Town of Collingwood Natural Heritage System

Transcription

1 Town of Collingwood Natural Heritage System Prepared by David Featherstone and Natosha Fortini Nottawasaga Valley Conservation Authority October 2011

2 Executive Summary The Town of Collingwood entered into an agreement with the Nottawasaga Valley Conservation Authority in August 2010 to review and update the natural heritage schedules and policies within the Town Official Plan. This study was deemed necessary to ensure Official Plan conformity with the 2005 Provincial Policy Statement and associated natural heritage guidelines and also to address the presence of previously unevaluated natural heritage features within areas proposed for future development. The project Terms of Reference outlines a three-phase approach. Phase 1 largely completed in late summer and fall 2010 consisted of extensive field work including roadside surveys (private lands) and in-field surveys (public lands) to identify vegetation communities and potential associated natural heritage functions within the Town of Collingwood. Nearshore surveys were also completed to assist with understanding linkages between land and water as well as a broader understanding of biodiversity associated with land and shoreline areas. Phase 2 included analyses of the Phase 1 data as well as extensive stakeholder consultation which was used to derive natural heritage scenarios and a proposed natural heritage system for Town consideration the first two phases form the basis for this report. Phase 3 consists of public consultation and continuing work to assist the Town with natural heritage updates to Official Plan policies and schedules. The main body of the report opens with an outline of natural heritage planning in Southern Ontario (including its evolution over the past thirty years), natural heritage policies associated with the Provincial Policy Statement (PPS; Province of Ontario, 2005), and technical direction provided by the PPS companion Natural Heritage Reference Manual (Ministry of Natural Resources, 2010). This provides a broad provincial framework for natural heritage system discussion. In particular, the sections in the Natural Heritage Reference Manual pertaining to natural heritage system development within Settlement Areas were used to guide this study. An iterative approach with input from key community and agency stakeholders was used to strike a balance between municipal development and natural heritage system mandates. This balance is also reflected in the mission statement of the Town of Collingwood Strategic Plan (1995): We, the community of Collingwood, working in partnership with our elected leaders, our business sector, and our community service organizations will maintain our small-town atmosphere, our natural environment and our heritage while embracing opportunities to enhance our quality of life and to acquire economic benefits through stainable development, four -season tourism and active participation in the global economy. A number of initiatives undertaken within the last ten years have implications for natural heritage system development within the Town of Collingwood. These studies range from international efforts that span the entire Lake Huron basin to local efforts within the Town of Collingwood itself. Each initiative is summarized to provide a broader context for Town natural heritage system development. The current natural heritage planning context within the Town of Collingwood is identified. Designated features within this context include provincially-designated features (e.g. provincially significant wetlands), regionally-designated features (County Greenlands) and Town-designated features and associated policies. 1/12/2011 Nottawasaga Valley Conservation Authority i

3 Existing natural heritage features and functions within the Town are identified based on background literature review and field studies associated with this project. This is a comprehensive assessment which includes cultural history, forests, wetlands, regenerating vegetation communities, watercourses, shorelines and fish and wildlife habitat functions. A number of unevaluated wetlands were identified through this study - some of which support globally rare Great Lakes coastal marshes which are endemic to shallowly sloping limestone shorelines along the Great Lakes. The northwest portion of Collingwood including the nearshore area and associated islands as well onshore wetlands and forests is identified as a key area of biodiversity. Analyses of the natural features and functions within the Town of Collingwood were undertaken using a PPS perspective. Recommendations as to which features/functions meet provincial criteria for significant wetlands, significant woodlands and significant wildlife habitat are provided. Following this analysis, the report outlines the steps undertaken to build a consensus-based natural heritage system for the Town of Collingwood. It begins with a discussion of candidate Town Greenlands broad groupings of natural features within the Town and their associated features and functions. Based on stakeholder committee direction, three natural heritage scenarios were developed and brought back to the stakeholder committee for review. A draft proposed natural heritage system, based on stakeholder committee discussion, was then developed and subject to further stakeholder review (Figure ES-1). The report then examines how the draft system integrates with a number of perspectives and initiatives including: the Town s development mandate, the Provincial Policy Statement, County and adjacent municipal natural heritage systems, as well as broader natural heritage initiatives. Challenges and opportunities associated with the Town natural heritage system are identified in the conclusion of the report. Challenges include: provision of linear infrastructure to support development (which may potentially cross portions of the system) shoreline alteration and dredging (which may lie beyond Town jurisdiction) adjacent lands impacts of upstream land uses (in municipalities outside the Town of Collingwood) A number of community-based opportunities to support the natural heritage system are available. These include: public education reforestation on public and private lands stream restoration invasive plant removal citizen-based monitoring initiatives to assess the health of natural heritage features and functions input in support of continued development of the Town s renowned trail system 1/12/2011 Nottawasaga Valley Conservation Authority ii

4 1/12/2011 Nottawasaga Valley Conservation Authority iii

5 Table of Contents Executive Summary... i Table of Contents... iv 1.0 Introduction Town of Collingwood Context Context Report Outline Terms of Reference Work Plan and Deliverables Steering and Technical Advisory Committees Public Consultation Natural Heritage Planning in Southern Ontario Provincial Policy Statement (Province of Ontario, 2005) Natural Heritage Reference Manual (MNR, 2010) Natural Heritage Background Studies Existing Natural Heritage Features and Designations Provincially Significant Wetlands Silver Creek Wetland Complex Simcoe County Greenlands Town of Collingwood Official Plan Ecological and Cultural History Cultural Heritage Aboriginal History Recent History Post-glacial History Geology, Physiography and Soils Paleozoic/Bedrock Geology Physiography and Quaternary Geology Soils Wetlands Functions and Historical Trends Study Results Forest Cover Temporal Trends Forest Interior Habitat Hydrological and Air Quality Functions Study Results Non-treed Upland Habitats Functions and Historical Trends Study Results Watercourses Bower s Beach Creek Batteaux Creek Pretty River /12/2011 Nottawasaga Valley Conservation Authority iv

6 6.7.4 Black Ash Creek Silver Creek Townline Creek Local Drainage Features Groundwater Hydrogeology Groundwater Discharge Areas and Highly Vulnerable Aquifers Significant Recharge Areas Shoreline Shoreline Impacts Islands Climate Change Invasive Species Provincial Policy Statement - Natural Heritage Features and Functions Provincially Significant Wetlands Silver Creek Wetland Complex Unevaluated Wetlands Species At Risk - Threatened and Endangered Species Butternut Endangered Spotted Turtle Endangered Blanding s Turtle Threatened Boblink Threatened Chimney Swift Threatened Significant Woodlands Woodland Size Ecological Functions Uncommon Characteristics Economic and Social Functional Values Significant Woodlands Summary Significant Wildlife Habitat Seasonal Concentrations of Animals Rare Vegetations Communities Specialized Habitats for Wildlife Highly Diverse Areas Seeps and Springs Habitat of Species of Conservation of Concern Animal Movement Corridors Natural Heritage System Development Town of Collingwood Candidate Greenlands Fairgrounds Forest Braeside Forest Batteaux Creek Sandford Fleming Pretty River Black Ash Creek Harbour East Harbour West /12/2011 Nottawasaga Valley Conservation Authority v

7 White s Bay Lighthouse Bay Georgian Trail Mountain Road Regeneration Silver Creek North Silver Creek South Townline Creek Southwest Regeneration Southwest Forest Natural Heritage Scenario Development PPS/Existing Official Plan Scenario Middle Scenario Protective Scenario Scenario Discussion Draft Proposed Natural Heritage System Category 1 and Category 2 Recommendations Integration with Settlement Area Needs Integration with PPS Features Integration with Simcoe County Greenlands Integration with Adjacent Municipal Environmental Protection Features Integration with Areas of Concern Habitat Targets Forest Cover Wetland Cover Integration with Other Local, Provincial and International Initiatives Natural Heritage System Challenges and Opportunities Environmental Impact Studies Infrastructure Shoreline Alteration and Dredging Adjacent Lands Upstream Land Use Invasive Species Reforestation Fish Habitat Trails Education Performance Indicators References /12/2011 Nottawasaga Valley Conservation Authority vi

