wildlife Habitat Mitigation
Support Tool Index #8 provides
Suitable habitat does not intersect
proposed drainage improvement
projects within the Study Area for
Shorebird Migratory Stopover Area;
no lakes, beach areas or
unvegetated shoreline habitats
NHIC records do not list Shorebird
Migratory Concentration Area
within the Study Area.
SWM features are not considered to
be SWH.
No further consideration is
warranted.
Town of The Blue Mountains Drainage Master Plan Appendix D
Natural Heritage Assessment BIRKS NHC 04-039-2020
Page 3 of 26
Wildlife Habitat Wildlife Species Candidate SWH Confirmed SWH Assessment
ELC Ecosite Codes Habitat Criteria and Information Sources Defining Criteria
Dunlin development effects and mitigation
measures.
Raptor Wintering
Area
Rationale:
Sites used by
multiple species,
a high number of
individuals and
used annually are
most significant
Rough-legged Hawk
Red-tailed Hawk
Northern Harrier
American Kestrel
Snowy Owl
Special Concern:
Short-eared Owl
Bald Eagle
Hawks/Owls:
Combination of ELC
Community Series; need
to have present one
Community Series from
each land class;
Forest:
FOD, FOM, FOC.
Upland:
CUM; CUT; CUS; CUW.
Bald Eagle:
Forest community Series:
FOD, FOM, FOC, SWD,
SWM or SWC on
shoreline areas adjacent
to large rivers or
adjacent to lakes with
open water (hunting
area).
The habitat provides a combination of fields and
woodlands that provide roosting, foraging and resting
habitats for wintering raptors.
Raptor wintering sites (hawk/owl) need to be > 20 ha
with a combination of forest and upland.
Least disturbed sites, idle/fallow or lightly grazed
field/meadow (>15ha) with adjacent woodlands
Field area of the habitat is to be wind swept with
limited snow depth or accumulation.
Eagle sites have open water, large trees and snags
available for roosting
Information Sources:
OMNRF Ecologist or Biologist Field Naturalist Clubs
Natural Heritage Information Center (NHIC) Raptor
Winter Concentration Area
Data from Bird Studies Canada
Results of Christmas Bird Counts Reports and other
information available from Conservation Authorities.
Studies confirm the use of these habitats by:
One or more Short-eared Owls or; One or
more Bald Eagles or; At least 10
individuals and two of the listed
hawk/owl species.
To be significant a site must be used
regularly (3 in 5 years) for a minimum of
20 days by the above number of birds.
The habitat area for an Eagle winter site is
the shoreline forest ecosites directly
adjacent to the prime hunting area
Evaluation methods to follow “Bird and
Bird Habitats: Guidelines for Wind Power
Projects”
Significant Wildlife Habitat Mitigation
Support Tool Index #10 and #11 provides
development effects and mitigation
measures.
The Study Area contains woodlands
and open uplands that form a large
contiguous woodland feature
beyond the Study Area. Wildlife
species are known to occur within
the Town of The Blue Mountains
and DMP Study Area. Further
consideration is warranted.
Bat Hibernacula
Rationale; Bat
hibernacula are
rare habitats in all
Ontario
landscapes.
Big Brown Bat
Tri-coloured Bat
Bat Hibernacula may be
found in these ecosites:
CCR1
CCR2
CCA1
CCA2
(Note: buildings are not
considered to be SWH)
Hibernacula may be found in caves, mine shafts,
underground foundations and Karsts.
Active mine sites should not be considered as SWH
The locations of bat hibernacula are relatively poorly
known.
Information Sources
OMNRF for possible locations and contact for local
experts
Natural Heritage Information Center (NHIC) Bat
Hibernaculum Ministry of Northern
Development and Mines for location of mine shafts.
Clubs that explore caves (e.g. Sierra Club)
All sites with confirmed hibernating bats
are SWH.
The habitat area includes a 200m radius
around the entrance of the hibernaculum,
for most development types and 1000m
for wind farms
Studies are to be conducted during the
peak swarming period (Aug. – Sept.).
Surveys should be conducted following
methods outlined in the “Bats and Bat
Habitats: Guidelines for Wind Power
Projects.
No caves, mine shafts, karst or
underground foundations have
been identified within the Study
Area. Study Area is located outside
of the Escarpment proper, which
would provide this type of habitat.
No further consideration is
warranted.
Town of The Blue Mountains Drainage Master Plan Appendix D
Natural Heritage Assessment BIRKS NHC 04-039-2020
Page 4 of 26
Wildlife Habitat Wildlife Species Candidate SWH Confirmed SWH Assessment
ELC Ecosite Codes Habitat Criteria and Information Sources Defining Criteria
University Biology Departments with bat experts. Significant Wildlife Habitat Mitigation
Support Tool Index #1 provides
development effects and mitigation
measures.
Bat Maternity
Colonies
Rationale: Known
locations of
forested bat
maternity
colonies are
extremely rare in
all Ontario
landscapes.
Big Brown Bat
Silver-haired Bat
Maternity colonies
considered SWH are
found in forested
Ecosites.
All ELC Ecosites in ELC
Community Series:
FOD
FOM
SWD
SWM
Maternity colonies can be found in tree cavities,
vegetation and often in buildings (buildings are not
considered to be SWH).
Maternity roosts are not found in caves and mines in
Ontario.
Maternity colonies located in Mature deciduous or
mixed forest stands with >10/ha large diameter (>25cm
dbh) wildlife trees
Female Bats prefer wildlife tree (snags) in early stages
of decay, class 1-3.
Silver-haired Bats prefer older mixed or deciduous
forest and form maternity colonies in tree cavities and
small hollows. Older forest areas with at least 21
snags/ha are preferred
Information Sources
OMNRF for possible locations and contact for local
experts
University Biology Departments with bat experts.
Maternity Colonies with confirmed use
by;
>10 Big Brown BatsⒺ
>5 Adult Female Silver-haired Bats
The area of the habitat includes the entire
woodland or a forest stand ELC Ecosite or
an Ecoelement containing the maternity
colonies.
Evaluation methods for maternity
colonies should be conducted following
methods outlined in the “Bats and Bat
Habitats: Guidelines for Wind Power
Projects”.
Significant Wildlife Habitat Mitigation
Support Tool Index #12 provides
development effects and mitigation
measures.
The Study Area contains forested
habitat that may contain mature
trees that provide this function to
the listed bat species.
Further consideration is warranted
to adequately assess the presence
of Bat Maternity Colonies within
each drainage improvement
project location.
Town of The Blue Mountains Drainage Master Plan Appendix D
Natural Heritage Assessment BIRKS NHC 04-039-2020
Page 5 of 26
Wildlife Habitat Wildlife Species Candidate SWH Confirmed SWH Assessment
ELC Ecosite Codes Habitat Criteria and Information Sources Defining Criteria
Turtle Wintering
Areas
Rationale:
Generally sites
are the only
known sites in
the area. Sites
with the highest
number of
individuals are
most significant.
Midland Painted Turtle
Special Concern:
Northern Map Turtle
Snapping Turtle
Snapping and Midland
Painted Turtles; ELC
Community
Classes; SW, MA, OA and
SA, ELC Community
Series; FEO and BOO
Northern Map Turtle;
Open Water areas such
as deeper rivers or
streams and lakes with
current can also be used
as over-wintering
habitat.
For most turtles, wintering areas are in the same
general area as their core habitat. Water must be deep
enough not to freeze and have soft mud substrates.
Over-wintering sites are permanent water bodies, large
wetlands, and bogs or fens with adequate Dissolved
Oxygen
Man-made ponds such as sewage lagoons or storm
water ponds should not be considered SWH.
Information Sources
EIS studies carried out by Conservation Authorities.
Local field naturalists and experts, as well as university
herpetologists may also know where to find some of
these sites.
OMNRF Ecologist or Biologist
Field Naturalist clubs
Natural Heritage Information Center (NHIC)
Presence of 5 over-wintering Midland
Painted Turtles is significant.
One or more Northern Map Turtle or
Snapping Turtle over-wintering within a
wetland is significant.
The mapped ELC ecosite area with the
over wintering turtles is the SWH. If the
hibernation site is within a stream or
river, the deep-water pool where the
turtles are over wintering is the SWH.
Over wintering areas may be identified by
searching for congregations (Basking
Areas) of turtles on warm, sunny days
during the fall (Sept. – Oct.) or spring
(Mar. – May)
Congregation of turtles is more common
where wintering areas are limited and
therefore significant
Significant Wildlife Habitat Mitigation
Support Tool Index #28 provides
development effects and mitigation
measures for turtle wintering habitat.
NHIC records indicate several
occurrences of Midland Painted
Turtle and Snapping Turtle
throughout the Study Area.
Further consideration is warranted
to adequately assess the presence
of Turtle Wintering Areas within
each drainage improvement
project location.
Town of The Blue Mountains Drainage Master Plan Appendix D
Natural Heritage Assessment BIRKS NHC 04-039-2020
Page 6 of 26
Wildlife Habitat Wildlife Species Candidate SWH Confirmed SWH Assessment
ELC Ecosite Codes Habitat Criteria and Information Sources Defining Criteria
Reptile
Hibernaculum
Rationale;
Generally sites
are the only
known sites in
the area. Sites
with the highest
number of
individuals are
most significant.
Snakes:
Eastern Gartersnake
Northern Watersnake
Northern Red-bellied
Snake
Northern Brownsnake
Smooth Green Snake
Northern Ring-necked
Snake
Milksnake
Special Concern:
Eastern Ribbonsnake
Lizard:
Special Concern
(Southern Shield
population): Five-lined
Skink
For all snakes, habitat
may be found in any
ecosite other than very
wet ones. Talus, Rock
Barren, Crevice, Cave,
and Alvar sites may be
directly related to these
habitats.
Observations or
congregations of snakes
on sunny warm days in
the spring or fall is a
good indicator.
For Five-lined Skink, ELC
Community Series of
FOD and FOM and
Ecosites: FOC1 FOC3
For snakes, hibernation takes place in sites located
below frost lines in burrows, rock crevices and other
natural or naturalized locations. The existence of
features that go below frost line; such as rock piles or
slopes, old stone fences, and abandoned crumbling
foundations assist in identifying candidate SWH.
Areas of broken and fissured rock are particularly
valuable since they provide access to subterranean sites
below the frost line
Wetlands can also be important over-wintering habitat
in conifer or shrub swamps and swales, poor fens, or
depressions in bedrock terrain with sparse trees or
shrubs with sphagnum moss or sedge hummock ground
cover.
Five-lined skink prefer mixed forests with rock outcrop
openings providing cover rock overlaying granite
bedrock with fissures .
Information Sources
In spring, local residents or landowners may have
observed the emergence of snakes on their property
(e.g. old dug wells).
Reports and other information available from
Conservation Authorities.
Field Naturalists clubs
University herpetologists
Natural Heritage Information Center (NHIC)
OMNRF ecologist or biologist may be aware of locations
of wintering skinks
Studies confirming:
Presence of snake hibernacula used by a
minimum of five individuals of a snake sp.
or; individuals of two or more snake spp.
Congregations of a minimum of five
individuals of a snake sp. or; individuals of
two or more snake spp. near potential
hibernacula (eg. foundation or rocky
slope) on sunny warm days in Spring
(Apr/May) and Fall (Sept/Oct)
Note: If there are Special Concern Species
present, then site is SWH
Note: Sites for hibernation possess
specific habitat parameters (e.g.
temperature, humidity, etc.) and
consequently are used annually, often by
many of the same individuals of a local
population (i.e. strong hibernation site
fidelity). Other critical life processes (e.g.
mating) often take place in close
proximity to hibernacula. The feature in
which the hibernacula is located plus a 30
m radius area is the SWH
Significant Wildlife Habitat Mitigation
Support Tool Index #13 provides
development effects and mitigation
measures for snake hibernacula.
Presence of any active hibernaculum for
skink is significant.
Significant Wildlife Habitat Mitigation
Support Tool Index #37 provides
development effects and mitigation
measures for five-lined skink wintering
habitat.
NHIC records indicate several
occurrences of Eastern Milksnake
throughout the Study Area.
Wildlife species at known to occur
in the Study Area
Features associated with this
function appear to be common in
the general landscape as reptile
hibernaculum habitat may be
found in almost any ecosite.
Reptiles may gain access to below
the frost line for hibernation
through rodent burrows and tree
root systems in the Study Area.
Further consideration is warranted
to adequately assess the presence
of Reptile Hibernaculum within
each drainage improvement
project location.
Town of The Blue Mountains Drainage Master Plan Appendix D
Natural Heritage Assessment BIRKS NHC 04-039-2020
Page 7 of 26
Wildlife Habitat Wildlife Species Candidate SWH Confirmed SWH Assessment
ELC Ecosite Codes Habitat Criteria and Information Sources Defining Criteria
Colonially -
Nesting Bird
Breeding Habitat
(Bank and Cliff)
Rationale:
Historical use and
number of nests
in a colony make
this habitat
significant. An
identified colony
can be very
important to local
populations. All
swallow
populations are
declining in
Ontario.
