Natural Heritage Inventory and Evaluation for the Medway Valley Heritage Forest South ESA. Public Meeting January 27, 2014

Transcription

1 Natural Heritage Inventory and Evaluation for the Medway Valley Heritage Forest South ESA

2 Welcome! Tonight you will have the opportunity to learn and comment on: Purpose of the Inventory and Evaluation Approach and Methodology Summary of Fieldwork Results ESA Criteria Applicable to MVHF Revisions to the MVHF Boundary Designation of Management Zones

3 Introduction This work is in support of the development of a Conservation Master Plan for the City of London s Medway Valley Heritage Forest (MVHF) Environmentally Significant Area (ESA). A current natural heritage life science inventory is an important first step Most natural heritage data (e.g. flora lists, wildlife observations, Species at Risk) for the MVHF ESA was collected during the late 1980 s to mid 1990 s.

4 Objectives The main objectives of the Natural Heritage Inventory and Evaluation were to: Complete a detailed multi-season inventory and analysis on accessible lands in the MVHF South ESA Confirm and refine the ecological boundaries of the MVHF ESA. Apply the criteria for the evaluation of ESAs as per the City s Environmental Management Guideline to the MVHF ESA. Propose an environmental management strategy for the ESA.

5 Our Study Area MVHF ESA This study is focused on updating information and completing evaluations within the MVHF ESA only. Study Area The MVHF ESA is located in north London Focus of the study is on the MVHF ESA located south of Fanshawe Park Road West City of London Targeted studies undertaken north of Fanshawe Park Road West Study has occurred only on public lands

6 Methodology (Natural Heritage Inventory) Tasks ELC Validation Methods/Criteria Followed Ecological Land Classification for Southern Ontario (Lee et al., 1998) Wildlife Habitat Survey Significant Wildlife Habitat Technical Guide (MNR, 2000) Amphibian Breeding Survey Marsh Monitoring Protocol (Bird Studies Canada et al., 2008) Salamander Search Marsh Monitoring Protocol (Bird Studies Canada et al., 2008) Breeding Birds Ontario Breeding Bird Atlas Protocol (Cadman et al., 2001) Flora Reptiles Mammals Butterflies, Dragonflies & Wandering transects/area searches Targeted and incidental observations Incidental observations Area searches during peak flight times Damselflies Aquatic Habitat Characterization of Medway Creek and tributaries Physical Features Existing Uses and Disturbances Observations recorded during field studies Observations recorded during field studies

7 Inventory Results Tasks ELC Validation Wildlife Habitat Survey Amphibian Breeding Survey Salamander Search Breeding Birds Summary of Results Validation of ELC resulted in a total of 16 vegetation communities Ten different types of habitat were identified Four species were observed; all of which are common to London Historic population confirmed to be still present in Snake Creek Valley During the breeding season, 55 species were observed and an additional 25 during the migration periods. Ten species (9 migrants, 1 breeding) had not been previously identified in the MVHF ESA Flora A total of 564 flora species were identified during the inventory with 151 of those not previously recorded in the MVHF ESA Reptiles Seven species were observed within the MVHF ESA and the Medway Creek/Thames River confluence Mammals Butterflies, Dragonflies & Damselflies Twenty species were observed during the inventory and by the general public Forty-eight species of butterfly (25 not previously documented) and 41 species of dragonflies/damselflies (13 not previously documented) were observed during surveys

8 Inventory Results (continued) Species at Risk Observed (Threatened, Endangered or Special Concern under the Ontario Endangered Species Act, 2007) Rare Species Observed (sensitive to human activities, natural events, less than 100 occurrences reported in Ontario) False-Rue Anemone (THR) Northern Long-eared Bat (END) American Gromwell Butternut (END) Barn Swallow (Visitor) (THR) Cream Violet Kentucky Coffee-Tree (THR) Chimney Swift (Visitor) (THR) Harbinger-of-Spring (North Only) Green Dragon (SC) Bald Eagle (Visitor) (SC) White-haired Panic Grass Cucumber Magnolia (END) Canada Warbler (Migrant)(SC) Slender Satin Grass Snapping Turtle (SC) Common Nighthawk (Migrant)(SC) Shrubby St. John s Wort Eastern Milksnake (SC) Olive-sided Flycatcher (Migrant)(SC) Tri-coloured Bat Queensnake (END) Monarch (SC) Giant Swallowtail Spiny Softshell (THR) Little Brown Bat (END) Tawny Emperor Pronghorn Clubtail Swamp Darner Blue-tipped Dancer

9 Methodology (Environmental Management Strategy Analysis) ESA Criteria Update The City s Guideline Document for Environmentally Significant Areas Identification, Evaluation and Boundary Delineation (July 1997) was reviewed to verify the continued applicability of the ESA Criteria attributed to the MVHF ESA Boundary Refinement Ecological boundary of ESA was refined using the Guideline Document for Environmentally Significant Areas Identification, Evaluation and Boundary Delineation (July 1997) Management Zones Delineated using a matrix found in the City s Planning and Design Standards for Trails in ESAs (June 2012). For MVHF South ESA only.