8 LIST OF FIGURES Figure 1: Town of Collingwood Study Area... 3 Figure 2: MNR Big Picture Figure 3: Simcoe County Greenlands Figure 4: Town of Collingwood OP - Schedule A Figure 5: Town of Collingwood OP - Schedule B Figure 6: Nipissing Shorecliff Figure 7: Soil Types Figure 8: Existing Forest Cover Figure 9: Forest Loss Figure 10: Forest Interior Habitat Figure 11: Watercourses Figure 12: Highly Vulnerable Aquifers Figure 13: Significant Groundwater Recharge Areas Figure 14: Shoreline Figure 15: Provincially Significant Wetlands Figure 16: Wetlands Figure 17: Provincially Rare Habitat Types Figure 18: Biodiversity Hotspot Figure 19: Landscape Corridors Figure 20: Candidate Town Greenlands Figure 21: PPS/Existing OP Scenario Figure 22: Middle Scenario Figure 23: Protective Scenario Figure 24: Proposed Natural Heritage System Figure 25: Proposed Natural Heritage System and Land Use Designations 100 Figure 26: Integration of Draft Proposed Natural Heritage System with Adjacent Environmentally Protected Lands..105 Figure 27: Draft Proposed Natural Heritage System and Outlying ELC Cover /12/2011 Nottawasaga Valley Conservation Authority vii

9 LIST OF TABLES Table 1: Simcoe County Greenland Features and Functions 20 Table 2: Soil Type Descriptions 29 Table 3: ELC Wetland Communities Town of Collingwood.32 Table 4: Forest Interior Bird Species of Southern Ontario 34 Table 5: ELC Forest Communities Town of Collingwood.36 Table 6: ELC Successional Communities Town of Collingwood..41 Table 7: Species at Risk Town of Collingwood.60 Table 8: Rare Vegetation Communities Town of Collingwood.72 Table 9: Regionally/Provincially Rare Species Town of Collingwood..78 Table 10: Habitat Targets for Great Lakes Areas of Concern.106 Table 11: Comparison of Town Natural Heritage Features to AOC Habitat Targets..107 LIST OF APPENDICES Appendix A: Glossary of Terms Appendix B: Stakeholder Committee Meetings Members in Attendance Appendix C: Drawing C-1: ELC Communities in the Town of Collingwood 1/12/2011 Nottawasaga Valley Conservation Authority viii

10 1.0 Introduction In summer 2010, the Town of Collingwood entered an agreement with the Nottawasaga Valley Conservation Authority to undertake a Natural Heritage System Update and Review (, 2010). The purpose of this study is to develop a collaboratively based natural heritage system for the Town of Collingwood. This system is based on a broad understanding of natural heritage features and functions within the Town and adjacent municipalities, coupled with an understanding of the Town s mandate as a Settlement Area. The natural heritage system is a community-based product that recognizes a variety of stakeholder interests within the Town of Collingwood. This review was supported by significant field work to identify natural heritage features and functions associated with the Town and adjacent Nottawasaga Bay shoreline. These features and functions were reviewed within a broader subwatershed context to ensure that natural heritage system connections to adjacent municipalities were identified and appropriately protected. 1.1 Town of Collingwood Context The Town of Collingwood (Figure 1) supports a wide range of natural heritage features and functions. Several of these features and functions are rare from a global, national, provincial and regional perspective. The Town has been a proactive leader in environmental protection and restoration in partnership with federal, provincial and local agencies and groups, the Collingwood Harbour Area of Concern (AOC) became the first Great Lakes AOC to be delisted in The importance of natural heritage systems and natural heritage planning, in balance with a mandate for growth, is acknowledged in Section 1.6 of the Town s Official Plan (Town of Collingwood, 2004) which states that the primary municipal aim in developing new Official Plan policy is to establish a strategy for growth which addresses the long-term living, working and recreational needs of the municipality s residents while remaining true to the Plan s broader environmental, social and economic goals. This balance is also reflected in the mission statement of the Town of Collingwood Strategic Plan (1995): We, the community of Collingwood, working in partnership with our elected leaders, our business sector, and our community service organizations will maintain our small-town atmosphere, our natural environment and our heritage while embracing opportunities to enhance our quality of life and to acquire economic benefits through stainable development, four -season tourism and active participation in the global economy. Natural heritage policies and schedules in the Official Plan are intended to preserve and enhance the quality of the natural environment by establishing development guidelines and policies which implement the Greenlands objectives of the County of Simcoe Official Plan and which minimize land use conflicts within environmentally sensitive areas (Goal 1; Section 4.1.1) and to preserve and enhance natural heritage features and areas (Greenlands) deemed to have Provincial or regional significance by establishing development guidelines and policies in relation to locally significant environmental features. Nottawasaga Valley Conservation Authority 1

11 A number of unevaluated wetlands and unassessed forest blocks and wetlands have recently been identified within the Town of Collingwood. A significant proportion of these features lie within areas currently designated and zoned for development. The status of these unassessed natural features has been brought into question as part of recent development applications within the Town of Collingwood. The Town of Collingwood has identified a need to undertake a natural heritage system study to ensure that natural heritage features are recognized appropriately and that the Town s Official Plan natural heritage schedules and policies are updated and consistent with provincial policy and Town needs. 1.2 Context The has long recognized the importance of natural heritage planning at a watershed and municipal/subwatershed level and also recognizes that significant responsibility for natural heritage planning has been downloaded to local municipalities by the provincial government through the Provincial Policy Statement (PPS; MMAH, 2005). The Natural Heritage Reference Manual (NHRM; MNR, 2000) a key supporting document for the PPS, acknowledges the role of municipal planning authorities stating that natural heritage planning should be a communitybased activity, involving the public and local environmental agencies, working cooperatively with the planning authority to identify and protect the significant natural heritage features and areas. Conservation Authorities have a mandate to participate in natural heritage planning through the Conservation Authorities Act (1990). The goal, as stated in the Nottawasaga Valley Watershed Management Plan (1996) is to conserve the natural resources within our watershed in a cooperative, integrated manner in which human needs are met in balance with the need to sustain the natural environment. Conservation Authorities have regulatory jurisdiction over water-oriented components of natural heritage systems such as watercourses, floodplains, valleylands and wetlands. The Business Plan has developed a natural heritage planning program, in part to assist partner municipalities in meeting natural heritage system obligations set out in the PPS, and to assist with meeting community-specific environmental objectives. Natural heritage planning studies have been developed by the in partnership with the Town of New Tecumseth (, 2004), Essa Township (Featherstone et al., 2004) and the Town of Wasaga Beach (Featherstone et al, 2005). Nottawasaga Valley Conservation Authority 2

12 Nottawasaga Valley Conservation Authority 3

13 1.3 Report Outline Section 2 describes the terms of reference for this study including work scope and methodologies used for field investigations. Public consultation is a key component of this study and this process is also described here. Section 3 provides an outline of natural heritage planning in Southern Ontario (including its evolution over the past thirty years), natural heritage policies associated with the Provincial Policy Statement (Province of Ontario, 2005), and technical direction provided by the PPS companion Natural Heritage Reference Manual (MNR, 2010). This section provides a broad provincial framework for natural heritage system discussion. Section 4 summarizes a number of studies undertaken within the last ten years that have implications for natural heritage system development within the Town of Collingwood. These studies range from international efforts that span the entire Lake Huron basin to local efforts within the Town of Collingwood itself. Section 5 identifies the current natural heritage planning context within the Town of Collingwood including provincially-designated features (e.g. provincially significant wetlands), regionallydesignated features (County Greenlands) and Town-designated features and associated policies. Section 6 provides a description of natural heritage features and functions within the Town of Collingwood based on study fieldwork, analysis and background information review. Section 7 provides analyses of the natural features and functions within the Town of Collingwood from a PPS perspective and provides recommendations as to which features/functions meet provincial criteria for significant wetlands, significant woodlands and significant wildlife habitat. Section 8 documents the steps undertaken to build a consensus-based natural heritage system for the Town of Collingwood. It begins with a discussion of candidate Town Greenlands, describes three natural heritage scenarios which were brought to the stakeholder committee for review, and then a proposed natural heritage system based on further stakeholder review. This proposed natural heritage system is then compared to existing natural heritage designations within the Town OP as well as Environment Canada guidelines for ecosystem health. Section 9 identifies challenges and opportunities for the Town of Collingwood natural heritage system. These include community-based opportunities for education, reforestation, stream restoration and invasive plant removal. Challenges and opportunities associated with the Town s renowned trail system are also discussed. 2.0 Terms of Reference The purpose of the natural heritage strategy is to provide the Town with the information and tools necessary to strike an appropriate balance between land and resource use and the protection of the Town s significant natural features and their functions. The strategy identifies and evaluates all natural heritage components within the Town and identifies a core natural heritage system based on this evaluation, with a focus on increased protection of core systems identified through the study. The strategy will help the Town to refine natural heritage policies in its Official Plan, and Nottawasaga Valley Conservation Authority 4