Cliff Swallow
Northern Rough-winged
Swallow (this species is
not colonial but can be
found in Cliff Swallow
colonies)
Eroding banks, sandy
hills, borrow pits, steep
slopes, and sand piles.
Cliff faces, bridge
abutments, silos, barns.
Habitat found in the
following ecosites:
CUM1
CUT1
CUS1
BLO1
BLS1
BLT1
CLO1
CLS1
CLT1
Any site or areas with exposed soil banks, undisturbed
or naturally eroding that is not a licensed/permitted
aggregate area.
Does not include man-made structures (bridges or
buildings) or recently (2 years) disturbed soil areas,
such as berms, embankments, soil or aggregate
stockpiles.
Does not include a licensed/permitted Mineral
Aggregate Operation.
Information Sources
Reports and other information available from
Conservation Authorities.
Ontario Breeding Bird Atlas
Bird Studies Canada; NatureCounts
http://www.birdscanada.org/birdmon/
Field Naturalist Clubs.
Studies confirming:
Presence of 1 or more nesting sites with 8
or more cliff swallow pairs and/or rough-
winged swallow pairs during the breeding
season.
A colony identified as SWH will include a
50m radius habitat area from the
peripheral nests
Field surveys to observe and count
swallow nests are to be completed during
the breeding season. Evaluation methods
to follow “Bird and Bird Habitats:
Guidelines for Wind Power Projects”
Significant Wildlife Habitat Mitigation
Support Tool Index #4 provides
development effects and mitigation
measures
No eroding banks, sandy hills,
borrow pits, sand piles, cliff faces,
are present in the Study Area for
colonially-nesting bird breeding
habitat (bank and cliff). The
proposed drainage improvement
projects do not intercept this type
of habitat.
No further consideration is
warranted.
Colonially -
Nesting Bird
Breeding Habitat
(Tree/Shrubs)
Rationale: Large
colonies are
important to local
bird population,
typically sites are
only known
colony in area
and are used
annually.
Great Blue Heron
Black-crowned Night-
Heron
Great Egret
Green Heron
SWM2
SWM3
SWM5
SWM6
SWD1
SWD2
SWD3
SWD4
SWD5
SWD6
SWD7
FET1
Nests in live or dead standing trees in wetlands, lakes,
islands, and peninsulas. Shrubs and occasionally
emergent vegetation may also be used.
Most nests in trees are 11 to 15 m from ground, near
the top of the tree.
Information Sources
Ontario Breeding Bird Atlas, colonial nest records.
Ontario Heronry Inventory 1991 available from Bird
Studies Canada or NHIC (OMNRF).
Natural Heritage Information Center (NHIC) Mixed
Wader Nesting Colony
Aerial photographs can help identify large heronries.
Reports and other information available from CAs.
MNRF District Offices.
Local naturalist clubs.
Studies confirming:
Presence of 5 or more active nests of
Great Blue Heron or other listed species.
The habitat extends from the edge of the
colony and a minimum 300m radius or
extent of the Forest Ecosite containing
the colony or any island <15.0ha with a
colony is the SWH
Confirmation of active heronries are to be
achieved through site visits conducted
during the nesting season (April to
August) or by evidence such as the
presence of fresh guano, dead young
and/or eggshells
Significant Wildlife Habitat Mitigation
Support Tool Index #5 provides
Suitable habitat intersects
proposed drainage improvements
within the Study Area – swamp
habitats are present within the
Study Area.
NHIC records list Colonially -
Nesting Bird Breeding Habitat as
present within the Study Area.
Further consideration is warranted
to adequately assess the presence
of Colonially -Nesting Bird Breeding
Habitat within each drainage
improvement project location.
Town of The Blue Mountains Drainage Master Plan Appendix D
Natural Heritage Assessment BIRKS NHC 04-039-2020
Page 8 of 26
Wildlife Habitat Wildlife Species Candidate SWH Confirmed SWH Assessment
ELC Ecosite Codes Habitat Criteria and Information Sources Defining Criteria
development effects and mitigation
measures.
Colonially -
Nesting Bird
Breeding Habitat
(Ground)
Rationale;
Colonies are
important to local
bird population,
typically sites are
only known
colony in area
and are used
annually.
Herring Gull
Great Black-backed Gull
Little Gull
Ring-billed Gull
Common Tern
Caspian Tern
Brewer’s Blackbird
Any rocky island or
peninsula (natural or
artificial) within a lake or
large river (two-lined on
a 1;50,000 NTS map).
Close proximity to
watercourses in open
fields or pastures with
scattered trees or shrubs
(Brewer’s Blackbird)
MAM1 – 6;
MAS1 – 3;
CUM
CUT
CUS
Nesting colonies of gulls and terns are on islands or
peninsulas associated with open water or in marshy
areas.
Brewers Blackbird colonies are found loosely on the
ground in low bushes in close proximity to streams and
irrigation ditches within farmlands.
Information Sources
Ontario Breeding Bird Atlas , rare/colonial species
records.
Canadian Wildlife Service
Reports and other information available from CAs.
Natural Heritage Information Center (NHIC) Colonial
Waterbird Nesting Area
MNRF District Offices.
Field Naturalist clubs.
Studies confirming:
Presence of > 25 active nests for Herring
Gulls or Ring-billed Gulls, >5 active nests
for Common Tern or >2 active nests for
Caspian Tern.
Presence of 5 or more pairs for Brewer’s
Blackbird.
Any active nesting colony of one or more
Little Gull, and Great Black-backed Gull is
significant.
The edge of the colony and a minimum
150m radius area of habitat, or the extent
of the ELC ecosites containing the colony
or any island <3.0ha with a colony is the
SWH
Studies would be done during May/June
when actively nesting. Evaluation
methods to follow “Bird and Bird
Habitats: Guidelines for Wind Power
Projects”
Significant Wildlife Habitat Mitigation
Support Tool Index #6 provides
development effects and mitigation
measures.
NHIC records indicate several
occurrences of Colonial Waterbird
Nesting Areas throughout the
Study Area.
Further consideration is warranted
to adequately assess the presence
of Colonially -Nesting Bird Breeding
Habitat within each drainage
improvement project location.
Migratory
Butterfly
Stopover Areas
Rationale:
Butterfly
stopover areas
are extremely
Painted Lady
Red Admiral
Special Concern
Monarch
Combination of ELC
Community Series; need
to have present one
Community Series from
each land class:
Field:
CUM
CUT
A butterfly stopover area will be a minimum of 10 ha in size
with a combination of field and forest habitat present and
will be located within 5 km of Lake Ontario.
The habitat is typically a combination of field and
forest, and provides the butterflies with a location to
rest prior to their long migration south
The habitat should not be disturbed, fields/meadows
with an abundance of preferred nectar plants and
Studies confirm:
The presence of Monarch Use Days
(MUD) during fall migration (Aug/Oct).
MUD is based on the number of days a
site is used by Monarchs, multiplied by
the number of individuals using the site.
Numbers of butterflies can range from
100-500/day, significant variation can
Study Area is not located within 5
km of Lake Ontario and thus this
habitat function is not applicable.
No further consideration is
warranted.
Town of The Blue Mountains Drainage Master Plan Appendix D
Natural Heritage Assessment BIRKS NHC 04-039-2020
Page 9 of 26
Wildlife Habitat Wildlife Species Candidate SWH Confirmed SWH Assessment
ELC Ecosite Codes Habitat Criteria and Information Sources Defining Criteria
rare habitats and
are biologically
important for
butterfly species
that migrate
south for the
winter.
CUS
Forest:
FOC
FOD
FOM
CUP
Anecdotally, a candidate
site for butterfly
stopover will have a
history of butterflies
being observed.
woodland edge providing shelter are requirements for
this habitat.
Staging areas usually provide protection from the
elements and are often spits of land or areas with the
shortest distance to cross the Great Lakes
Information Sources
OMNRF (NHIC)
Agriculture Canada in Ottawa may have list of
butterfly experts.
Field Naturalist Clubs
Toronto Entomologists Association
Conservation Authorities
occur between years and multiple years
of sampling should occur.
Observational studies are to be
completed and need to be done
frequently during the migration period to
estimate MUD.
MUD of >5000 or >3000 with the
presence of Painted Ladies or Red
Admiral’s is to be considered significant.
Significant Wildlife Habitat Mitigation
Support Tool Index #16 provides
development effects and mitigation
measures.
Landbird
Migratory
Stopover Areas
Rationale: Sites
with a high
diversity of
species as well as
high numbers are
most significant.
All migratory songbirds.:
Canadian Wildlife Service
Ontario website.
All migrant raptor species:
Ontario Ministry of
Natural Resources: Fish
and Wildlife Conservation
Act, 1997. Schedule 7:
Specially Protected Birds
(Raptors)
All Ecosites associated
with these ELC
Community Series;
FOC
FOM
FOD
SWC
SWM
SWD
Woodlots need to be >10 ha in size and within 5 km of Lake
Ontario.
If multiple woodlands are located along the
shoreline those Woodlands <2km from Lake
Ontario are more significant
Sites have a variety of habitats; forest, grassland
and wetland complexes.
The largest sites are more significant
Woodlots and forest fragments are important
habitats to migrating birds, these features located
along the shore and located within 5km of Lake
Ontario are Candidate SWH .
Information Sources
Bird Studies Canada
Ontario Nature
Local birders and naturalist club
Ontario Important Bird Areas (IBA) Program
Studies confirm:
Use of the habitat by >200 birds/day and
with >35 spp with at least 10 bird spp.
recorded on at least 5 different survey
dates. This abundance and diversity of
migrant bird species is considered above
average and significant.
Studies should be completed during
spring (Apr./May) and fall (Aug/Oct)
migration using standardized assessment
techniques. Evaluation methods to follow
“Bird and Bird Habitats: Guidelines for
Wind Power Projects”
Significant Wildlife Habitat Mitigation
Support Tool Index #9 provides
development effects
Study Area is not located within 5
km of Lake Ontario and thus this
habitat function is not applicable.
No further consideration is
warranted.
Deer Yarding
Areas
White-tailed Deer
Note: OMNRF to
determine this habitat.
Deer yarding areas or winter concentration areas
(yards) are areas deer move to in response to the onset
of winter snow and cold. This is a behavioural response
No Studies Required:
Snow depth and temperature are the
greatest influence on deer use of winter
No deer wintering SWH is mapped
by MNRF (LIO) in the Study Area.
Town of The Blue Mountains Drainage Master Plan Appendix D
Natural Heritage Assessment BIRKS NHC 04-039-2020
Page 10 of 26
Wildlife Habitat Wildlife Species Candidate SWH Confirmed SWH Assessment
ELC Ecosite Codes Habitat Criteria and Information Sources Defining Criteria
Rationale: Winter
habitat for deer is
considered to be
the main limiting
factor for
northern deer
populations. In
winter, deer
congregate in
“yards” to survive
severe winter
conditions. Deer
yards typically
have a long
history of annual
use by deer,
yards typically
represent 10-15%
of an areas
summer range.
ELC Community Series
providing a thermal
cover component for a
deer yard would include;
FOM, FOC, SWM and
SWC.
Or these ELC Ecosites;
CUP2
CUP3
FOD3
CUT
and deer will establish traditional use areas. The yard is
composed of two areas referred to as Stratum I and
Stratum II. Stratum II covers the entire winter yard area
and is usually a mixed or deciduous forest with plenty
of browse available for food. Agricultural lands can also
be included in this area. Deer move to these areas in
early winter and generally, when snow depths reach 20
cm, most of the deer will have moved here. If the snow
is light and fluffy, deer may continue to use this area
until 30 cm snow depth. In mild winters, deer may
remain in the Stratum II area the entire winter.
The Core of a deer yard (Stratum I) is located within the
Stratum II area and is critical for deer survival in areas
where winters become severe. It is primarily composed
of coniferous trees (pine, hemlock, cedar, spruce) with
a canopy cover of more than 60%.
OMNRF determines deer yards following methods
outlined in “Selected Wildlife and Habitat Features:
Inventory Manual"
Woodlots with high densities of deer due to artificial
feeding are not significant.
yards. Snow depths > 40cm for more than
60 days in a typically winter are minimum
criteria for a deer yard to be considered
as SWH.
Deer Yards are mapped by OMNRF
District offices. Locations of Core or
Stratum 1 and Stratum 2 Deer yards
considered significant by OMNRF will be
available at local MNRF offices or via Land
Information Ontario (LIO).
Field investigations that record deer
tracks in winter are done to confirm use
(best done from an aircraft). Preferably,
this is done over a series of winters to
establish the boundary of the Stratum I
and Stratum II yard in an "average"
winter. MNRF will complete these field
investigations.
If a SWH is determined for Deer
Wintering Area or if a proposed
development is within Stratum II yarding
area then Movement Corridors are to be
considered as outlined within this
Schedule.
Significant Wildlife Habitat Mitigation
Support Tool Index #2 provides
development effects and mitigation
measures.