10 ESA Criteria Update To qualify as an Environmentally Significant Area (ESA) within the City of London, a natural area must fulfill, at minimum, two of the criteria listed by the City MVHF meets all seven criteria outlined in the Guideline Document It was determined that some of the rationale or supporting information for the ESA Evaluation was out-dated or new information could be added for extra support to the ESA designation

11 ESA Criteria Update (continued) Key updates to the ESA Criteria include: High concentrations of species indicative of high quality habitat are present (Twinleaf, Sycamore) Confirming the presence of 16 ecosites or vegetation communities and a high biodiversity of flora (564 species) MVHF ESA is an important migratory stopover for birds; 26 species in addition to the breeding species were documented using the ESA during the spring and fall migratory periods MVHF ESA contains habitat for a number of provincially significant species including Species at Risk Twinleaf

12 ESA Boundary Revisions Revisions to the ESA Boundary were completed through interpretation of applicable guidelines (Guideline Document for Environmentally Significant Areas Identification, Evaluation and Boundary Delineation (July 1997)) Eight applicable guidelines were used during the refinement process Resulted in a boundary more representative of the actual ecological boundary

13 Guideline 1 Habitat Zones must be included within the patch boundary Used to protect interior forest by increasing the forest edge buffer (> 100 metres from edge)

14 Guideline 4(b) Watercourses must be included within the boundary if the watercourse connects two or more patches within 85 metres: The connection must include a minimum corridor width of 30 metres on each side of the high water mark of small watercourses or 100 metres on the side(s) of large rivers/creeks such as Medway Creek

15 Guideline 7(a) Cultural savannahs, woodlands and old fields must be included within the ESA boundary if they: A) Minimize negative edge effects by forming a well-established mantel at the edge of the tree patches

16 Guideline 7(b) Cultural savannahs, woodlands and old fields must be included within the ESA boundary if they: B) Strengthen internal linkages in the patch by filling in bays

17 Guideline 8(b) Plantations contiguous with patches of natural vegetation must be included in the boundary if the plantation: B) Minimizes edge effects to natural heritage features by providing a buffer between the feature and the surrounding land use

18 Guideline 9(a) Existing land uses within or adjacent to a patch are subject to the following boundary considerations: A) Existing lands uses within a patch, such as recreational trails are included in the patch

19 Guideline 10 Residential sites and institutional areas within or adjacent to a patch area subject to the following boundary considerations Stormwater Management Facilities including supporting infrastructure are not included within the ESA Boundary

20

21

22 Management Zones Using the revised boundary, management zones were delineated based on ecological significance and sensitivity to disturbance A matrix available in the City s Planning and Design Standards for Trails in ESAs (June 2012) was used to identify and delineate zones The seven criterion used to evaluate the ESA are used to determine the applicable management zone The ecological indicator with the greatest sensitivity rating is used to determine the management zone of each delineated area

23 Management Zones (continued) Management Zones within the MVHF South ESA are separated into five designations: Nature Reserve Zone: Highly sensitive areas, usually containing populations of SAR. Natural Area Zone 1: The majority of these zones are areas with a moderate to high sensitivity. Elsie Perrin Williams Estate (Cultural Heritage) Natural Area Zone 2: These zones are those with low sensitivity. Cultural Heritage Zone: Associated with important culture heritage landscapes. Population of False-Rue Anemone within a Nature Reserve Zone Access Zone: Provide an entrance for visitors to the MVHF ESA Access Zone off Gainsborough Road

24

25 Restoration Overlay Zones Those areas within the MVHF South ESA that require active ecological restoration or special management. This primarily involves management of invasive species and planting of native European Common Reed (Invasive) trees & shrubs Fifteen Restoration Overlay Zones have been identified Woodland Sedge (Invasive) Japanese Knotweed (Invasive)

26

27 Naturalization/Stewardship Areas within the MVHF South ESA that are optimal locations for naturalization projects (e.g. tree planting) were identified, generally these areas overlap with Restoration Overlay Zones Private properties that extend into Area west of Gainsborough Road in MVHF ESA the highest sensitivity management zones (Natural Reserve Zone) are identified as potential partnerships between the landowner and the City for stewardship of the ESA Above Area in 2013 after Naturalization Efforts Occurred Over 10 Years

28

29 Wildlife Habitat Zones Management strategy recommendations to protect wildlife habitat identified during the natural heritage inventory included: Existing sensitivities of habitat; Amphibian Breeding Habitat Potential threats to habitat; Current activity levels within habitat; Potential opportunities for education, restoration; and, Amphibian Breeding Habitat Priority levels for protection and/or active management.

30

31 Summary The ESA continues to meet all seven criteria for designation for as an ESA. Inventory data collected was used to designate Management Zones and develop an Environmental Management Strategy specific to MVHF South ESA. The refinement of the ESA boundary has resulted in an ESA boundary more representative of the actual ecological boundary. Red-backed Salamander The refined boundary excludes residential sites and infrastructure (i.e. SWM facilities) from the ESA that were previously included within the ESA. Management Zones have been applied to MVHF South ESA based on ecological significance and sensitivity to disturbance Management Zones were identified based on background and ecological inventory information, and guided by the ESA Criteria that the MVHF South ESA has been recognized for. Green Dragon The Environmental Management Strategy considered areas that may benefit from restoration (Restoration Overlays), naturalization, and wildlife habitat protection. Marsh Marigold

32 Next Steps Following this public meeting, the City of London will review your comments and address questions or concerns that were raised. Please complete a comment form tonight, or respond by mail or before March 10, Phase 2 Start-up Meeting 2014 Date TBD Phase 2 Local Advisory Committee (LAC) Meeting 2014 Date TBD Phase 2 Process Completed 2015 Information will be collected in accordance with the Freedom of Information and Protection of Privacy Act. With the exception of personal information, all comments will become part of the public record.

33

34 ESA North Results Tasks ELC Validation Amphibian Breeding Survey Breeding Birds Summary of Results Validation of ELC resulted in a total of 9 vegetation communities Two species were observed; all of which are common to London During the breeding season, 47 species were observed. One species, House Sparrow, had not been previously identified in the MVHF ESA Flora Focus was on rare and sensitive species at pre-determined sites. Documented five species (Two SAR, Two SCC, One High CC) Reptiles Two species were observed within the MVHF ESA