14 to address municipal responsibilities to be consistent with the natural heritage provisions of the Provincial Policy Statement within a Settlement Area context. 2.1 Work Plan and Deliverables A three phase approach to development of a was undertaken: Phase 1 Classification of all natural heritage features in the Town of Collingwood to Vegetation Type using an Ecological Land Classification (ELC) approximation approach. The ELC system has been developed by the MNR in partnership with other public agencies to establish a comprehensive and consistent province-wide approach for ecosystem description, inventory and interpretation. This system has been designed to facilitate conservation planning and ecosystem management objectives at various site to landscape scales of resolution (Lee et al., 1998). For the purposes of this study, natural heritage features within the Town of Collingwood were first identified and delineated as a GIS layer via air photo and orthophoto interpretation. Where available, Environmental Impact Studies (EIS) were used to map and document ELC communities. A minimum vegetation community size of 0.5 ha was used (as per ELC protocol) to delineate vegetation polygons. Site visits on September 21, 22, 24, 26, 30, October 1,3,6,7,8,11,14,15, and November 10, 2010, and May 11, 2011, were undertaken to refine ELC analysis to Vegetation Type where EIS information did not exist. The relatively small aerial extent of the Town and extensive road network enabled staff to view many vegetation communities from the roadside. Trails on public lands (i.e. Georgian Trail) provided access to other vegetation communities. Private lands were not accessed as part of this study. A small proportion of total identified vegetation communities could not be viewed from roadside or trail. ELC Vegetation Type analysis for these communities was undertaken through orthophoto interpretation and comparison to known ELC Vegetation Type communities. Please see Appendix C for a drawing of ELC communities within the Town of Collingwood. ELC Vegetation Type assessment was undertaken using an approximation approach rather than using the full ELC protocol. ELC mapping from various development applications were combined with classification of previously unmapped areas. Unmapped area classification was undertaken using a combination of roadside surveys, trail walks, orthophoto interpretation and field surveys (where access is available on public lands only). Where roadsides and trails abutted or intersected mapped vegetation communities, staff documented dominant tree, shrub and ground cover and combined this with an understanding of general soil characteristics in the area to derive ELC Vegetation Types. This approximation approach provides a reasonable assessment of vegetation communities and associated biodiversity within the Town of Collingwood; however, staff recognize that Vegetation Type may be subject to refinement based on full access to vegetation community features and implementation of the full ELC protocol. In addition to ELC mapping, shoreline features (natural and anthropogenic) were mapped to better understand these features and their functions. An informal shoreline survey was conducted on November 16 th, 2010 by canoe, which identified shoreline use, substrate conditions, and aquatic vegetation. Watercourses and associated valleylands and fish habitat were also identified. Nottawasaga Valley Conservation Authority 5

15 Phase 2 Evaluate Feature Significance and Develop Natural Heritage System Feature evaluation and natural heritage system development was based on accepted natural heritage theory embodied within the PPS, and associated support documents, which state that the physical characteristics of the natural heritage feature dictate its ecological function, such that larger, well-connected, and more compactly shaped areas provide more functions and are, therefore, generally more important than small, narrow or isolated features. Large features are vital components of the natural heritage system, providing a range of habitats and internal connectivity that support biodiversity on the landscape. The fine resolution of vegetation community mapping combined with functional knowledge of interactions between these communities and, in some cases, watercourses/valleylands and the Georgian Bay shoreline, allow for a functional assessment that goes beyond most municipal natural heritage approaches which tend to focus on landscape-scale associations. This draft Natural Heritage System report documenting the results of the natural heritage feature assessment and development of a proposed natural heritage system is provided at the end of Phase 2. Phase 3 Develop and Implement Natural Heritage Schedules and Policies Following preparation of the Natural Heritage System report, the final step will be to work with Town staff and council to develop updated natural heritage schedules and policies to protect and enhance the Town Natural Heritage System. This will be a consultative process with the Town and the public. The Natural Heritage Strategy is intended to be incorporated into the Town Official Plan as part of its ongoing review and update processes. Through appropriate policy, the NHS can be used to facilitate: protection of identified significant natural areas, development application review, stewardship initiatives involving restoration and rehabilitation, and long-term land securement decision-making. 2.2 Steering and Technical Advisory Committees The Natural Heritage Reference Manual (MNR, 2010) strongly encourages community-based natural heritage system development in designated settlement areas, recognizing the need for balance between development and natural heritage mandates. To ensure that this balance was recognized, an initial meeting was held with Town staff, representatives from Blue Mountain Watershed Trust, Georgian Triangle Development Institute and staff to discuss the broad objectives of the study and to determine an appropriate steering committee structure to guide the study process. The intent of this steering committee structure was to ensure an iterative system development process where all views could be shared to work toward a consensus-driven natural heritage system for the Town of Collingwood. A stakeholder committee was organized comprised of interested municipal staff, the County of Simcoe,, Blue Mountain Watershed Trust, Georgian Triangle Development Institute, Town of Collingwood Economic Development Board, Grey Sauble Conservation, and WILD Canada Ecological Consulting. The group continues to meet to discuss project and policy development as well as study progress. For a complete list of committee members and attendance at each meeting, please refer to Appendix B. Nottawasaga Valley Conservation Authority 6

16 The first meeting was held on August 12, 2010 where an introduction to Natural Heritage Systems was presented, and the Town of Collingwood Official Plan review was discussed within a natural heritage context. The Terms of Reference for the project was also developed at this time. A second Phase 1 meeting was scheduled on November 19 th, During this meeting, Dave Featherstone () provided an overview of project objectives, a review of natural heritage systems and provincial policy, and also provided an update on Phase 1 of the study (Lay of the Land, forests, wetlands, streams, and shorelines). Preliminary analysis and mapping of forest and wetland habitat were presented and an open group discussion followed. The first Phase 2 meeting occurred on February 4 th, 2011, where a Phase 2 update was presented, along with three NHS scenarios and Greenland mapping. Open discussion of the presented material followed which helped to provide direction for the draft proposed NHS. The draft proposed natural heritage system was presented to the stakeholder committee on May 13 th, A Phase 2 update and review was also presented, along with a recap of the three NHS scenarios. An open discussion on the proposed NHS followed. 2.3 Public Consultation Consultation with the public will occur following completion of Phase 2 of the Natural Heritage Strategy. A public open house format will be used to provide the public with input and review of the draft natural heritage system mapping and reporting. 3.0 Natural Heritage Planning in Southern Ontario Approaches for studying natural heritage have evolved over the last two decades. Areas of Natural and Scientific Interest, wetland evaluation, and Environmentally Significant Area (ESA) studies were originally undertaken in the late 1970s and 1980s to identify significant, representative features in response to increasing degradation and loss of natural habitat in southern Ontario (TRCA, 2001). However, the protection of only the most significant features ( islands of green approach) has been ineffective at maintaining a reasonable level of ecosystem health in much of southern Ontario (TRCA, 2001). The natural landscapes of southern Ontario have been altered and fragmented since settlement to meet the need for economic and social development of the province (Riley and Mohr, 1994). In many areas of southern Ontario, the natural features of the landscape are now reduced to levels where natural heritage and landscape functions are impaired and fail to approximate or meet most natural heritage health criteria. Provincial and regional efforts to protect the most significant natural features, while laudable, have been insufficient to protect landscape function in much of southern Ontario. Ecosystem and watershed planning approaches evolved in the late 1980s in an effort to look beyond individual habitat features to recognize and understand ecosystem functions. The County of Simcoe Greenlands initiative in the mid 1990s (Gartner Lee Limited, 1996) was an important first step in landscape-level ecosystem planning. Additional efforts have been undertaken within the Town of Collingwood to refine natural heritage system mapping including Gartner Lee (2004; Background Environmental Study Town of Collingwood) and MNR (2005; Silver Creek Wetland Complex boundary update). Nottawasaga Valley Conservation Authority 7