No further consideration is
warranted.
Deer Winter
Congregation
Areas
Rationale: Deer
movement during
winter in the
White-tailed Deer
All Forested Ecosites
with these ELC
Community Series;
FOC
FOM
FOD
SWC
Woodlots will typically be >100 ha in size. Woodlots
<100ha may be considered as significant based on
MNRF studies or assessment.
Deer movement during winter in the southern areas of
Ecoregion 6E are not constrained by snow depth,
however deer will annually congregate in large
numbers in suitable woodlands.
Studies confirm:
Deer management is an MNRF
responsibility, deer winter congregation
areas considered significant will be
mapped by MNRF
Use of the woodlot by white-tailed deer
will be determined by MNRF, all woodlots
No deer wintering SWH is mapped
by MNRF (LIO) in the Study Area.
No further consideration is
warranted.
Town of The Blue Mountains Drainage Master Plan Appendix D
Natural Heritage Assessment BIRKS NHC 04-039-2020
Page 11 of 26
Wildlife Habitat Wildlife Species Candidate SWH Confirmed SWH Assessment
ELC Ecosite Codes Habitat Criteria and Information Sources Defining Criteria
southern areas of
Ecoregion 6E are
not constrained
by snow depth,
however deer will
annually
congregate in
large numbers in
suitable
woodlands to
reduce or avoid
the impacts of
winter conditions.
SWM
SWD
Conifer plantations much
smaller than 50 ha may
also be used.
If deer are constrained by snow depth refer to the Deer
Yarding Area habitat.
Large woodlots > 100ha and up to 1500 ha are known
to be used annually by densities of deer that range from
0.1-1.5 deer/ha .
Woodlots with high densities of deer due to artificial
feeding are not significant.
Information Sources
MNRF District Offices
LIO/NRVIS
exceeding the area criteria are significant,
unless determined not to be significant by
MNRF
Studies should be completed during
winter (Jan/Feb) when >20cm of snow is
on the ground using aerial survey
techniques, ground or road surveys. or a
pellet count deer density survey.
If a SWH is determined for Deer
Wintering Area or if a proposed
development is within Stratum II yarding
area then Movement Corridors are to be
considered as outlined below.
Significant Wildlife Habitat Mitigation
Support Tool Index #2 provides
development effects and mitigation
measures.
Town of The Blue Mountains Drainage Master Plan Appendix D
Natural Heritage Assessment BIRKS NHC 04-039-2020
Page 12 of 26
Rare Vegetation Communities
Rare Vegetation
Community
Candidate SWH Confirmed SWH Assessment
ELC Ecosite Code Habitat Description Detailed Information and Sources Defining Criteria
Cliffs and Talus
Slopes
Rationale: Cliffs
and Talus Slopes
are extremely
rare habitats in
Ontario.
Any ELC Ecosite within
Community Series:
TAO
TAS
TAT
CLO
CLS
CLT
A Cliff is vertical to near
vertical bedrock >3m in
height.
A Talus Slope is rock
rubble at the base of a cliff
made up of coarse rocky
debris
Most cliff and talus slopes occur along the Niagara
Escarpment.
Information Sources
The Niagara Escarpment Commission has detailed
information on location of these habitats.
OMNRF District
Natural Heritage Information Center (NHIC) has
location information available on their website
Field Naturalist clubs
Conservation Authorities
Confirm any ELC Vegetation Type for
Cliffs or Talus Slopes
Significant Wildlife Habitat Mitigation
Support Tool Index #21 provides
development effects and mitigation
measures.
Habitat in the Study Area does not
meet key criteria to be considered
significant. No cliff and talus slopes
are present in the area.
No further consideration is
warranted.
Sand Barren
Rationale; Sand
barrens are rare
in Ontario and
support rare
species. Most
Sand Barrens
have been lost
due to cottage
development and
forestry
ELC Ecosites:
SBO1
SBS1
SBT1
Vegetation cover varies
from patchy and barren
to continuous meadow
(SBO1), thicket-like
(SBS1), or more closed
and treed (SBT1). Tree
cover always ≤ 60%
Sand Barrens typically are
exposed sand, generally
sparsely vegetated and
caused by lack of
moisture, periodic fires
and erosion. Usually
located within other types
of natural habitat such as
forest or savannah.
Vegetation can vary from
patchy and barren to tree
covered, but less than
60%.
A sand barren area >0.5ha in size.
Information Sources
OMNRF Districts.
Natural Heritage Information Center (NHIC) has
location information available on their website.
Field Naturalist clubs
Conservation Authorities
Confirm any ELC Vegetation Type for
Sand Barrens
Site must not be dominated by exotic or
introduced species (<50% vegetative
cover are exotic sp.)
Significant Wildlife Habitat Mitigation
Support Tool Index #20 provides
development effects and mitigation
measures.
Habitat in the Study Area does not
meet key criteria to be considered
significant. No sand barren sites are
present in the area.
No further consideration is
warranted.
Alvar
Rationale; Alvars
are extremely
rare habitats in
Ecosregion 6E.
Most alvars in
Ontario are in
Ecoregions 6E
and 7E. Alvars in
ALO1
ALS1
ALT1
FOC1
FOC2
CUM2
CUS2
CUT2-1
CUW2
An alvar is typically a level,
mostly unfractured
calcareous bedrock
feature with a mosaic of
rock pavements and
bedrock overlain by a thin
veneer of soil. The
hydrology of alvars is
complex, with alternating
periods of inundation and
An Alvar site > 0.5 ha in size.
Information Sources
Alvars of Ontario (2000), Federation of Ontario
Naturalists.
Ontario Nature – Conserving Great Lakes Alvars.
Natural Heritage Information Center (NHIC) has
location information available on their website
OMNRF Districts
Field Naturalist clubs.
Field studies that identify four of the five
Alvar Indicator Species at a Candidate
Alvar site is Significant.
Site must not be dominated by exotic or
introduced species (<50% vegetative
cover are exotic sp.).
The alvar must be in excellent condition
and fit in with surrounding landscape
with few conflicting land uses
Habitat in the Study Area does not
meet key criteria to be considered
significant. No alvar sites are present
in the area.
No further consideration is
warranted.
Town of The Blue Mountains Drainage Master Plan Appendix D
Natural Heritage Assessment BIRKS NHC 04-039-2020
Page 13 of 26
Rare Vegetation
Community
Candidate SWH Confirmed SWH Assessment
ELC Ecosite Code Habitat Description Detailed Information and Sources Defining Criteria
6E are small and
highly localized
just north of the
Palaeozoic-
Precambrian
contact.
Five Alvar
Species:
1) Carex crawei
2) Panicum
philadelphicum
3) Eleocharis compressa
4) Scutellaria parvula
5) Trichostema
brachiatum
These indicator species
are very specific to
Alvars within Ecoregion
6E
drought. Vegetation cover
varies from sparse lichen-
moss associations to
grasslands and shrublands
and comprising a number
of characteristic or
indicator plants.
Undisturbed alvars can be
phyto- and
zoogeographically diverse,
supporting many
uncommon or are relict
plant and animal species.
Vegetation cover varies
from patchy to barren with
a less than 60% tree cover
Conservation Authorities.
Significant Wildlife Habitat Mitigation
Support Tool Index #17 provides
development effects and mitigation
measures.
Old Growth
Forest
Rationale; Due to
historic logging
practices,
extensive old
growth forest is
rare in the
Ecoregion.
Interior habitat
provided by old
growth forests is
required by many
wildlife species.
Forest Community
Series:
FOD
FOC
FOM
SWD
SWC
SWM
Old Growth forests are
characterized by heavy
mortality or turnover of
over-storey trees resulting
in a mosaic of gaps that
encourage development of
a multi-layered canopy
and an abundance of
snags and downed woody
debris.
Woodland areas 30 ha or greater in size or with at least 10
ha interior habitat assuming 100 m buffer at edge of forest.
Information Sources
OMNRF Forest Resource Inventory mapping
OMNRF Districts.
Field Naturalist clubs
Conservation Authorities
Sustainable Forestry Licence (SFL) companies will
possibly know locations through field operations.
Municipal forestry departments
Field Studies will determine:
If dominant trees species of the are >140
years old, then the area containing these
trees is SWH
The forested area containing the old
growth characteristics will have
experienced no recognizable forestry
activities (cut stumps will not be present)
The area of forest ecosites combined or
an eco-element within an ecosite that
contains the old growth characteristics is
the SWH.
Determine ELC vegetation types for the
forest area containing the old growth
characteristics
Significant Wildlife Habitat Mitigation
Support Tool Index #23 provides
development effects and mitigation
measures.
Woodland habitat within the Study
Area is not considered to be old
growth forest as the dominant trees
are less than 140 years old and the
woodland lacks the characteristics
required to be considered old
growth.
No further consideration is
warranted.
Town of The Blue Mountains Drainage Master Plan Appendix D
Natural Heritage Assessment BIRKS NHC 04-039-2020
Page 14 of 26
Rare Vegetation
Community
Candidate SWH Confirmed SWH Assessment
ELC Ecosite Code Habitat Description Detailed Information and Sources Defining Criteria
Savannah
Rationale:
Savannahs are
extremely rare
habitats in
Ontario.
TPS1
TPS2
TPW1
TPW2
CUS2
A Savannah is a tallgrass
prairie habitat that has
tree cover between 25 –
60%.
No minimum size to site. Site must be restored or a natural
site. Remnant sites such as railway right of ways are not
considered to be SWH.
Information Sources
Natural Heritage Information Center (NHIC) has
location information available on their website
OMNRF Districts
Field Naturalist clubs.
Conservation Authorities.
Field studies confirm one or more of the
Savannah indicator species listed in Appendix
N should be present. Note: Savannah plant
spp. list from Ecoregion 6E should be used.
Area of the ELC Ecosite is the SWH.
Site must not be dominated by exotic or
introduced species (<50% vegetative
cover are exotic sp.).
Significant Wildlife Habitat Mitigation
Support Tool Index #18 provides
development effects and mitigation
measures.
Habitat in the Study Area does not
meet key criteria to be considered
significant. No savannah sites are
present in the area.
No further consideration is
warranted.
Tallgrass Prairie
Rationale:
Tallgrass Prairies
are extremely
rare habitats in
Ontario.
TPO1
TPO2
A Tallgrass Prairie has
ground cover dominated
by prairie grasses. An open
Tallgrass Prairie habitat
has < 25% tree cover.
No minimum size to site. Site must be restored or a natural
site. Remnant sites such as railway right of ways are not
considered to be SWH.
Information Sources
Natural Heritage Information Center (NHIC) has
location information available on their website
OMNRF Districts
Field Naturalist clubs.
Conservation Authorities.
Field studies confirm one or more of the
Prairie indicator species listed in Appendix N
should be present. Note: Prairie plant spp. list
from Ecoregion 6E should be used
Area of the ELC Ecosite is the SWH.
Site must not be dominated by exotic or
introduced species (<50% vegetative
cover are exotic sp.).
Significant Wildlife Habitat Mitigation
Support Tool Index #19 provides
development effects and mitigation
measures.
Habitat in the Study Area does not
meet key criteria to be considered
significant. There are no tallgrass
prairie sites within the area.
No further consideration is
warranted.
Other Rare
Vegetation
Communities
Rationale: Plant
communities that
often contain
rare species
which depend on
the habitat for
survival.
Provincially Rare S1, S2
and S3 vegetation
communities are listed
in Appendix M of the
Significant Wildlife
Habitat Technical
Guide. Any ELC Ecosite
Code that has a
possible ELC Vegetation
Type that is Provincially
Rare is Candidate SWH.
Rare Vegetation
Communities may include
beaches, fens, forest,
marsh, barrens, dunes and
swamps.
ELC Ecosite codes that have the potential to be a rare ELC
Vegetation Type as outlined in appendix M
The OMNRF/NHIC will have up to date listing for rare
vegetation communities.
Information Sources
Natural Heritage Information Center (NHIC) has
location information available on their website
OMNRF Districts
Field Naturalist clubs.
Conservation Authorities.
Field studies should confirm if an ELC
Vegetation Type is a rare vegetation
community based on listing within Appendix
M of Significant Wildlife Habitat Technical
Guide.
Area of the ELC Vegetation Type polygon
is the SWH.
Significant Wildlife Habitat Mitigation
Support Tool Index #37 provides
development effects and mitigation
measures.
No rare vegetation communities have
been documented within the Study
Area.
No further consideration is
warranted.
Town of The Blue Mountains Drainage Master Plan Appendix D
Natural Heritage Assessment BIRKS NHC 04-039-2020
Page 15 of 26
Specialized Habitat for Wildlife
Wildlife Habitat Wildlife Species Candidate SHW Confirmed SWH Assessment
ELC Ecosite Codes Habitat Criteria and Information Sources Defining Criteria
Waterfowl
Nesting Area
Rationale;
Important to local
waterfowl
populations, sites
with greatest
number of
species and
highest number
of individuals are
significant.
American Black Duck
Northern Pintail
Northern Shoveler
Gadwall
Blue-winged Teal
Green-winged Teal
Wood Duck
Hooded Merganser
Mallard
All upland habitats located
adjacent to these wetland
ELC Ecosites are Candidate
SWH:
MAS1
MAS2
MAS3
SAS1
SAM1
SAF1
MAM1
MAM2
MAM3
MAM4
MAM5
MAM6
SWT1
SWT2
SWD1
SWD2
SWD3
SWD4
Note: includes adjacency
to Provincially Significant
Wetlands
A waterfowl nesting area extends 120 m from a wetland (>
0.5 ha) or a wetland (>0.5ha) and any small wetlands (0.5ha)
within 120m or a cluster of 3 or more small (<0.5 ha)
wetlands within 120 m of each individual wetland where
waterfowl nesting is known to occur.
Upland areas should be at least 120 m wide so that
predators such as racoons, skunks, and foxes have
difficulty finding nests.
Wood Ducks and Hooded Mergansers utilize large
diameter trees (>40cm dbh) in woodlands for cavity
nest sites.
Information Sources
Ducks Unlimited staff may know the locations of
particularly productive nesting sites.
OMNRF Wetland Evaluations for indication of significant
waterfowl nesting habitat.
Reports and other information available from
Conservation Authorities.
Studies confirmed:
Presence of 3 or more nesting pairs for
listed species excluding Mallards, or;
Presence of 10 or more nesting pairs for
listed species including Mallards.
Any active nesting site of an American
Black Duck is considered significant.
Nesting studies should be completed
during the spring breeding season (April -
June). Evaluation methods to follow “Bird
and Bird Habitats: Guidelines for Wind
Power Projects”
A field study confirming waterfowl
nesting habitat will determine the
boundary of the waterfowl nesting
habitat for the SWH, this may be greater
or less than 120 m from the wetland and
will provide enough habitat for waterfowl
to successfully nest.
Significant Wildlife Habitat Technical
Guide Index #25 provides development
effects and mitigation measures.
The Silver Creek Wetland Complex
Provincially Significant Wetlands
has been identified in the eastern
limit of the Study Area. Several un-
evaluated wetlands have been
identified throughout the Study
Area.
ELC ecosites are present within the
Study area and proximity to
drainage alternatives.
Further consideration is warranted
to adequately assess the presence
of Waterfowl Nesting Area within
each drainage improvement project
location.
Bald Eagle and
Osprey Nesting,
Foraging and
Perching Habitat
Rationale;
Nest sites are
fairly uncommon
in Eco-region 6E
Osprey
Special Concern
Bald Eagle
ELC Forest Community
Series: FOD, FOM, FOC,
SWD, SWM and SWC
directly adjacent to
riparian areas – rivers,
lakes, ponds and wetlands
Nests are associated with lakes, ponds, rivers or wetlands
along forested shorelines, islands, or on structures over
water.
Osprey nests are usually at the top a tree whereas Bald
Eagle nests are typically in super canopy trees in a notch
within the tree’s canopy.
Nests located on man-made objects are not to be
included as SWH (e.g. telephone poles and constructed
nesting platforms).
Studies confirm the use of these nests by:
One or more active Osprey or Bald Eagle
nests in an area.
Some species have more than one nest in
a given area and priority is given to the
primary nest with alternate nests included
within the area of the SWH.
For an Osprey, the active nest and a 300
m radius around the nest or the
Suitable habitat intersects
proposed drainage improvements
within the Study Area – swamp
habitats are present within the
Study Area.
Further consideration is warranted
to adequately assess the presence
of Bald Eagle and Osprey Nesting,
Town of The Blue Mountains Drainage Master Plan Appendix D
Natural Heritage Assessment BIRKS NHC 04-039-2020
Page 16 of 26
Wildlife Habitat Wildlife Species Candidate SHW Confirmed SWH Assessment
ELC Ecosite Codes Habitat Criteria and Information Sources Defining Criteria
and are used
annually by these
species. Many
suitable nesting
locations may be
lost due to
increasing
shoreline
development
pressures and
scarcity of
habitat.
Information Sources
Natural Heritage Information Center (NHIC) compiles all
known nesting sites for Bald Eagles in Ontario.
MNRF values information (LIO/NRVIS) will list known
nesting locations. Note: data from NRVIS is provided as
a point and does not represent all the habitat.
Nature Counts, Ontario Nest Records Scheme data.
OMNRF Districts.
Check the Ontario Breeding Bird Atlas or Rare Breeding
Birds in Ontario for species documented
Reports and other information available from
Conservation Authorities.
Field Naturalists clubs
contiguous woodland stand is the SWH ,
maintaining undisturbed shorelines with
large trees within this area is important .
For a Bald Eagle the active nest and a 400-
800 m radius around the nest is the SWH.
, Area of the habitat from 400-800m is
dependent on-site lines from the nest to
the development and inclusion of
perching and foraging habitat
To be significant a site must be used
annually. When found inactive, the site
must be known to be inactive for > 3
years or suspected of not being used for
>5 years before being considered not
significant.
Observational studies to determine nest
site use, perching sites and foraging areas
need to be done from mid March to mid
August.
Evaluation methods to follow “Bird and
Bird Habitats: Guidelines for Wind Power
Projects”
Significant Wildlife Habitat Technical
Guide Index #26 provides development
effects and mitigation measures
Foraging and Perching Habitat
within each drainage improvement
project location.
Woodland Raptor
Nesting Habitat
Rationale:
Nests sites for
these species are
rarely identified;
these area
sensitive habitats
and are often
used annually by
these species.
Northern Goshawk
Cooper’s Hawk
Sharp-shinned Hawk
Red-shouldered Hawk
Barred Owl
Broad-winged Hawk
May be found in all
forested ELC Ecosites.
May also be found in SWC,
SWM, SWD and CUP3
All natural or conifer plantation woodland/forest stands
>30ha with >10ha of interior habitat. Interior habitat
determined with a 200m buffer
Stick nests found in a variety of intermediate-aged to
mature conifer, deciduous or mixed forests within tops
or crotches of trees. Species such as Coopers hawk nest
along forest edges sometimes on peninsulas or small
off-shore islands.
In disturbed sites, nests may be used again, or a new
nest will be in close proximity to old nest.
Information Sources
Studies confirm:
Presence of 1 or more active nests from
species list is considered significant.
Red-shouldered Hawk and Northern
Goshawk – A 400m radius around the
nest or 28 ha area of habitat is the SWH
(the 28ha habitat area would be applied
where optimal habitat is irregularly
shaped around the nest)
Barred Owl – A 200m radius around the
nest is the SWH.
Woodland features within the Study
Area do not meet size criteria to be
considered SWH.
No further consideration is
warranted.
Town of The Blue Mountains Drainage Master Plan Appendix D
Natural Heritage Assessment BIRKS NHC 04-039-2020
Page 17 of 26
Wildlife Habitat Wildlife Species Candidate SHW Confirmed SWH Assessment
ELC Ecosite Codes Habitat Criteria and Information Sources Defining Criteria
OMNRF Districts.
Check the Ontario Breeding Bird Atlas or Rare Breeding
Birds in Ontario for species documented.
Check data from Bird Studies Canada.
Reports and other information available from
Conservation Authorities.
Broad-winged Hawk and Coopers Hawk–
A 100m radius around the nest is the
SWH.
Sharp-Shinned Hawk – A 50m radius
around the nest is the SWH.
Conduct field investigations from mid-
March to end of May. The use of call
broadcasts can help in locating territorial
(courting/nesting) raptors and facilitate
the discovery of nests by narrowing down
the search area.
Significant Wildlife Habitat Technical
Guide Index #27 provides development
effects and mitigation measures.
Turtle Nesting
Areas
Rationale;
These habitats
are rare and
when identified
will often be the
only breeding site
for local
populations of
turtles.
Midland Painted Turtle
Special Concern Species
Northern Map Turtle
Snapping Turtle
Exposed mineral soil (sand
or gravel) areas adjacent
(<100m) or within the
following ELC Ecosites:
MAS1
MAS2
MAS3
SAS1
SAM1
SAF1
BOO1
FEO1
Best nesting habitat for turtles are close to water and
away from roads and sites less prone to loss of eggs by
predation from skunks, raccoons or other animals.
For an area to function as a turtle-nesting area, it must
provide sand and gravel that turtles are able to dig in
and are located in open, sunny areas. Nesting areas on
the sides of municipal or provincial road embankments
and shoulders are not SWH.
Sand and gravel beaches adjacent to undisturbed
shallow weedy areas of marshes, lakes, and rivers are
most frequently used.
Information Sources
Use Ontario Soil Survey reports and maps to help find
suitable substrate for nesting turtles (well-drained sands
and fine gravels).
Check the Ontario Herpetofaunal Summary Atlas
records or other similar atlases for uncommon turtles;
location information may help to find potential nesting
habitat for them.
Natural Heritage Information Center (NHIC)
Field Naturalist clubs
Studies confirm:
Presence of 5 or more nesting Midland
Painted Turtles
One or more Northern Map Turtle or
Snapping Turtle nesting is a SWH.
The area or collection of sites within an
area of exposed mineral soils where the
turtles nest, plus a radius of 30-100m
around the nesting area dependant on
slope, riparian vegetation and adjacent
land use is the SWH.
Travel routes from wetland to nesting
area are to be considered within the SWH
as part of the 30-100m area of habitat.
Field investigations should be conducted
in prime nesting season typically late
spring to early summer. Observational
studies observing the turtles nesting is a
recommended method.
Areas of exposed soils suitable for
turtle nesting within the Study
Area.
Note that nesting areas on the sides
of municipal or provincial road
embankments and shoulders are
not SWH.
Further consideration is warranted
to adequately assess the presence
of Turtle Nesting Areas within each
drainage improvement project
location.
Town of The Blue Mountains Drainage Master Plan Appendix D
Natural Heritage Assessment BIRKS NHC 04-039-2020
Page 18 of 26
Wildlife Habitat Wildlife Species Candidate SHW Confirmed SWH Assessment
ELC Ecosite Codes Habitat Criteria and Information Sources Defining Criteria
Significant Wildlife Habitat Technical Guide
Index #28 provides development effects and
mitigation measures for turtle nesting habitat.
Seeps and
Springs
Rationale;
Seeps/Springs are
typical of
headwater areas
and are often at
the source of
coldwater
streams.
Wild Turkey
Ruffed Grouse
Spruce Grouse
White-tailed Deer
Salamander spp.
Seeps/Springs are areas
where ground water
comes to the surface.
Often they are found
within headwater areas
within forested habitats.
Any forested Ecosite
within the headwater
areas of a stream could
have seeps/springs.
Any forested area (with <25% meadow/field/pasture) within
the headwaters of a stream or river system.
Seeps and springs are important feeding and drinking
areas especially in the winter will typically support a
variety of plant and animal species
Information Sources
Topographical Map.
Thermography.
Hydrological surveys conducted by Conservation
Authorities and Ministry of the Environment,
Conservation and Parks.
Field Naturalists clubs and landowners.
Municipalities and Conservation Authorities may have
drainage maps and headwater areas mapped.
Field Studies confirm:
Presence of a site with 2 or more
seeps/springs should be considered SWH.
The area of an ELC forest ecosite or an
ecoelement within ecosite containing the
seeps/springs is the SWH. The protection
of the recharge area considering the
slope, vegetation, height of trees and
groundwater condition need to be
considered in delineation the habitat.
Significant Wildlife Habitat Technical
Guide Index #30 provides development
effects and mitigation measures
Groundwater seepage is known to
occur in the Study Area.
Further consideration is warranted
to adequately assess the presence
Seeps and Springs within each
drainage improvement project
location.
Town of The Blue Mountains Drainage Master Plan Appendix D
Natural Heritage Assessment BIRKS NHC 04-039-2020
Page 19 of 26
Wildlife Habitat Wildlife Species Candidate SHW Confirmed SWH Assessment
ELC Ecosite Codes Habitat Criteria and Information Sources Defining Criteria
Amphibian
Breeding Habitat
(Woodland).
Rationale:
These habitats
are extremely
important to
amphibian
biodiversity
within a
landscape and
often represent
the only breeding
habitat for local
amphibian
populations
Eastern Newt
Blue-spotted
Salamander
Spotted Salamander
Gray Treefrog
Spring Peeper
Western Chorus Frog
Wood Frog
All Ecosites associated with
these ELC Community
Series;
FOC
FOM
FOD
SWC
SWM
SWD
Breeding pools within the
woodland or the shortest
distance from forest
habitat are more
significant because they
are more likely to be used
due to reduced risk to
migrating amphibians
Presence of a wetland, pond or woodland pool
(including vernal pools) >500m2 (about 25m diameter)
within or adjacent (within 120m) to a woodland (no
minimum size). Some small wetlands may not be
mapped and may be important breeding pools for
amphibians.