17 The Provincial Policy Statement (Province of Ontario, 2005) has continued to move natural heritage planning toward an ecosystem function-based approach by promoting the protection of identified significant features and functions across the landscape. The Natural Heritage Reference Manual - a supporting document for the PPS - states that by developing natural heritage systems, planning authorities can proactively maintain or restore linkages between features by identifying and protecting core areas, ecological linkages and landscape features that contribute to a system (MNR, 2010). The review uses this function-based approach to identify significant natural heritage features and functions on the landscape. This information is then used in concert with iterative stakeholder discussions - to develop a sustainable natural heritage system strategy for the Town. 3.1 Provincial Policy Statement (Province of Ontario, 2005) The Provincial Policy Statement (PPS) is issued under the Planning Act (1990) and provides direction on land use planning and development in Ontario. It supports the provincial goal of enhancing the quality of life for the citizens of Ontario by providing guidelines for appropriate development while protecting public health and safety, the quality of the natural environment, and resources of provincial interest. The official plan is the most important vehicle for implementation of the PPS municipal official plans shall provide clear, reasonable and attainable policies to protect provincial interests and direct development to suitable areas (Policy 4.5). The Provincial Policy Statement is more than a set of individual policies and is intended to be read in its entirety where all relevant policies are to be applied to each situation. It is recognized that there are complex inter-relationships among environmental, economic, and social factors in land use planning, and the Provincial Policy Statement supports and addresses a comprehensive long-term approach to planning. The policies of the PPS represent minimum standards; this does not prevent planning authorities and decision-makers from going beyond the minimum standards established in specific policies, unless doing so would conflict with any policy of the PPS (Policy 4.6). The PPS encourages municipalities to be consistent with natural heritage policies outlined in Section 2.1. With the exception of Provincially Significant Wetlands (PSW), Areas of Natural and Scientific Interest (ANSI), and significant portions of habitat for Species At Risk, municipalities are ultimately responsible for identifying significant natural heritage features on the landscape. The PPS defines significant as those features that are ecologically important in terms of features, functions, representation or amount, and contributing to the quality and diversity of an identifiable geographic area or natural heritage system. The Wise Use and Management of Resources policy as it relates to natural heritage is found in section 2.1 of the Provincial Policy Statement, and is as follows: Policy 2.1 Natural Heritage Natural Features and areas shall be protected for the long-term The diversity and connectivity of natural features in an area, and the long-term ecological function and biodiversity of natural heritage systems, should be maintained, restored, or where possible, improved, recognizing linkages between and among natural heritage features and areas, surface water features and ground water features. Nottawasaga Valley Conservation Authority 8

18 2.1.3 Development and site alteration shall not be permitted in: a) significant habitat of endangered species and threatened species; b) significant wetlands in Ecoregions 5E, 6E and 7E; and c) significant coastal wetlands Development and site alteration shall not be permitted in: a) significant wetlands in the Canadian Shield north of Ecoregions 5E, 6E and 7E; b) significant woodlands south and east of the Canadian Shield; c) significant valleylands south and east of the Canadian Shield; d) significant wildlife habitat; and e) significant areas of natural and scientific interest 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 fish habitat except in accordance with provincial and federal requirements Development and site alteration shall not be permitted on adjacent lands to the natural heritage features and areas identified in policies 2.1.3, 2.1.4, and 2.1.5, unless the ecological functions 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 functions Nothing in policy 2.1 is intended to limit the ability of existing agricultural uses to continue. 3.2 Natural Heritage Reference Manual (MNR, 2010) The most recent edition of the Natural Heritage Reference Manual (NHRM; MNR, 2010) provides technical guidance for implementing the natural heritage policies of the PPS, This manual includes recommended technical criteria and approaches for being consistent with the Provincial Policy Statement (PPS) in protecting natural heritage features and areas and natural heritage systems in Ontario. This section, unless otherwise noted, paraphrases key sections of the NHRM that pertain to natural heritage system development particularly in designated settlement areas. The NHRM notes that natural heritage systems should be identified in appropriate designations and information on land use schedules. Official plan policies should restrict permitted uses in these areas to existing uses and/or those uses that are compatible with the long-term protection of the natural heritage areas. Further, it states that a coordinated, integrated and comprehensive approach should be used when dealing with planning matters within municipalities, or which cross lower, single and/or upper-tier municipal boundaries including:.(b) managing natural heritage, water, agricultural, mineral, and cultural heritage and archaeological resources; and, (d) ecosystem, shoreline and watershed related issues (Policy 1.2.1). Planning for natural heritage systems facilitates the coordination of ecosystem-based and watershed-based issues across planning authority boundaries. The NHRM recognizes that for settlement areas (as defined by the PPS), there can be some unique considerations in planning for natural heritage systems. The Town of Collingwood has Nottawasaga Valley Conservation Authority 9

19 been designated as a settlement area and development of a natural heritage system should address the considerations discussed in the NHRM. Natural heritage systems in settlement areas should not be viewed in isolation but rather as part of a larger regional context. In existing built-up areas, efforts should concentrate on protecting the remaining significant features and their functions and connecting features or improving them wherever possible. In designated growth areas, natural heritage systems are a key element that should be functionally integrated into the urban community. The intent is to identify and protect a system of connected natural features that will retain long-term ecological function once development has been established around the system. A preliminary natural heritage system should be identified before any other planning interests are considered. This allows an opportunity to assess the natural heritage features and ecological functions and determine the best way to connect them. Further refinement can occur later in the planning process to incorporate other planning objectives. The integration of the natural heritage system with other planning consideration is an interactive process in which the public and decision makers, supported by appropriate experts, develop workable and achievable plans for urbanizing areas through the development of comprehensive official plan policies and land use designations. Due to proximity of people and traffic in settlement areas, natural features and areas (and linkages between and among them) may be subject to more stressors than their counterparts in rural areas. This makes it important to include lands within a natural heritage system that will help to maintain its long-term ecological function and diversity. This can include agricultural and regenerating lands that link or contribute to core natural heritage system components. These nontraditional natural heritage lands are particularly important in fragmented landscapes. Once a final natural heritage system has been identified, it should be designated and zoned in municipal documents. Because development is expected to occupy most other lands, natural heritage systems in designated growth areas, in contrast to such systems in non-settlement areas, may need to be implemented with more prescriptive or restrictive land use designations and zones. Permitted uses within natural heritage systems in settlement areas should be limited to those that support low-impact activities. The NHRM recognizes that roads and other linear infrastructure may need to cross the natural heritage system to ensure an efficient urban community. These types of crossings should be kept to a minimum and incorporate suitable design and mitigation measures to maintain linkages between and among natural heritage features. 4.0 Natural Heritage Background Studies Several studies with strong linkages to natural heritage system development have been completed over the past ten years. Study scale ranges from a national overview of biodiversity to studies specific to the Town of Collingwood (Gartner Lee, 2004). A summary of each study with specific reference to the Town of Collingwood context is provided below. Nottawasaga Valley Conservation Authority 10

20 Canadian Biodiversity: Ecosystem Status and Trends 2010 (Federal, Provincial and Territorial Governments of Canada, 2010) Biodiversity is defined as the variety of life as expressed through genes, species and ecosystems and is shaped by ecological and evolutionary processes. A full spectrum of biodiversity is essential to maintaining the ecological functions, processes and connections that sustain us and deliver many economic and social benefits. The report is in response to the United Nations biodiversity target to achieve by 2010 a significant reduction of the current rate of biodiversity loss at the global, regional and national level as a contribution to poverty alleviation and to the benefit of all life on Earth and to review progress toward the Biodiversity Outcomes Framework (2006) goal of Healthy and Diverse Ecosystems which outlined two key outcomes i) productive, resilient, diverse ecosystems with the capacity to recover and adapt, and ii) damaged ecosystems restored. The report noted the importance of ecological goods and services, breaking them down into the following categories: Regulating services: flood and drought mitigation, filtration of air and water, control of pest populations; Provisioning services: food, fibre, and water Cultural services: education, recreation, psychological health and spiritual experience; and, Supporting services: for production of other ecosystem services i.e. soil formation and nutrient cycling Ecological goods and services provide critical life support and underpin our economy and quality of life. The full suite of services cannot be duplicated with human-made alternatives. Within the southern Ontario Greenbelt alone, measurable non-market ecosystems services is approximately $2.6 billion/year. Key findings of the report note that plant communities and animal populations are responding to climate change and that invasive non-native species have reached critical levels in the Great Lakes and elsewhere. Despite significant efforts to conserve and restore wetlands in some areas, overall loss and degradation continue, with wetlands near urban centres being particularly threatened. When impact thresholds have been crossed, ecosystems shift irrevocably from one state to another options for action are usually limited, expensive, and have a low probability of success. Protection of natural areas, as well as sustainable management outside of these areas, is equally important. The use of conservation corridors to enhance the biodiversity value of protected areas is an important conservation tool in fragmented landscapes (such as southern Ontario). Actions to maintain large, intact landscapes will likely slow the rate of biodiversity loss. Ontario s Biodiversity Strategy, 2011: Renewing Our Commitment to Protecting What Sustains Us (Ontario Biodiversity Council, 2011) This report provides a guiding framework for coordinating the conservation of our province s rich variety of life and ecosystems and builds on Ontario s Biodiversity Strategy (2005). The 2011 strategy builds on the Canadian Biodiversity Strategy and provides a renewed commitment to Nottawasaga Valley Conservation Authority 11

21 safeguard Ontario biodiversity as part of building a strong and prosperous future for the province. It recognizes that healthy ecosystems sustain healthy people and a healthy economy. The strategy s vision is a future where biodiversity loss is halted and recovery is advanced. People value, protect and enhance biodiversity and the ecosystem services essential for human health and well-being. A number of targets are identified within the 2011 Biodiversity Strategy to achieve the strategy visions. Target 12 states that By 2015, natural heritage systems plans and biodiversity conservation strategies are developed and implemented at the municipal and landscape levels. Great Lakes Conservation Blueprints (Nature Conservancy of Canada and MNR, 2005) The Conservation Blueprint program was launched by Nature Conservancy of Canada (NCC) and the Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources (MNR) in 2005 to develop a conservation blueprint for terrestrial and freshwater biodiversity for the Ontario portion of the Great Lakes. The purpose of the blueprints was to identify the best representative areas across the Great Lakes for conservation planning, regardless of land tenure. Stream systems, inland lakes, wetlands and Great Lakes shoreline habitat were deemed to be under-represented within existing protected areas and conservation lands, and improved representation within protected areas was recommended. Coastal marshes were highlighted for their pivotal role in sustaining the Great Lakes aquatic ecosystem. They process nutrients and organic material from the land and make major contributions to the aquatic food web. Many fish species depend upon them for spawning and rearing. Large populations of migratory waterfowl use these areas for feeding and staging. The following vegetation communities and species of biodiversity interest were identified proximal to the Town of Collingwood: Ram s-head Lady s-slipper (Cypripedium arietinum) globally and provincially rare; associated with fresh-moist mixed forests Stiff Yellow Flax (Linum medium var. medium) provincially rare; associated with endemic coastal marshes Sand Cherry (Prunus pumila var. pumila); associated with shoreline sand/gravel ridges Black Tern - Special Concern-Ontario; colonial nester in shallow marshes Least Bittern Threatened; nests in large, quiet marshes Spotted Turtle Endangered; inhabits suite of wetland habitats and adjacent upland areas Graminoid Coastal Meadow Marsh endemic Great Lakes shoreline marsh community; globally imperiled, provincially very rare Shrubby Cinquefoil Coastal Meadow Marsh - endemic Great Lakes shoreline marsh community; globally imperiled, provincially very rare MNR Big Picture 2002 (MNR, 2002) Although not regarded as a true natural heritage designation or policy, the MNR Big Picture 2002 project provides guidance regarding the significance of natural heritage core areas and corridors on the landscape from a southern Ontario perspective. The purpose of this project was to identify high-value core natural areas and highest probability linkages using a replicable, rule-based Nottawasaga Valley Conservation Authority 12

22 model. The model was targeted to include >30% of the non-urban area within each ecological district. Minimum core sizes of 200 ha were used south of the Canadian Shield. Viable occurrences of provincially and globally rare species and communities were also included in core areas. Minimum corridor width of 200 m was used within the model. The Big Picture 2002 project was intended to map natural heritage cores and linkage at a regional scale. The project team noted that natural heritage planning is still needed at local levels and that alternate core and linkage criteria and weighting could be explored. The broad scale of mapping derived from the Big Picture model becomes pixilated and difficult to observe at the local scale; however, elements of Big Picture core areas and corridors were identified in the Collingwood area (Figure 2). Portions of northwest Collingwood including broad natural heritage blocks associated with the Silver Creek Wetlands and Georgian Trail forests/wetlands were identified as Cores and Nearby Natural/Values. Regenerating forest/wetland habitats along Black Ash Creek were identified as Linkages natural portion. Forest cover north of the Nipissing ridge in east Collingwood was also identified as Linkagesnatural portion. Portions of these Linkage areas have been fragmented by urban development and highway construction since the Big Picture 2002 project. Nottawasaga Valley Conservation Authority 13

23 Legend Cores and Nearby Natural/Values Linkages non-natural portion Linkages natural portion Island Cores Figure 2: MNR Big Picture Mapping Nottawasaga Valley Conservation Authority 14

24 La Mer Douce The Sweet Sea. An International Biodiversity Strategy for Lake Huron; Lake Huron Biodiversity Conservation Strategy Core Team, 2010 Lake Huron is an ecologically rich and globally significant ecosystem, but its biodiversity is at risk due to a number of stresses, including: degradation of water quality, climate change, invasive species, rapid and poorly planned residential and industrial growth, altered hydrology and incompatible agricultural, fisheries and forestry management and practices. The Conservation Strategy is an international initiative designed to identify what actions are needed to protect and conserve the native biodiversity of Lake Huron. The most critical threats were determined through a collaborative, science-based process and strategies were developed to restore and conserve a functioning ecosystem. Priority Biodiversity Conservation Areas were identified for implementation of strategies. The following biodiversity features were chosen to represent the overall biodiversity of the project area: Open water benthic and pelagic ecosystem (beyond the 30 m bathymetric contour) Nearshore zone (shoreline to 30 m bathymetric contour) Islands Native migratory fish Coastal wetlands Coastal terrestrial system (shoreline to 2 km inland) Aerial migrants (migratory birds, bats, butterflies and dragonflies with high fidelity to Lake Huron Incompatible development and shoreline alterations along southern Georgian Bay have resulted in the degradation and fragmentation of nearshore and coastal ecosystems. These activities have also disrupted the natural processes acting on the lakebed and shoreline that create and maintain important coastal and aquatic habitats. Priority Biodiversity Conservation Areas are identified in Section 7 of the Lake Huron report. The Collingwood shoreline is rated high for coastal wetland and medium-high for coastal terrestrial communities. A number of strategies developed through this initiative have natural heritage system implications. These include: 1.1 Effectively conserve a system of public and private conservation lands for coastal terrestrial, nearshore zone and island features that are resilient to changes in land use and climate 2.4 Develop and implement an integrative, adaptive, and harmonized framework for coastal management within selected US and Canadian geographic regions 2.5 Restore priority coastal terrestrial, nearshore zone and island features (Silver Creek Wetlands identified as priority area) 2.6 Develop and implement programs that identify and conserve priority coastal terrestrial, nearshore zone and island habitats (Silver Creek Wetlands identified as priority area) 3.1 Restore native populations of Lake Huron s aquatic and terrestrial species 4.1 Enhance knowledge, technical skills and information exchange to build capacity of local policy and land use planning authorities to include biodiversity values into their decisions 4.3 Increase community engagement, awareness, understanding and commitment to coastal Nottawasaga Valley Conservation Authority 15

25 terrestrial, nearshore zone and island conservation The report concludes with a Call To Action stating that the maintenance and protection of the biological integrity of the Great Lakes is a cornerstone of the Great Lakes Water Quality Agreement and that success lies in cooperative partnerships and stakeholder engagement throughout the basin. Lake Huron-Georgian Bay Watershed A Canadian Framework for Community Action. (Environment Canada, 200*) In 2005, representatives from Canadian provincial and federal agencies, First Nation, county, municipal and environmental/non-governmental organizations discussed the need for a unifying vision and strategy to improve collaboration and integrated ecosystem management for the Canadian portion of the watershed. There was an overwhelming consensus on the need to adopt an integrated domestic approach and to empower communities and individuals. A Lake Huron Charter was struck stating that We, the people(s) of the Lake Huron Watershed believe in a healthy, life sustaining ecosystem that provides our cultural, economic and spiritual fulfillment. Through this Charter we commit to working together to restore and protect the lands and waters of the Lake Huron Watershed for today and for all generations. A variety of actions are proposed to ensure that: Degraded areas are restored and environmental health sustained; Our use of land and water is ecologically sound; and Our open waters, shorelines, farmlands, forests, river, streams and wetland across the watershed, are protected today and for all future generations Status and Trends in Shoreline Development and Alteration Along the Southern Georgian Bay Shoreline (MNR, 2010). This report is one of a series of reports prepared by MNR (in collaboration with other stakeholders) in support of the Southern Georgian Bay Coastal Initiative. This project began in 2008 and was initiated by Mayor Ellen Anderson, Town of Blue Mountains. The initiative was supported by mayors and municipal councils from Tobermory to Penetanguishene and other agency and non-government organization stakeholders quickly became involved. It has direct linkages to strategies recommended in the Lake Huron Biodiversity Strategy. A variety of shoreline classifications from previous studies and recent remote sensing are provided for the study area. The report builds on this work through informal shoreline observations (Section 6 of this report). The Town of Collingwood encompasses 5.9% of the Southern Georgian Bay shoreline. Within this area, 98.4% is considered to be high development while 1.6% is considered moderate development. A variety of shoreline alterations are identified including dredging, groyne construction and hardened shoreline (details in Section 6 of this report). Road densities within one kilometer of the shoreline (which impacts biodiversity and ecosystem function) are noted as moderate (1-3 km road/km 2 - east and west Collingwood) and high (>5 km road/km 2 urban Collingwood) with a Nottawasaga Valley Conservation Authority 16