Woodlands with permanent ponds or those containing
water in most years until mid-July are more likely to be
used as breeding habitat
Information Sources
Ontario Herpetofaunal Summary Atlas (or other similar
atlases) for records
Local landowners may also provide assistance as they
may hear spring-time choruses of amphibians on their
property.
OMNRF District.
OMNRF wetland evaluations
Field Naturalist clubs
Canadian Wildlife Service
Amphibian Road Call Survey
Ontario Vernal Pool Association:
http://www.ontariovernalpools.org
Studies confirm;
Presence of breeding population of 1 or
more of the listed newt/salamander
species or 2 or more of the listed frog
species with at least 20 individuals
(adults or eggs masses) or 2 or more of
the listed frog species with Call Level
Codes of 3.
A combination of observational study and
call count surveys will be required during
the spring (March-June) when amphibians
are concentrated around suitable
breeding habitat within or near the
woodland/wetlands.
The habitat is the wetland area plus a
230m radius of woodland area. If a
wetland area is adjacent to a woodland, a
travel corridor connecting the wetland to
the woodland is to be included in the
habitat.
Significant Wildlife Habitat Technical
Guide Index #14 provides development
effects and mitigation measures.
Woodland communities that
provide amphibian breeding
habitat are known to occur within
the Study Area.
Further consideration is warranted
to adequately assess the presence
of Amphibian Breeding Habitat
(Woodland) within each drainage
improvement project location.
Amphibian
Breeding Habitat
(Wetlands)
Rationale;
Wetlands
supporting
breeding for
these amphibian
species are
extremely
important and
fairly rare within
Eastern Newt
American Toad
Spotted Salamander
Four-toed Salamander
Blue-spotted
Salamander
Gray Treefrog
Western Chorus Frog
Northern Leopard Frog
Pickerel Frog
Green Frog
Mink Frog
Bullfrog
ELC Community
Classes SW, MA, FE, BO,
OA and SA.
Typically these wetland
ecosites will be isolated
(>120m) from woodland
ecosites, however larger
wetlands containing
predominantly aquatic
species (e.g. Bull Frog) may
be adjacent to woodlands.
Wetlands>500m2 (about 25m diameter), supporting
high species diversity are significant; some small or
ephemeral habitats may not be identified on MNRF
mapping and could be important amphibian breeding
habitats.
Presence of shrubs and logs increase significance of
pond for some amphibian species because of available
structure for calling, foraging, escape and concealment
from predators.
Bullfrogs require permanent water bodies with
abundant emergent vegetation.
Studies confirm:
Presence of breeding population of 1 or
more of the listed newt/salamander
species or 2 or more of the listed
frog/toad species with at least 20
individuals (adults or eggs masses) or 2 or
more of the listed frog/toad species with
Call Level Codes of 3. or; Wetland with
confirmed breeding Bullfrogs are
significant.
The ELC ecosite wetland area and the
shoreline are the SWH.
Wetland communities that provide
amphibian breeding habitat are
known to occur in the Study Area.
Further consideration is warranted
to adequately assess the presence
of Amphibian Breeding Habitat
(Wetlands) within each drainage
improvement project location.
Town of The Blue Mountains Drainage Master Plan Appendix D
Natural Heritage Assessment BIRKS NHC 04-039-2020
Page 20 of 26
Wildlife Habitat Wildlife Species Candidate SHW Confirmed SWH Assessment
ELC Ecosite Codes Habitat Criteria and Information Sources Defining Criteria
Central Ontario
landscapes.
Information Sources
Ontario Herpetofaunal Summary Atlas (or other similar
atlases)
Canadian Wildlife Service Amphibian Road Surveys and
Backyard Amphibian Call Count.
OMNRF Districts and wetland evaluations
Reports and other information available from
Conservation Authorities.
A combination of observational study and
call count surveys will be required during
the spring (March-June) when amphibians
are concentrated around suitable
breeding habitat within or near the
wetlands.
If a SWH is determined for Amphibian
Breeding Habitat (Wetlands) then
Movement Corridors are to be considered
as outlined below.
Significant Wildlife Habitat Technical
Guide Index #15 provides development
effects and mitigation measures.
Woodland
Area-Sensitive
Bird Breeding
Habitat
Rationale:
Large, natural
blocks of mature
woodland habitat
within the settled
areas of Southern
Ontario are
important
habitats for area
sensitive interior
forest song birds.
Yellow-bellied
Sapsucker
Red-breasted Nuthatch
Veery
Blue-headed Vireo
Northern Parula
Black-throated Green
Warbler
Blackburnian Warbler
Black-throated Blue
Warbler
Ovenbird
Scarlet Tanager
Winter Wren
Special Concern:
Canada Warbler
All Ecosites
associated with these ELC
Community Series;
FOC
FOM
FOD
SWC
SWM
SWD
Habitats where interior forest breeding birds are breeding,
typically large mature (>60 yrs old) forest stands or woodlots
>30 ha,
• Interior forest habitat is at least 200 m from forest edge
habitat.
Information Sources
Local bird clubs.
Canadian Wildlife Service (CWS) for the location of
forest bird monitoring.
Bird Studies Canada conducted a 3-year study of 287
woodlands to determine the effects of forest
fragmentation on forest birds and to determine what
forests were of greatest value to interior species
Reports and other information available from
Conservation Authorities.
Studies confirm:
Presence of nesting or breeding pairs of
3 or more of the listed wildlife species.
Note: any site with breeding Canada
Warblers is to be considered SWH.
Conduct field investigations in spring
and early summer when birds are singing
and defending their territories.
Evaluation methods to follow “Bird and
Bird Habitats: Guidelines for Wind Power
Projects”
Significant Wildlife Habitat Technical
Guide Index #34 provides development
effects and mitigation measures.
Woodlands of sufficient size maybe
present in the Study Area, and
listed species are confirmed to be
present.
Further consideration is warranted
to adequately assess the presence
of Woodland Area-Sensitive Bird
Breeding Habitat within each
drainage improvement project
location.
Habitat for Species of Conservation Concern (Not including Endangered or Threatened Species)
Town of The Blue Mountains Drainage Master Plan Appendix D
Natural Heritage Assessment BIRKS NHC 04-039-2020
Page 21 of 26
Wildlife Habitat Wildlife Species Candidate SHW Confirmed SWH Assessment
ELC Ecosite Codes Habitat Criteria and Information Sources Defining Criteria
Marsh Breeding
Bird Habitat
Rationale;
Wetlands for
these bird species
are typically
productive and
fairly rare in
Southern Ontario
landscapes.
American Bittern
Virginia Rail
Sora
Common Moorhen
American Coot
Pied-billed Grebe
Marsh Wren
Sedge Wren
Common Loon
Sandhill Crane
Green Heron
Trumpeter Swan
Special Concern:
Black Tern
Yellow Rail
MAM1
MAM2
MAM3
MAM4
MAM5
MAM6
SAS1
SAM1
SAF1
FEO1
BOO1
For Green Heron:
All SW, MA and CUM1
sites.
Nesting occurs in wetlands.
All wetland habitat is to be considered as long as there
is shallow water with emergent aquatic vegetation
present.
For Green Heron, habitat is at the edge of water such as
sluggish streams, ponds and marshes sheltered by
shrubs and trees. Less frequently, it may be found in
upland shrubs or forest a considerable distance from
water.
Information Sources
OMNRF District and wetland evaluations.
Field Naturalist clubs
Natural Heritage Information Center (NHIC) Records.
Reports and other information available from
Conservation Authorities.
Ontario Breeding Bird Atlas.
Studies confirm:
Presence of 5 or more nesting pairs of
Sedge Wren or Marsh Wren or 1 pair of
Sandhill Cranes; or breeding by any
combination of 5 or more of the listed
species.
Note: any wetland with breeding of 1 or
more Black Terns, Trumpeter Swan,
Green Heron or Yellow Rail is SWH.
Area of the ELC ecosite is the SWH.
Breeding surveys should be done in
May/June when these species are actively
nesting in wetland habitats.
Evaluation methods to follow “Bird and
Bird Habitats: Guidelines for Wind Power
Projects”
Significant Wildlife Habitat Technical
Guide Index #35 provides development
effects and mitigation measures
Ecosites and listed species are
known to occur within the Study
Area.
Further consideration is warranted
to adequately assess the presence
of Marsh Breeding Bird Habitat
within each drainage improvement
project location.
Open Country
Bird Breeding
Habitat
Sources Defining
Criteria
Rationale;
This wildlife
habitat is
declining
throughout
Ontario and North
America. Species
such as the
Upland Sandpiper
have declined
significantly the
past 40 years
Upland Sandpiper
Vesper Sparrow
Northern Harrier
Savannah Sparrow
Special Concern
Short-eared Owl
Grasshopper Sparrow
CUM1
CUM2
Large grassland areas (includes natural and cultural fields
and meadows) >30 ha
Grasslands not Class 1 or 2 agricultural lands, and not
being actively used for farming (i.e. no row cropping or
intensive hay or livestock pasturing in the last 5 years).
Grassland sites considered significant should have a
history of longevity, either abandoned fields, mature
hayfields and pasturelands that are at least 5 years or
older.
The Indicator bird species are area sensitive requiring
larger grassland areas than the common grassland
species.
Information Sources
Agricultural land classification maps, Ministry of
Agriculture.
Local bird clubs.
Field Studies confirm:
Presence of nesting or breeding of 2 or
more of the listed species.
A field with 1 or more breeding Short-
eared Owls or Grasshopper Sparrow is to
be considered SWH.
The area of SWH is the contiguous ELC
ecosite field areas.
Conduct field investigations of the most
likely areas in spring and early summer
when birds are singing and defending
their territories.
Evaluation methods to follow “Bird and
Bird Habitats: Guidelines for Wind Power
Projects”
Significant Wildlife Habitat Technical
Guide Index #32 provides development
effects and mitigation measures
The Study Area does not contain
grasslands of suitable size to be
considered significant.
No further consideration is
warranted.
Town of The Blue Mountains Drainage Master Plan Appendix D
Natural Heritage Assessment BIRKS NHC 04-039-2020
Page 22 of 26
Wildlife Habitat Wildlife Species Candidate SHW Confirmed SWH Assessment
ELC Ecosite Codes Habitat Criteria and Information Sources Defining Criteria
based on CWS
(2004) trend
records.
Ontario Breeding Bird Atlas
Reports and other information available from
Conservation Authorities.
Shrub/Early
Successional Bird
Breeding Habitat
Rationale;
This wildlife
habitat is
declining
throughout
Ontario and North
America.
The Brown
Thrasher has
declined
significantly over
the past 40 years
based on CWS
(2004) trend
records.
Indicator Spp:
Brown Thrasher
Clay-coloured
Sparrow
Common Spp.
Field Sparrow
Black-billed
Cuckoo
Eastern Towhee
Willow Flycatcher
Special Concern:
Golden-winged Warbler
CUT1
CUT2
CUS1
CUS2
CUW1
CUW2
Patches of shrub ecosites
can be
complexed into a larger
habitat for some bird
species
Large field areas succeeding to shrub and thicket
habitats>10ha in size.
Shrub land or early successional fields, not class 1 or 2
agricultural lands, not being actively used for farming
(i.e. no row-cropping, haying or live-stock pasturing in
the last 5 years).
Shrub thicket habitats (>10 ha) are most likely to
support and sustain a diversity of these species.
Shrub and thicket habitat sites considered significant
should have a history of longevity, either abandoned
fields or pasturelands.
Information Sources
Agricultural land classification maps, Ministry of
Agriculture.
Local bird clubs.
Ontario Breeding Bird Atlas
Reports and other information available from
Conservation Authorities.
Field Studies confirm:
Presence of nesting or breeding of 1 of
the indicator species and at least 2 of the
common species.
A habitat with breeding Golden-winged
Warbler is to be considered as Significant
Wildlife Habitat.
The area of the SWH is the contiguous ELC
ecosite field/thicket area.
Conduct field investigations of the most
likely areas in spring and early summer
when birds are singing and defending
their territories
Evaluation methods to follow “Bird and
Bird Habitats: Guidelines for Wind Power
Projects”
Significant Wildlife Habitat Technical
Guide Index #33 provides development
effects and mitigation measures.
The listed species are known to
occur within the Study Area, and
suitable habitat is present.
Further consideration is warranted
to adequately assess the presence
of Shrub/Early Successional Bird
Breeding Habitat within each
drainage improvement project
location.
Terrestrial
Crayfish
Rationale:
Terrestrial
Crayfish are only
found within SW
Ontario in Canada
and their habitats
are very rare.
Chimney or Digger
Crayfish;
(Fallicambarus fodiens)
Devil Crayfish or
Meadow Crayfish;
(Cambarus Diogenes)
MAM1
MAM2
MAM3
MAM4
MAM5
MAM6
MAS1
MAS2
MAS3
SWD
SWT
SWM
CUM1 with inclusions of
above meadow marsh or
Wet meadow and edges of shallow marshes (no minimum
size) should be surveyed for terrestrial crayfish.
Constructs burrows in marshes, mudflats, meadows, the
ground can’t be too moist. Can often be found far from
water.