26 small area in west Collingwood (Georgian Trail/Silver Creek) noted as low to moderate density (0-1 km road/km 2 ) Migratory bird stopover habitat is addressed in the report. Stopover habitat functions are considered high to very high in east and west Collingwood. The report notes that it is important to protect key habitat areas where species concentrate at a vulnerable point in their annual or life cycle. For migratory stopover habitats, natural areas within 400 m of the shoreline are considered of very high importance and natural areas m from the shoreline are of high importance. Background Environmental Study Town of Collingwood (Gartner Lee Limited, 2004). This background study was commissioned by the Town in the late 1990s to assist with their Official Plan update and to bring Official Plan schedules and policies in conformity with the 1995 Provincial Policy Statement. The report consisted of a desktop review of existing resource mapping including review of Forest Resource Inventory maps (FRI; MNR) and MNR wetland mapping. No attempts were initiated to update vegetation community and wetland mapping within the Town of Collingwood. The study noted that, based on FRI mapping, relatively few forest stands were greater than 75 years old. This is not consistent with review of 1950s air photos which indicates many forest stands were present on the landscape at that time and were approaching, if not greater than, 75 years of age at the time of the study. Much of the forest cover is described as young (cedar/poplar), unproductive, not significant wildlife habitat, and with limited value as corridors and linkages though this was not supported by any in-season field work. North of Nipissing ridge, much of this forest cover is similar in character to that described in the pre-settlement surveys (DERM, 1964). Forests dominated by aspen and cedar were excluded from significant woodland consideration regardless of size this approach is not supported by the current NHRM. The report noted that a diversity of habitat types should be represented in the natural heritage system, including successional old fields and shrub thickets. 5.0 Existing Natural Heritage Features and Designations Several natural features within the Town of Collingwood have been designated by the MNR, Simcoe County and/or the Town as significant natural areas through provincial, regional and local planning policy. One provincially significant wetland complex Silver Creek Wetlands Complex - has been designated by the MNR and recognized in the Town s OP. The County of Simcoe has designated four County Greenland areas that are wholly or partially encompassed by the Town. The Town of Collingwood has designated additional natural heritage features as Category 1 and Category 2 lands within its OP. This section provides an overview of these designations and associated natural heritage features. 5.1 Provincially Significant Wetlands Evaluation of wetlands in southern Ontario began in 1984 in an attempt to recognize and protect provincially significant wetlands on the landscape. Scoring is based on a wetland s biological, Nottawasaga Valley Conservation Authority 17

27 hydrological, social and special features attributes. Wetlands which are connected by local surface flows or proximity are grouped together and evaluated as a wetland complex. The first two editions of the evaluation protocol ranked wetlands as Classes 1 through 7 with Classes 1, 2 and 3 designated as provincially significant wetlands. The 3 rd edition of the evaluation system dropped the class distinctions. Wetlands scoring 600 or more points (or at least 200 points in biological or special features) are designated provincially significant while other wetlands are identified as non-provincially significant. A key change from the 2 nd edition to the 3 rd edition is a significant revision of the hydrological scoring component within the evaluation system. Provincially significant wetlands in southern Ontario (south of the Canadian Shield) are protected from development by Section 2.1 of the PPS which states development and site alteration shall not be permitted within provincially significant wetlands in Ecoregions 5E, 6E and 7E and shall not be permitted on adjacent lands (within 120 m) unless it has been demonstrated that there will be no negative impacts on the wetland or its ecological functions (MMAH, 2005). The Town of Collingwood lies within Ecoregion 6E Silver Creek Wetland Complex The Silver Creek Wetland Complex is the only evaluated wetland within the Town of Collingwood. This provincially significant wetland is over 327 ha in size and lies within one kilometer of the Nottawasaga Bay shoreline. A portion of this complex extends west into the Town of Blue Mountains. Earlier wetland evaluations identified three separate wetland complexes Cranberry Marsh, Collingwood Harbour and Silver Creek; however, all three wetlands were complexed into one unit in A broad update of the Silver Creek Wetland Complex was undertaken by MNR in Since that time several wetland unit boundaries have been refined in the field by consultants/mnr and previously unevaluated wetlands have been added to the complex. From a functional standpoint, Cranberry Marsh and its contiguous swamp forests comprise an island which is separated from other portions of the complex by urban and golf course development. Wetlands extending westward along the shoreline from Collingwood Harbour through Princeton Shores are generally narrow and abut urban development. Larger blocks of wetland and contiguous upland cover are present north of Highway 26 in northwest Collingwood in the vicinity of Silver and Townline Creeks. The Silver Creek Wetland Complex consists of a mosaic of swamp, marsh and rich fen habitats. Globally rare Great Lakes coastal marsh communities are present along the Nottawasaga Bay shoreline. These communities expand and contract in association with lower and higher lake levels. Inland and west of Princeton Shores Boulevard, a variety of deciduous, mixed, coniferous and thicket swamps are intermixed with upland habitats. These community associations are generally absent to the east due to urbanization. A large cattail marsh is associated with Cranberry Marsh this habitat historically supported area-sensitive marsh birds. 5.2 Simcoe County Greenlands The County of Simcoe Greenland system is based on a background report entitled Development of a Natural Heritage System for the County of Simcoe (Gartner Lee, 1996). Section 3.7 of the County of Simcoe Official Plan (2000) states that the purpose of the Greenland designation is to Nottawasaga Valley Conservation Authority 18

28 ensure that the scale, form and location of development is such that the features and functions of the natural heritage system are sustained for future generations. Within the Town of Collingwood, the Greenland designation includes evaluated and unevaluated wetlands, significant woodlands, significant wildlife habitat, fish habitat and major river and creek systems. The County Official Plan encourages local initiatives to augment the County Greenland system stating that locally significant features and functions which support the County Greenland system are to be identified and protected in local municipal official plans. Greenland areas are subject to several policies within the County Official Plan which seek to protect these areas from incompatible development. Four Greenland areas are wholly or partially located within the Town of Collingwood (Figure 3) and are associated with the Wasaga Lowlands (WL) physiographic region. A brief description of these areas follows. Key features and functions associated with these areas are included in Table 1. WL1 Collingwood Shores-Northwest Collingwood WL1 encompasses much of the provincially significant Silver Creek Wetland and adjacent forests as well as large blocks of forest/wetland along the Georgian Trail. Shallow, calcareous soils over limestone bedrock support globally and provincially rare coastal meadow marsh communities. This Greenland unit is functionally connected to other portions of the Silver Creek Wetland complex (and contiguous forest) within Town of Blue Mountains (Grey County). WL2 Stayner Swamp Though mostly associated with scattered blocks of wetland and woodland located in the vicinity of Stayner, WL2 also includes a narrow forest along the south side of Highway 26 that extends from Batteaux Creek to the Town of Wasaga Beach boundary (Gartner Lee, 1996). Forest cover in this area has been fragmented by residential, recreational and highway bypass development. Remaining unfragmented forest in the vicinity of Batteaux Creek is functionally part of the Batteaux Creek Greenland (WL6) WL5 Pretty River The Pretty River arises within Grey County with headwater tributaries entering a large re-entrant valley that cuts into the Niagara Escarpment southwest of Nottawa. Significant coldwater habitat for rainbow trout and brook trout is present in this section. Downstream of the valley, the Pretty River flows through agricultural lands and then enters a flood control dyke which conveys flows through much of urban Collingwood. Downstream reaches through Collingwood are narrow and support local corridor functions only. WL6 Batteaux Creek Batteaux Creek arises as a series of springs along the slopes of the Niagara Escarpment west of Duntroon. Coldwater habitats associated with the Escarpment transition quickly to warmwater habitats as the Batteaux Creek flows through an agricultural landscape with limited forest and riparian cover. A relatively large forest and regeneration block is located south of Highway 26 the older forest communities are an outlier of WL2; however, functionally, they have a much closer association with Batteaux Creek. Nottawasaga Valley Conservation Authority 19

29 Table 1: Simcoe County Greenland Features and Functions (adapted from Gartner Lee, 1996) FUNCTION WL1 WL2 WL5 WL6 Terrain Functions Recharge Discharge X X a X Flood Storage X Conveyance X a X X Vegetation Erosion Protection X X Functions Temperature Control X X a X X Water Quality Enhancement X a X X Aquatic Habitat X X Terrestrial Habitat X X X X Attributes Coldwater Habitat X a X a X a Warmwater Habitat X a Fish Spawning X X X Deer Concentrations Waterfowl Concentrations Provincially Rare Animals Provincially Rare Plants X Uncommon Vegetation Linkage Large Core Area Number of Links 1 2 a N N Aquatic X X Riparian/Lowland X X X Upland Narrow Link in Agriculture X a Linkage Beyond Simcoe X X County Restoration Opportunity X a X X Status Designations Provincial ANSI Regional ANSI Site of Interest ESA PSW 1 1 a LSW Prov. Park/Cons. Area a function/feature lies outside Town of Collingwood X Function, attribute or linkage occurs N Links exist but are narrow? Unknown Numerical references refer to the number of particular attribute types found within the Greenland Nottawasaga Valley Conservation Authority 20

30 Nottawasaga Valley Conservation Authority 21

31 5.3 Town of Collingwood Official Plan The environmental goals set out in the Town Official plan are as follows: 1. To preserve and enhance the quality of the natural environment by establishing development guidelines and policies which implement the Greenlands objectives of the County of Simcoe Official Plan and which minimize land use conflicts within environmentally sensitive areas. 2. To ensure the health and safety of area residents by preventing the loss of life and minimizing property damage due to flooding. 3. To preserve and enhance natural heritage features and areas (Greenlands) deemed to have Provincial or regional significance by establishing development guidelines and policies in relation to locally significant environmental features. The lands in Collingwood warranting protection due to their environmental importance are designated Environmental Protection Areas on Schedule A (Figure 4). These lands are shown in greater detail on Schedule B (Environmental Protection Natural Heritage Resource Areas; Figure 5). The Environmental Protection Areas classification on Schedule A includes lands unsuited for development due to inherent natural hazards such as susceptibility to flooding or erosion, poor drainage, organic soils or steep slopes. This designation has also been utilized to provide an added level of protection to the Town s most significant (Category 1 on Schedule B) natural heritage features such as provincially significant wetlands. The Environmental Protection - Natural Heritage Resource Areas classification on Schedule B identifies lands warranting varying levels of protection due to their environmental importance. The natural heritage features identified on Schedule B include: provincially significant wetlands, valleylands, woodland, and fish and nursery habitats. These areas fall into two categories: Category 1 Lands Category 1 lands are included within the Environmental Protection Areas designation on Schedule A in order to provide a higher level of protection for Collingwood s most sensitive natural resources. Category 1 lands, by virtue of their significant functions, attributes and linkages, are those considered to make the greatest contribution to the natural heritage system of the Town of Collingwood and include; provincially significant wetlands, major river valleys, fish habitat located within significant valley-lands and primary woodlands greater than 4 hectares (9.9 acres) that are more than 75 years old. Category 2 Lands The Category 2 classification encompasses locally significant wetlands, younger woodlands greater than 10 hectares (25 acres), and/or fish habitat located outside significant valley-lands. Category 2 lands are where limited forms of development, in accordance with the land use designations on Schedule A, may be possible subject to the findings of an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS). Nottawasaga Valley Conservation Authority 22

32 Figure 4: Town of Collingwood Official Plan Schedule A Nottawasaga Valley Conservation Authority 23

33 Figure 5: Town of Collingwood Official Plan Schedule B Nottawasaga Valley Conservation Authority 24

34 6.0 Ecological and Cultural History This section provides an overview of geological, Aboriginal, and recent history of the Town of Collingwood, as well as an overview of terrestrial and aquatic natural heritage features and functions present on the Town landscape and natural heritage connectivity to adjacent municipalities. 6.1 Cultural Heritage Aboriginal History Although small bands of nomadic Paleolithic hunters and Archaic tribes from the south doubtlessly traveled through the present-day Town in the interval between the recession of Lake Algonquin and the transgression of the Nipissing lake stage, most evidence of their passage was likely lost during the Nipissing transgression. Evidence of prehistoric settlement near the Town has been uncovered along the lower Nottawasaga River (Thornbush, 2001) in the vicinity of Jack s Lake with a number of Middle Woodland sites clustered between Jack s Lake and the Oxbow. This evidence dates back to the Middle Woodland period about 1,800 years ago. At this time, aboriginal peoples retained their nomadic, hunter-gatherer lifestyle but incorporated pottery and ceramic vessels into their way of life. During the Late Woodland period, the Petuns settled in villages along the lower slopes of the Escarpment from the Noisy River north to Silver Creek. The Petuns may have originally come from the Wendat (Huron) nation to the northeast and likely moved into the area during the protohistoric period (1580 to 1600) to supplement the fur trade. Although their subsistence economy (corn agriculture with fishing and some hunting) was similar to that of the Wendat, the Petuns likely specialized in beaver hunting which became more prominent as the French made contact with the Wendats. Trade with the Wendats increased markedly during the French contact period with the Wendat often acting as trade intermediaries and moving beaver pelts to the markets along the Ottawa and St. Lawrence Rivers. (Reference*) At the point of French contact, the Petun population was approximately 8,000; however, following contact, up to 90% of the aboriginal population was lost through disease, displacement and intertribal warfare (Larson et al., 1999). Two-thirds of the Wendat nation died in the smallpox epidemics of the mid-1630s (Drury, 1972) and the Petun nation was no doubt similarly afflicted. Iroquois pressure from the south led to a northward retreat of the Petun. On December 7, 1649, the Iroquois attacked Petun Village of Etharita and the survivors fled to Ekarenniondi (present-day Scenic Caves). In spring 1650, the remaining Petuns and Wendats journeyed westward to Mackinac Island then continued southwest, eventually settling in Oklahoma. Over the next 200 years, human presence was marked by sparse populations of Ojibways who used the area for hunting and fishing. Temporary campsites were established in sunny glades near the mouth of the Nottawasaga River. The Ojibwa ceded lands in the Collingwood area to the British Crown in Nottawasaga Valley Conservation Authority 25

35 6.1.2 Recent History As the dawn of European settlement approached, the southern Georgian Bay area was generally forested, providing large tracts of habitat for mammals such as black bear, marten, fisher, wolverine, timber wolf, lynx, elk and eastern cougar that are now extirpated or rare. Settlement near Collingwood began in the 1830s with the surveying of Scotch Corners (present day Duntroon) in 1833 and 1834 (Lewis, 2004). A post office was established at this location in 1836 and farmers soon settled property around this settlement. Since farmland north of the Nipissing shorecliff was marginal at best, settlement within Collingwood itself did not occur until 1843 when Tallyho Stephens constructed Hurontario Mills on the Pretty River near present day Raglan and Ontario Streets (Lewis, 2004). Significant settlement in Collingwood came with the construction of the Ontario, Simcoe and Huron Union Railroad (and later the Northern Railway of Canada) line from Toronto to Collingwood in January 1855 (Messenge, 1968). The rail line was built to facilitate construction of a shipping harbour on Nottawasaga Bay. The construction of the rail line resulted in a population boom from 50 prior to the railway to 2,000 at the time of Town incorporation in 1858 (Messenge, 1968). Several lumber mills operated in the harbour and accounted for the processing of much of the original white pine stands that dominate the forest of central/northern Simcoe County (Gartner Lee, 2004). Sporadic shipbuilding occurred for the next two decades then became a driving force with the official opening of harbour facilities in 1883 (Heller, 1981). The corporate shipbuilding industry prospered in Collingwood and continued to play an important role in the economy of the Town until the Yard closed in While industry is still an important part of the Town s economy, Collingwood has focused on establishing itself as a fourseason tourist area in recent years, and has become a major recreation centre for the Southern part of the province. Recent growth within the Town has been steady with permanent resident population expanding from approximately 14,700 in the 1990s to over 17,900 today (currently almost 26, 000 including recreational residents; Town of Collingwood, 2004). By 2021, growth to over 21,000 permanent residents is projected, with the population reaching approximately 30, 000 including recreational residents. 6.2 Post-glacial History About 12,000 years ago, the Wisconsinan ice sheets began their final retreat from southern Ontario, leaving a legacy of till plains, moraines, drumlins, eskers and spillway valleys throughout much of the watershed; however, within the Town of Collingwood, much of the ecological features and functions are predicated on landform processes that occurred after glaciation. 6.3 Geology, Physiography and Soils Paleozoic/Bedrock Geology Over 550 million years ago, shallow seas associated with the Iapetus Ocean covered most of southern Ontario (Eyles, 2002). Simcoe Group limestone (Lindsay Formation) was laid down as Nottawasaga Valley Conservation Authority 26