Both species are a semi-terrestrial burrower which
spends most of its life within burrows consisting of a
network of tunnels. Usually the soil is not too moist so
that the tunnel is well formed.
Information Sources
Information sources from “Conservation Status of
Freshwater Crayfishes” by Dr. Premek Hamr for the
WWF and CNF March 1998
Studies Confirm:
Presence of 1 or more individuals of
species listed or their chimneys (burrows)
in suitable meadow marsh, swamp or
moist terrestrial sites
Area of ELC ecosite or an ecoelement area
of meadow marsh or swamp within the
larger ecosite area is the SWH.
Surveys should be done April to August in
temporary or permanent water. Note the
presence of burrows or chimneys are
often the only indicator of presence,
observance or collection of individuals is
very difficult
ELC Ecosite Codes not provided at
this stage. Due to proximity to
PSWs and un-evaluated wetlands,
potential for Terrestrial Crayfish
habitat is considered to be
moderate to high.
Further consideration is warranted
to adequately assess the presence
of Terrestrial Crayfish within each
drainage improvement project
location.
Town of The Blue Mountains Drainage Master Plan Appendix D
Natural Heritage Assessment BIRKS NHC 04-039-2020
Page 23 of 26
Wildlife Habitat Wildlife Species Candidate SHW Confirmed SWH Assessment
ELC Ecosite Codes Habitat Criteria and Information Sources Defining Criteria
swamp ecosites can be
used by terrestrial
crayfish.
Significant Wildlife Habitat Technical
Guide Index #36 provides development
effects and mitigation measures.
Special Concern
and Rare Wildlife
Species
Rationale:
These species are
quite rare or have
experienced
significant
population
declines in
Ontario.
All Special Concern and
Provincially Rare (S1-S3,
SH) plant and animal
species. Lists of these
species are tracked by
the Natural Heritage
Information Centre.
All plant and animal
element occurrences (EO)
within a 1 or 10km grid.
Older element
occurrences were
recorded prior to GPS
being available, therefore
location information may
lack accuracy
When an element occurrence is identified within a 1 or 10
km grid for a Special Concern or provincially Rare species;
linking candidate habitat on the site needs to be completed
to ELC Ecosites
Information Sources
Natural Heritage Information Centre (NHIC) will have
Special Concern and Provincially Rare (S1-S3, SH)
species lists with element occurrences data.
NHIC Website “Get Information” :
http://nhic.mnr.gov.on.ca
Ontario Breeding Bird Atlas
Expert advice should be sought as many of the rare spp.
have little information available about their
requirements.
Studies Confirm:
Assessment/inventory of the site for the
identified special concern or rare species
needs to be completed during the time
of year when the species is present or
easily identifiable.
The area of the habitat to the finest ELC
scale that protects the habitat form and
function is the SWH, this must be
delineated through detailed field studies.
The habitat needs be easily mapped and
cover an important life stage component
for a species e.g. specific nesting habitat
or foraging habitat.
Significant Wildlife Habitat Technical
Guide Index #37 provides development
effects and mitigation measures.
Special Concern and Rare Wildlife
Species potentially present:
Snapping Turtle, Eastern Wood
Peewee, Wood Thrush, Silver
Lamprey, Common Nighthawk,
Hart’s-tongue Fern, Bald Eagle,
Canada Warbler,
Further consideration is warranted
to adequately assess the presence
of Special Concern and Rare
Wildlife Species within each
drainage improvement project
location.
Town of The Blue Mountains Drainage Master Plan Appendix D
Natural Heritage Assessment BIRKS NHC 04-039-2020
Page 24 of 26
Animal Movement Corridors
Wildlife Habitat Wildlife Species Candidate SHW Confirmed SWH Assessment
ELC Ecosite Habitat Criteria and Information Sources Defining Criteria
Amphibian
Movement
Corridors
Rationale;
Movement
corridors for
amphibians
moving from their
terrestrial habitat
to breeding
habitat can be
extremely
important for
local populations.
Eastern Newt
American Toad
Spotted Salamander
Four-toed Salamander
Blue-spotted
Salamander
Gray Treefrog
Western Chorus Frog
Northern Leopard
Frog
Pickerel Frog
Green Frog
Mink Frog
Bullfrog
Corridors may be found in
all ecosites associated
with water.
Corridors will be
determined based on
identifying the
significant breeding
habitat for these
species
Movement corridors between breeding habitat and summer
habitat.
Movement corridors must be determined when
Amphibian breeding habitat is confirmed as SWH
(Amphibian Breeding Habitat –Wetland)
Information Sources
MNRF District Office.
Natural Heritage Information Center (NHIC).
Reports and other information available from
Conservation Authorities.
Field Naturalist Clubs.
Field Studies must be conducted at the
time of year when species are expected to
be migrating or entering breeding sites.
Corridors should consist of native
vegetation, with several layers of
vegetation.
Corridors unbroken by roads, waterways
or bodies, and undeveloped areas are
most significant
Corridors should have at least 15m of
vegetation on both sides of waterway or
be up to 200m wide of woodland habitat
and with gaps <20mcxlix .
Shorter corridors are more significant
than longer corridors, however
amphibians must be able to get to and
from their summer and breeding habitat.
Significant Wildlife Habitat Technical
Guide Index #40 provides development
effects and mitigation measures
Due to proximity to PSWs and un-
evaluated wetlands, potential for
Amphibian Movement Corridors is
considered to be moderate to high.
Further consideration is warranted
to adequately assess the presence
of Amphibian Movement Corridors
within each drainage improvement
project location.
Deer Movement
Corridors
Rationale:
Corridors
important for all
species to be able
to access
seasonally
important life-
cycle habitats or
to access new
habitat for
dispersing
individuals by
White-tailed Deer
Corridors may be found in
all forested ecosites.
A Project Proposal in
Stratum II Deer Wintering
Area has potential to
contain corridors.
Movement corridor must be determined when Deer
Wintering Habitat is confirmed as SWH
A deer wintering habitat identified by the OMNRF as
will have corridors that the deer use during fall
migration and spring dispersion.
Corridors typically follow riparian areas, woodlots,
areas of physical geography (ravines, or ridges).
Information Sources
MNRF District Office.
Natural Heritage Information Center (NHIC).
Reports and other information available from
Conservation Authorities.
Field Naturalist Clubs.
Studies must be conducted at the time of
year when deer are migrating or moving
to and from winter concentration areas.
Corridors that lead to a deer wintering
habitat should be unbroken by roads and
residential areas.
Corridors should be at least 200m wide
with gaps <20m and if following riparian
area with at least 15m of vegetation on
both sides of waterway.
Shorter corridors are more significant
than longer corridors.
Significant Wildlife Habitat Technical
Guide Index #39 provides development
effects and mitigation measures
Deer wintering SWH is not present
in the Study Area therefore deer
movement corridors are not
expected to be present.
No further consideration is
warranted.
Town of The Blue Mountains Drainage Master Plan Appendix D
Natural Heritage Assessment BIRKS NHC 04-039-2020
Page 25 of 26
Wildlife Habitat Wildlife Species Candidate SHW Confirmed SWH Assessment
ELC Ecosite Habitat Criteria and Information Sources Defining Criteria
minimizing their
vulnerability while
travelling.
Exceptions for Ecoregion 6E
EcoDistrict Wildlife
Habitat and
Species
Candidate Confirmed SWH Assessment
Ecosites Habitat Description Habitat Criteria and Information Defining Criteria
6E-14
Rationale:
The Bruce
Peninsula has an
isolated and
distinct
population of
black bears.
Maintenance of
large woodland
tracts with mast-
producing tree
species is
important for
bears.
Mast
Producing
Areas
Black Bear
All Forested
habitat
represented by
ELC Community
Series:
FOM
FOD
Black bears require forested
habitat that provides cover,
winter hibernation sites, and
mast-producing tree species.
Forested habitats need to be
large enough to provide
cover and protection for
black bears
Woodland ecosites >30ha with mast-
producing tree species, either soft
(cherry) or hard (oak and beech),
Information Sources
Important forest habitat for black
bears may be identified by OMNRF.
All woodlands > 30ha with a
50%composition of these ELC
Vegetation Types are considered
significant:
FOM1-1
FOM2-1
FOM3-1
FOD1-1
FOD1-2
FOD2-1
FOD2-2
FOD2-3
FOD2-4
FOD4-1
FOD5-2
FOD5-3
FOD5-7
FOD6-5
Significant Wildlife Habitat Technical
Guide Index #3 provides
development effects and mitigation
measures.
Not applicable, Study Area is not located on the
Bruce Peninsula.
No further consideration is warranted.
Town of The Blue Mountains Drainage Master Plan Appendix D
Natural Heritage Assessment BIRKS NHC 04-039-2020
Page 26 of 26
EcoDistrict Wildlife
Habitat and
Species
Candidate Confirmed SWH Assessment
Ecosites Habitat Description Habitat Criteria and Information Defining Criteria
6E- 17
Rationale:
Sharp-tailed
grouse only occur
on Manitoulin
Island in Eco-
region 6E, Leks
are an important
habitat to
maintain their
population
Lek
Sharp-tailed
Grouse
CUM
CUS
CUT
The lek or dancing ground
consists of bare, grassy or
sparse shrubland. There is
often a hill or rise in
topography.
Leks are typically a grassy
field/meadow >15ha with
adjacent shrublands and
>30ha with adjacent
deciduous woodland.
Conifer trees within 500m
are not tolerated.
Grasslands (field/meadow) are to be
>15ha when adjacent to shrubland and
>30ha when adjacent to deciduous
woodland.
Grasslands are to be undisturbed
with low intensities of agriculture
(light grazing or late haying)
Leks will be used annually if not
destroyed by cultivation or
invasion by woody plants or tree
planting
Information Sources
OMNRF district office
Bird watching clubs
Local landowners
Ontario Breeding Bird Atlas
Studies confirming lek habitat are to
be completed from late March to
June.
Any site confirmed with sharp-
tailed grouse courtship activities
is considered significant
The field/meadow ELC ecosites
plus a 200 m radius area with
shrub or deciduous woodland is
the lek habitat
Significant Wildlife Habitat
Technical Guide Index #32
provides development effects
and mitigation measures
Not applicable, Study Area is not located on
Manitoulin Island.
No further consideration is warranted.
BIRKS NHC 04-039-2020
Appendix E
Natural Heritage Assessment Tables
Table 1 - Stormwater Management Feature Assessment Appendix E - Natural Heritage Assessment
Birks NHC 04-039-2020
ANSI Wetland Significant
Woodland
Associated Species at
Risk4
Significant
Valleylands
15402 Escarpment Recreation Yes N/A Unevaluated N/A Woodland,N/A Medium
12 Escarpment Recreation No N/A Unevaluated N/A Woodland N/A Medium
10401 Escarpment Recreation No N/A Unevaluated N/A Woodland,N/A Medium
7 Escarpment Recreation No N/A N/A N/A Open Habitats N/A Medium
5 Escarpment Recreation No N/A N/A N/A Woodland N/A Medium
6408 Escarpment Recreation Yes N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A Low
9 Escarpment Recreation Yes N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A Low
3 Escarpment Recreation Yes N/A N/A N/A Woodland N/A Medium
1 Assigned by Tatham Engineering Limited, Location shown on Figures 2a-2f, Appendix B
2 Niagara Escparment Commission Web Explorer (https://www.lioapplications.lrc.gov.on.ca/NEC/index.html?viewer=NiagaraEscarpmentCommission.NiagaraEscarpmentCommission&locale=en-CA).
Accessed June 2022
3 Town of The Blue Mountains Official Plan. 2016; County of Grey. Recolour Grey. 2019
4 In accordance with Appendix C - Town of The Blue Mountains Species at Risk Summary of the Drainage Master Plan Natural Heritage Assessment
5Natural Heritage Sensitivity has been assigned based on the following criteria:
Low - 1 or fewer mapped natural heritage features associated with the project, 0-1 SAR habitat types
Medium - 2-3 mapped natural heritage features, 2-3 SAR Habitat Types
High - 4 mapped natural heritage features, 4 SAR Habitat Types
NEC Land Designation2 Grey Sauble CA
Regulated
Proposed
SWMF Project
ID1
Natural Heritage Features3
Natural Heritage
Sensitivity5
Table 2 - Floodplain Expansion Project Assessment Appendix E - Natural Heritage Assessment
Birks NHC 04-039-2020
ANSI Wetland Significant
Woodland
Associated
Species at Risk4
Significant
Valleylands
Natural
Heritage
Sensitivity5
2 Escparment Protection
Area Yes N/A PSW and Unevaluated Yes Woodland, Open
Habitats, N/A High
13 Escarpment Recreation Yes N/A N/A N/A Woodland N/A High
14 Escarpment Recreation Yes N/A N/A Yes Woodland, Open
Habitats N/A High
15 Escarpment Recreation Yes N/A Unevaluated Yes Woodland, Open
Habitats N/A High
16 Escarpment Recreation Yes N/A N/A Yes Woodland N/A High
1 Assigned by Tatham Engineering Limited, Location shown on Figures 2a-2f, Appendix B
2 Niagara Escparment Commission Web Explorer (https://www.lioapplications.lrc.gov.on.ca/NEC/index.html?viewer=NiagaraEscarpmentCommission.NiagaraEscarpmentCommission&locale=en-CA).
Accessed June 2022
3 Town of The Blue Mountains Official Plan. 2016; County of Grey. Recolour Grey. 2019
4 In accordance with Appendix C - Town of The Blue Mountains Species at Risk Summary of the Drainage Master Plan Natural Heritage Assessment (Birks NHC, 2022 )
5Natural Heritage Sensitivity has been assigned based on the following criteria:
Low - 1 or fewer mapped natural heritage features associated with the project, 0-1 SAR habitat types
Medium - 2-3 mapped natural heritage features, 0-1 SAR Habitat Types
High - 2-3 mapped natural heritage features and 2+ SAR Habitat Types
Floodplain
Expansion
Project ID1
NEC Land Designation2 Grey Sauble CA
Regulated
Mapped Natural Heritage Features3
Table 3 - Culvert Assessment Appendix E - Natural Heritage Assessment
Birks NHC 04-039-2020
Culvert ID1 NEC Designation2 GSCA/NVCA Regulated Watercourse Name1 Permanency3 Species at Risk4 Significant
Woodlands5 Wetlands5 Fish Community Information3
Natural
Heritage
Sensitivity6
1 Escarpment Recreation GSCA Regulated Watercouse 1/Townline Creek Yes No Medium
2 Escarpment Recreation GSCA Regulated Watercouse 1/Townline Creek No No Medium
3 Not Applicable GSCA Regulated Watercouse 1/Townline Creek Yes PSW (Silver Creek Wetland Complex)High
4 Escarpment Recreation GSCA Regulated Watercouse 1/Townline Creek Yes PSW (Silver Creek Wetland Complex)High
5 Escarpment Recreation GSCA Regulated Watercouse 1/Townline Creek Yes Unevaluated Medium
6 Escarpment Recreation GSCA Regulated Watercouse 1/Townline Creek Yes PSW (Silver Creek Wetland Complex)High
7 Escarpment Recreation GSCA Regulated Watercouse 1/Townline Creek No No Medium
8 Not Applicable GSCA Regulated Watercouse 1/Townline Creek No No Medium
9 Not Applicable GSCA Regulated Watercouse 1/Townline Creek No Unevaluated Medium
10 Not Applicable GSCA Regulated Watercouse 1/Townline Creek No Unevaluated Medium
11 Escarpment Recreation GSCA Regulated Watercouse 1/Townline Creek No No Medium
12 Escarpment Recreation GSCA Regulated Watercouse 1/Townline Creek No No Medium
13 Escarpment Recreation GSCA Regulated Watercouse 1/Townline Creek No No Medium
14 Escarpment Recreation GSCA Regulated Watercouse 1/Townline Creek No No Medium
15 Escarpment Recreation GSCA Regulated Watercouse 1/Townline Creek No No Medium
16 Escarpment Recreation GSCA Regulated Watercouse 1/Townline Creek No No Medium
17 Escarpment Recreation GSCA Regulated Watercouse 1/Townline Creek No No Medium
18 Escarpment Recreation GSCA Reglated Watercourse 2 No PSW (Silver Creek Wetland Complex)HIgh
19 Escarpment Recreation GSCA Reglated Watercourse 2 No PSW (Silver Creek Wetland Complex)High
20 Escarpment Recreation GSCA Reglated Watercourse 2 No No Medium
21 Escarpment Recreation GSCA Reglated Watercourse 2 No No Medium
22 Escarpment Recreation GSCA Reglated Watercourse 2 Yes No Medium
25 Escarpment Recreation NVCA Regulated Silver Creek Permanent Silver Lamprey (SC) No No High
24 Escarpment Recreation NVCA Regulated Tributary of Silver Creek Seasonal* Not Applicable Yes No Low
23 Escarpment Recreation NVCA Regulated Tributary of Silver Creek Permanent* Not Applicable Yes No High
26 Escarpment Recreation NVCA Regulated Tributary of Silver Creek No No High
27 Escarpment Recreation NVCA Regulated Tributary of Silver Creek No No High
28 Escarpment Recreation NVCA Regulated Tributary of Silver Creek No No High
29 Escarpment Recreation NVCA Regulated Tributary of Silver Creek No No High
30 Escarpment Recreation NVCA Regulated Tributary of Silver Creek No No High
31 Escarpment Recreation NVCA Regulated Tributary of Silver Creek No No High
32 Escarpment Recreation NVCA Regulated Tributary of Silver Creek No Unevaluated High
33 Escarpment Recreation NVCA Regulated Tributary of Silver Creek No No High
34 Escarpment Recreation NVCA Regulated Tributary of Silver Creek No No High
35 Escarpment Recreation NVCA Regulated Tributary of Silver Creek No No High
36 Escarpment Recreation NVCA Regulated Tributary of Silver Creek No No High
37 Escarpment Recreation NVCA Regulated Tributary of Silver Creek No Unevaluated High
38 Not Applicable NVCA Regulated Tributary of Silver Creek No No High
39 Escarpment Recreation NVCA Regulated Tributary of Silver Creek No No High
Blacknose Dace,Bluntnose
Minnow,Brook Stickleback,Central
Mudminnow,Common
Shiner,Creek Chub,Fathead
Minnow
Survey Date: August 5, 2008
No Data
Permanent
Permanent
Not Applicable
Not Applicable
Permanent Silver Lamprey (SC),
Watercourse
Blacknose Dace,Bluntnose
Minnow,Brook Stickleback,Brown
Trout,Carps and Minnows,Central
Mudminnow,Common
Shiner,Cottus sp.,Creek
Chub,Emerald Shiner,Fathead
Minnow,Hornyhead Chub,Johnny
Darter,Longnose Dace,Longnose
Sucker,Northern Redbelly
Dace,Oncorhynchus
sp.,Perches,Rainbow
Smelt,Rainbow Trout,Rock
Bass,Rosyface Shiner,Salmo
sp.,Sand Shiner,Sculpins,White
Sucker
Page 1 of 6
Table 3 - Culvert Assessment Appendix E - Natural Heritage Assessment
Birks NHC 04-039-2020
Culvert ID1 NEC Designation2 GSCA/NVCA Regulated Watercourse Name1 Permanency3 Species at Risk4 Significant
Woodlands5 Wetlands5 Fish Community Information3
Natural
Heritage
Sensitivity6
40 Escarpment Recreation GSCA Regulated Watercourse 6 No No Medium
41 Escarpment Recreation GSCA Regulated Watercourse 6 Yes No Medium
42 Escarpment Recreation GSCA Regulated Watercourse 6 Yes No Medium
43 Escarpment Recreation GSCA Regulated Watercourse 7 No No Medium
44 Escarpment Recreation GSCA Regulated Watercourse 6 Yes No Medium
45 Escarpment Recreation GSCA Regulated Watercourse 6 No No Medium
46 Escarpment Recreation GSCA Regulated Watercourse 6 No No Medium
47 Escarpment Recreation GSCA Regulated Watercourse 6 No No Medium
48 Escarpment Recreation GSCA Regulated Watercourse 6 No No Medium
49 Escarpment Recreation GSCA Regulated Watercourse 6 No No Medium
50 Escarpment Recreation GSCA Regulated Watercourse 6 No No Medium
51 Escarpment Recreation GSCA Regulated Watercourse 6 No No Medium
52 Escarpment Recreation GSCA Regulated Watercourse 6 No No Medium
53 Escarpment Recreation GSCA Regulated Watercourse 7 No No Medium
54 Escarpment Recreation GSCA Regulated Watercourse 7 No No Medium
55 Escarpment Recreation GSCA Regulated Watercourse 7 No No Medium
56 Escarpment Recreation GSCA Regulated Watercourse 7 No No Medium
57 Escarpment Recreation GSCA Regulated Watercourse 7 No No Medium
58 Escarpment Recreation GSCA Regulated Watercourse 7 No No Medium
59 Escarpment Recreation GSCA Regulated Watercourse 7 No No Medium
60 Escarpment Recreation GSCA Regulated Outlet 8 No No Medium
61 Escarpment Recreation GSCA Regulated Outlet 8 No No Medium
62 Escarpment Recreation GSCA Regulated Outlet 8 No No Medium
63 Escarpment Recreation GSCA Regulated Watercourse 9 No No Medium
64 Escarpment Recreation GSCA Regulated Watercourse 9 No No Medium
65 Escarpment Recreation GSCA Regulated Watercourse 9 No No Medium
66 Escarpment Recreation GSCA Regulated Watercourse 9 Yes No Medium
67 Escarpment Recreation GSCA Regulated Watercourse 9 No No Medium
68 Escarpment Recreation GSCA Regulated Watercourse 10 No No Low
69 Escarpment Recreation GSCA Regulated Watercourse 10 No No Low
70 Escarpment Recreation GSCA Regulated Watercourse 10 No No Low
71 Escarpment Recreation GSCA Regulated Watercourse 10 No No Low
72 Escarpment Recreation GSCA Regulated Watercourse 10 Yes No Low
73 Escarpment Recreation GSCA Regulated Watercourse 10 Yes No Low
74 Escarpment Recreation GSCA Regulated Outlet 11 Seasonal* Not Applicable No No No Data Low
75 Escarpment Recreation GSCA Regulated Outlet 12 Seasonal* Not Applicable No No No Data Low
76 Escarpment Recreation GSCA Regulated Watercourse 14 No No Medium
77 Escarpment Recreation GSCA Regulated Watercourse 14 No No Medium
78 Escarpment Recreation GSCA Regulated Watercourse 14 No No Medium
79 Escarpment Recreation GSCA Regulated Watercourse 14 No No Medium
80 Escarpment Recreation GSCA Regulated Watercourse 14 No No Medium
81 Escarpment Recreation GSCA Regulated Watercourse 14 No No Medium
82 Escarpment Recreation GSCA Regulated Watercourse 14 No No Medium
83 Escarpment Recreation GSCA Regulated Watercourse 14 No No Medium
84 Escarpment Recreation GSCA Regulated Watercourse 14 No No Medium
85 Escarpment Recreation GSCA Regulated Watercourse 14 No No Medium
86 Escarpment Recreation GSCA Regulated Watercourse 14 No No Medium
87 Escarpment Recreation GSCA Regulated Watercourse 14 No No Medium
88 Escarpment Recreation GSCA Regulated Watercourse 14 No No Medium
Blacknose Dace, Creek Chub,
Flathead Minnow
Date of Survey: July 2, 2012
Permanent Not Applicable No Data
Blacknose Dace, Creek Chub
Date of Survey: August 9, 2004
No Data
No Data
Permanent*
Permanent*
Permanent*
Permanent
Not Applicable
Not Applicable
Not Applicable
Not Applicable
Page 2 of 6
Table 3 - Culvert Assessment Appendix E - Natural Heritage Assessment
Birks NHC 04-039-2020
Culvert ID1 NEC Designation2 GSCA/NVCA Regulated Watercourse Name1 Permanency3 Species at Risk4 Significant
Woodlands5 Wetlands5 Fish Community Information3
Natural
Heritage
Sensitivity6
89 Escarpment Recreation GSCA Regulated Watercourse 15 No No Medium
90 Escarpment Recreation GSCA Regulated Watercourse 15 No No Medium
91 Escarpment Recreation GSCA Regulated Outlet 18 No No Medium
92 Escarpment Recreation GSCA Regulated Outlet 18 No No Medium
93 Escarpment Recreation GSCA Regulated Watercourse 19 No No Medium
94 Escarpment Recreation GSCA Regulated Watercourse 19 No No Medium
95 Escarpment Protection Area GSCA Regulated Watercourse 19 Yes No Medium
96 Escarpment Recreation GSCA Regulated Watercourse 19 Yes Adjacent to Unevaluated Wetland Medium
97 Escarpment Recreation GSCA Regulated Watercourse 19 No No Medium
98 Escarpment Recreation GSCA Regulated Watercourse 19 No Adjacent to Unevaluated Wetland Medium
99 Escarpment Protection Area GSCA Regulated Watercourse 21 Yes Adjacent to Unevaluated Wetland Medium
100 Escarpment Protection Area GSCA Regulated Watercourse 21 Yes Adjacent to Unevaluated Wetland Medium
101 Escarpment Protection Area GSCA Regulated Watercourse 21 No No Medium
102 Escarpment Protection Area GSCA Regulated Watercourse 21 No No Medium
103 Escarpment Recreation GSCA Regulated Watercourse 22 No No Medium
104 Escarpment Recreation GSCA Regulated Watercourse 22 Yes Unevaluated Medium
105 Escarpment Recreation N/A Watercourse 23 Permanent*No Adjacent to Unevaluated Wetland Medium
106 Escarpment Protection Area N/A Watercourse 23 Seasonal*No Adjacent to Unevaluated Wetland Low
107 Escarpment Recreation N/A Watercourse 24 Permanent* Not Applicable Yes Adjacent to Unevaluated Wetland No Data Medium
108 Escarpment Recreation GSCA Regulated Outlet 25 No No Medium
109 Escarpment Recreation GSCA Regulated Outlet 25 No Adjacent to Unevaluated Wetland Medium
110 Escarpment Recreation GSCA Regulated Outlet 25 No No Medium
111 Escarpment Recreation GSCA Regulated Outlet 26 No Adjacent to Unevaluated Wetland Medium
112 Escarpment Recreation GSCA Regulated Outlet 26 No No Medium
113 Escarpment Recreation GSCA Regulated Outlet 26 No No Medium
114 Escarpment Recreation GSCA Regulated Outlet 26 No No Medium
115A Escarpment Recreation GSCA Regulated Watercourse 28 Unknown Not Applicable No No No Data Low
115 Escarpment Recreation GSCA Regulated Watercourse 28 No No Medium
116 Escarpment Recreation GSCA Regulated Watercourse 28 No No Medium
117 Escarpment Recreation GSCA Regulated Watercourse 28 No No Medium
118 Escarpment Recreation GSCA Regulated Watercourse 29 No No Medium
119 Escarpment Recreation GSCA Regulated Watercourse 29 No No Medium
120 Escarpment Recreation GSCA Regulated Watercourse 29 No No Medium
121 Escarpment Recreation GSCA Regulated Watercourse 30 No No Low
122 Escarpment Recreation GSCA Regulated Watercourse 30 No No Low
123 Escarpment Recreation GSCA Regulated Watercourse 30 No No Low
124 Escarpment Recreation GSCA Regulated Watercourse 31 No Adjacent to Unevaluated Wetland Medium
125 Escarpment Recreation GSCA Regulated Watercourse 31 No Adjacent to Unevaluated Wetland Medium
126 Escarpment Recreation GSCA Regulated Watercourse 31 No Adjacent to Unevaluated Wetland Medium
127 Escarpment Recreation GSCA Regulated Watercourse 31 No No Medium
128 Escarpment Recreation GSCA Regulated Watercourse 31 No No Medium
129 Escarpment Recreation GSCA Regulated Watercourse 31 Yes No Medium
130 Escarpment Recreation GSCA Regulated Watercourse 32 No Adjacent to Unevaluated Wetland High
131 Escarpment Recreation GSCA Regulated Watercourse 32 No Adjacent to Unevaluated Wetland High
132 Escarpment Recreation GSCA Regulated Watercourse 32 Yes Adjacent to Unevaluated Wetland High
133 Escarpment Recreation GSCA Regulated Watercourse 32 No Adjacent to Unevaluated Wetland High
134 Escarpment Recreation GSCA Regulated Watercourse 32 No Adjacent to Unevaluated Wetland High
135A Escarpment Recreation GSCA Regulated Watercourse 34 Unknown Not Applicable No No No Data Low
No Data
No Data
No Data
Not Applicable
No Data
Permanent
Permanent
Permanent
No Data
No Data
No Data
No Data
No Data
Blacknose Dace, Creek Chub
Survey Date: July 5, 2018
Blacknose Dace, Creek Chub,
Rainbow Trout
Date of Survey: September 21,
2001
Not Applicable
Not Applicable
Not Applicable
Not Applicable
Not Applicable
Not Applicable
Not Applicable
Not Applicable
Not Applicable
Not Applicable No Data
Permanent
Not Applicable
Permanent*
Permanent
Permanent
Seasonal*
Permanent
Permanent*
Permanent
Permanent
Page 3 of 6
Table 3 - Culvert Assessment Appendix E - Natural Heritage Assessment
Birks NHC 04-039-2020
Culvert ID1 NEC Designation2 GSCA/NVCA Regulated Watercourse Name1 Permanency3 Species at Risk4 Significant
Woodlands5 Wetlands5 Fish Community Information3
Natural
Heritage
Sensitivity6
135 Escarpment Recreation GSCA Regulated Watercourse 34 No No High
136 Escarpment Recreation GSCA Regulated Watercourse 34 No No High
137 Escarpment Recreation GSCA Regulated Watercourse 34 No Unevaluated High
138 Escarpment Recreation GSCA Regulated Watercourse 34 No No High
139 Escarpment Recreation GSCA Regulated Watercourse 40 No No High
140 Escarpment Recreation GSCA Regulated Watercourse 40 Yes No High
141 Not applicable GSCA Regulated Watercourse 40 Yes Unevaluated High
142 Not applicable GSCA Regulated Indian Brook Yes Adjacent to Unevaluated Wetland High
143 Not applicable GSCA Regulated Indian Brook Yes Unevaluated High
144 Not applicable GSCA Regulated Indian Brook No No High
145 Not applicable GSCA Regulated Watercourse 41 No No Medium
146 Not applicable GSCA Regulated Watercourse 41 No No Medium
147 Not applicable GSCA Regulated Watercourse 52 No No Medium
148 Not applicable GSCA Regulated Watercourse 52 No No Medium
149 Not applicable GSCA Regulated Watercourse 52 No No Medium
150 Not applicable GSCA Regulated Watercourse 52 No Unevaluated Medium
151 Not applicable GSCA Regulated Watercourse 52 No Unevaluated Medium
152 Not applicable GSCA Regulated Watercourse 52 No No Medium
153 Not applicable GSCA Regulated Watercourse 52 No No Medium
154 Not applicable GSCA Regulated Watercourse 52 No No Medium
155 Not applicable GSCA Regulated Watercourse 52 No No Medium
156 Not applicable GSCA Regulated Watercourse 52 No No Medium
157 Not applicable GSCA Regulated Watercourse 52 No No Medium
158 Not applicable GSCA Regulated Watercourse 42 No No Medium
159 Not applicable GSCA Regulated Watercourse 42 No No Medium
160 Not applicable GSCA Regulated Watercourse 42 No No Medium
161 Not applicable GSCA Regulated Watercourse 42 No No Medium
No Data
Common Shiner,Creek
Chub,Northern Redbelly
Dace,White Sucker
Blacknose Dace, Bluntnose
Minnow, Creek Chub, Northern
Redbelly Dace, Rainbow TroutNot Applicable
Not Applicable
Watercourses
Not Applicable
Not Applicable
Not Applicable
Brook Trout
Date of Survey: September 21,
In watercourse: Blacknose Dace,
Bluntnose Minnow, Brook
Stickleback, Central Mudminnow,
Fathead Minnow, Johnny Darter,
Common Shiner, Creek Chub,
Longnose Dace, Northern Redbelly
Dace, Rainbow Trout, White
Sucker
Within Open Area: Carps and
Minnows,Hornyhead
Chub,Perches,Rainbow
Trout,Sculpins,White Sucker,
Longnose Dace,Rock Bass, Creek
Chub, Johnny Darter,
Oncorhynchus sp., Blacknose
Dace, Bluntnose Minnow, Brown
Trout, Emrald Shiner, Rosyface
Shiner, Sand Shiner, Salmon Sp.,
Cottus sp.,
Blacknose Dace, Creek Chub,
White Sucker
Permanent
Permanent
Permanent
Permanent
Permanent
Permanent
Page 4 of 6
Table 3 - Culvert Assessment Appendix E - Natural Heritage Assessment
Birks NHC 04-039-2020
Culvert ID1 NEC Designation2 GSCA/NVCA Regulated Watercourse Name1 Permanency3 Species at Risk4 Significant
Woodlands5 Wetlands5 Fish Community Information3
Natural
Heritage
Sensitivity6
162 Not applicable GSCA Regulated Beaver River Silver Lamprey (SC),
Watercourse No No High
163 Not applicable GSCA Regulated Beaver River Silver Lamprey (SC),
Watercourse No No High
164 Not applicable GSCA Regulated Beaver River No No Medium
165 Not applicable GSCA Regulated Beaver River No No Medium
166 Not applicable GSCA Regulated Beaver River No No Medium
167 Not applicable GSCA Regulated Beaver River No No Medium
168 Not applicable GSCA Regulated Beaver River No No Medium
169 Not applicable GSCA Regulated Beaver River No No Medium
170 Not applicable GSCA Regulated Beaver River No Adjacent to Unevaluated Wetland Medium
171 Not applicable GSCA Regulated Beaver River No Adjacent to Unevaluated Wetland Medium
172 Not applicable GSCA Regulated Beaver River No Adjacent to Unevaluated Wetland Medium
173 Not applicable GSCA Regulated Beaver River No Adjacent to Unevaluated Wetland Medium
174 Not applicable GSCA Regulated Beaver River No Adjacent to Unevaluated Wetland Medium
175 Not applicable GSCA Regulated Beaver River No No Medium
176 Not applicable GSCA Regulated Beaver River No No Medium
177 Not applicable GSCA Regulated Beaver River No No Medium
178 Not applicable GSCA Regulated Beaver River No No Medium
179 Not applicable GSCA Regulated Beaver River No No Medium
180 Not applicable GSCA Regulated Beaver River No No Medium
181 Not applicable GSCA Regulated Beaver River No No Medium
182 Not applicable GSCA Regulated Beaver River No No Medium
183 Not applicable GSCA Regulated Beaver River No No Medium
184 Not applicable GSCA Regulated Beaver River No No Medium
Burbot, Carps, Minnows, Brook
Trout, Brook Stickleback, Perches,
Rainbow Trout, Rock Bass,
Sculpins, White Sucker, Burbot,
Mottled Sculpin, Salsmon sp.,
Trout sp.
Downstream of HWY 26: Common
Carp, Longnose Dace, Rock Bass,
Smallmouth Bass, White Sucker,
Longnose Sucker, Rainbow Trout,
Splake, Bluntnose
Minnow,Common Shiner,Emerald
Shiner,Johnny Darter,Sand
Shiner,Spottail Shiner, Yellow
Perch, Cottus sp, Pumpkinseed,
No DataPermanent Watercourses
Permanent
Page 5 of 6
Table 3 - Culvert Assessment Appendix E - Natural Heritage Assessment
Birks NHC 04-039-2020
Culvert ID1 NEC Designation2 GSCA/NVCA Regulated Watercourse Name1 Permanency3 Species at Risk4 Significant
Woodlands5 Wetlands5 Fish Community Information3
Natural
Heritage
Sensitivity6
185 Not applicable GSCA Regulated Boulder Channel
186 Not applicable GSCA Regulated Boulder Channel
187 Not applicable GSCA Regulated Boulder Channel No No Medium
188 Not applicable GSCA Regulated Boulder Channel No Unevaluated Medium
189 Not applicable GSCA Regulated Boulder Channel No No Medium
190 Not applicable GSCA Regulated Boulder Channel No No Medium
191 Not applicable GSCA Regulated Boulder Channel No No Medium
192 Not applicable GSCA Regulated Boulder Channel No No Medium
193 Not applicable GSCA Regulated Boulder Channel No No Medium
194 Not applicable GSCA Regulated Boulder Channel No No Medium
195 Not applicable GSCA Regulated Boulder Channel No No Medium
196 Not applicable GSCA Regulated Boulder Channel No No
197 Not applicable GSCA Regulated Boulder Channel No No Medium
198 Not applicable GSCA Regulated Watercourse 55 No No Medium
199 Not applicable GSCA Regulated Watercourse 55 Yes No Medium
200 Not applicable GSCA Regulated Watercourse 55 No No Medium
201 Not applicable GSCA Regulated Watercourse 55 No No Medium
202 Not applicable GSCA Regulated Watercourse 55 No No Medium
203 Not applicable GSCA Regulated Watercourse 55 No No Medium
204 Not applicable GSCA Regulated Watercourse 55 Yes No Medium
1 Assigned by Tatham Engineering Limited, Location shown on Figures 2a-2f, Appendix B
2 Niagara Escparment Commission Web Explorer (https://www.lioapplications.lrc.gov.on.ca/NEC/index.html?viewer=NiagaraEscarpmentCommission.NiagaraEscarpmentCommission&locale=en-CA). Accessed June 2022.
3 Land Information Ontario - Aquatic Resources Area Survey Point Dataset. Accessed June 2022
4 In accordance with Appendix C - Species at Risk Summary of the Drainage Master Plan Natural Heritage Assessement
5 Town of The Blue Mountains Official Plan. 2016; County of Grey. Recolour Grey. 2019
6 Natural Heritage Sensitivity has been assigned based on the following criteria:
Low - 1 or fewer mapped natural heritage features associated with the project, intermittent feature
Medium - mapped natural heritage features, SAR present, permanent feature
High - Permanent Feature, significant mapped natural heritage features, SAR present, Coldwater Species (Brook Trout, Brown Trout, Rainbow Trout)
Permanent*/Seasonal* - Assessed in the field June 16, 2022. 30.2 mm of rain received June 11, 2022 (Environment Canada Station #6118240)
No Data
No Data
Permanent Not Applicable
Permanent* Not Applicable
Page 6 of 6