36 compressed corals along the reefs of the shallow seas that covered present-day Collingwood during the Middle Ordovician period (about 460 million years ago). Near the shoreline, Lindsay Formation limestone bedrock lies close to the soil surface and is exposed along portions of the shoreline as well as the downstream reaches of Batteaux Creek, Black Ash Creek and the Pretty River. South of the shoreline, Blue Mountain Formation shales (associated with compressed muds) overlie the limestone bedrock. These muds are associated with sedimentation from a nearby island arc to the east. The blue-grey to black shales in this formation are interbedded with thin banks of limestone and calcareous siltstone Physiography and Quaternary Geology Physiography is the study of the physical structure of the surface of the land. The Simcoe Lowlands physiographic unit dominates the Town of Collingwood and is located north and adjacent to the Niagara Escarpment. Morphologically, this region is characterized by flat, lowlying plains composed of silts, clays and fine to medium-grained sands. The surficial geology of the Collingwood area consists of a series of linear deposits, oriented southeast to northwest, with till deposits separated by glaciolacustrine sand and gravel deposits. A small area of ice contact sand and gravel deposits lie to the west. Recent modern alluvial deposits are associated with narrow valleys formed by the water courses. The surficial till deposits in the town were deposited during the last (Wisconsian) glaciation and are comprised of sandy and clayey silt. They are low relief, undulating, and subdued by lake water or melt water erosion. This unit corresponds with the Newmarket Till deposited during the Port Bruce Stadial (Gymn and DiLabio, 1972). The physical geomorphological appearance of the Collingwood Area relates to the regression and transgression of the postglacial lake shorelines. Following the retreat of the Wisconsinan ice sheets, Collingwood was submerged to a depth of over 70 m in proglacial Lake Algonquin. This forerunner of present-day Lake Huron/Georgian Bay emptied rapidly with the opening of outlets through the North Bay area approximately 10,100 years ago. Collingwood and much of the Georgian Bay basin was dewatered until 8,000 years ago when rising lake levels associated with the proglacial Nipissing transgression re-advanced, eventually reaching their highest level about 4,700 years ago approximately one kilometre inland from the present-day shoreline. This ancient shoreline is marked by a distinct shorecliff (Figure 6) that can be observed throughout most of its length through Collingwood. The opening of the St. Clair River outlet and associated gradual lowering of lake levels to their present elevation (approximately 2,000 to 2,500 years ago) is marked by a series of beach ridges and troughs between the shorecliff and the present shoreline. Nottawasaga Valley Conservation Authority 27

37 Nottawasaga Valley Conservation Authority 28

38 6.3.3 Soils A variety of soil types have developed over the parent material deposited by glacial and postglacial processes. In general, soils north of the Nipissing ridge are imperfectly to poorly drained, whereas soils south of the ridge are well-drained to imperfectly-drained. Figure 7 depicts the soil types within the Town of Collingwood. Table 2 describes the various soil types (based on Hoffman et al, 1962), location and associated land uses. Table 2: Soil Type Descriptions Town of Collingwood Soil Type Characteristics Locations Land Uses Granby Poorly drained sandy loam Northwest Collingwood Forest, wetlands, abandoned (regenerating) farmland Alliston Tioga Parkhill Wiarton Berrien Kemble Imperfectly drained sandy loam Well-drained sandy loam Poorly drained, compact till Imperfectly drained, compacted silt loam with stones Imperfectly drained sands over clay Imperfectly drained clay loam over bedrock Northwest Collingwood south of Highway 26 West Collingwood south of ridge Cranberry Resort, Black Ash Creek Golf Course Georgian Trail, East Collingwood West Collingwood Southwest Collingwood, urban area, Sandford Fleming Drive Southwest Collingwood South-central Collingwood Farmland Recreation, pasture, hay Forests, wetlands, abandoned (regenerating) farmland Farmland Urban, abandoned (regenerating) farmland, forests Sargent Well-drained, droughty sand/gravel Farmland, Sand/gravel pit Percy Well-drained fine sand Farmland loam Harkaway Well-drained loam till Farmland The soils on the post-glacial/post-nipissing landscape were eventually colonized and stabilized by a variety of vegetation types adapted to the varied soil and moisture regimes left behind by the proglacial lake systems (Figures 6 and 7). Rich sugar maple/beech forests developed over the sandy loams south of the Nipissing shorecliff. Alternating bands of swamp and lowland forest developed over the ridge/trough systems between the shorecliff and the Nottawasaga Bay shoreline. Shallow shelves of limestone bedrock along the Nottawasaga Bay shoreline provided a unique setting for the development of Great Lakes coastal marsh communities. Nottawasaga Valley Conservation Authority 29

39 Nottawasaga Valley Conservation Authority 30

40 6.4 Wetlands Functions and Historical Trends Wetlands include lands that are seasonally or permanently covered by shallow water as well as lands where the water table is close to, or at, the surface. Saturated conditions in these areas result in the formation of hydric soils which favour hydrophytic and/or water-tolerant plant species. Traditionally viewed as unattractive and potentially dangerous by early settlers, it is now recognized that wetlands support a number of functions on the landscape. Headwater wetlands moderate flow regimes within watersheds. Runoff is stored during periods of high flow and slowly released, thereby reducing flooding and erosion and enhancing watercourse baseflow during the summer months. The economic value of flood control functions has been evaluated in the Charles River wetland complex in the eastern United States. This wetland complex has been estimated to provide $5,000/ha in flood control services on an annual basis (Norman, 2004). The frequency of flooding in the Red River watershed (Manitoba) has doubled since 1950 as a result of high wetland losses in headwater areas (Norman, 2004). There is a significant correlation between the magnitude of flood peaks and the amount of basin storage (wetlands) within a watershed. Stream hydrograph studies in the Saugeen River watershed in southern Ontario show that subwatersheds with extensive swamp cover have significantly lower flood peaks than subwatersheds where wetlands have been drained to facilitate agricultural and urban development. Further, these storm peaks are spread out over a longer period modulating stream flows. It is likely that historic losses of wetlands within the Nottawasaga Valley Conservation Authority jurisdiction have resulted in increased flood peaks which affect low-lying watershed communities such as the Town of Collingwood. Some wetlands act as recharge areas whereby water seeps into the ground, replenishing important groundwater aquifers. Other wetlands are associated with significant discharge areas which support stream baseflow and coldwater habitat. Wetlands also have the ability to retain sediments and filter nutrients and heavy metals, thus maintaining and improving downstream water quality. The presence of wetlands increases the complexity of the landscape, thereby increasing biodiversity. Extensive riparian cover associated with wetlands along watercourses stabilizes stream banks and provides shading, food inputs and instream cover which are essential components of healthy aquatic habitat. Wetlands also provide recreation and tourism opportunities as well as renewable resources which contribute to the economy. At a global level, carbon sequestration in wetlands is an important tool in managing climate change (DUC, 2010). Following European settlement in the 1800s, timber operation and wetland drainage to facilitate agriculture significantly reduced wetland coverage in southern Ontario. Urbanization in southern Ontario has also contributed significantly to wetland loss. Recent studies by Ducks Unlimited Canada (2010) indicate that 72% of pre-settlement wetlands have been lost in southern Ontario. In Simcoe County, 50.6% of pre-settlement wetlands have been lost. Within former Nottawasaga Township, wetland loss is pegged at 55.4% Although wetlands are being protected and restored on the southern Ontario landscape, the trend of wetland loss continues between 1982 and 2002, 3.5% of pre-settlement wetlands were lost There are four wetland types in southern Ontario: swamp, marsh, bog and fen. Swamps and marshes are represented within the Town of Collingwood coastal marsh communities within the Town are often regarded as rich fens. Nottawasaga Valley Conservation Authority 31

41 Swamps (wooded areas with at least 25% cover of live trees or tall shrubs) are the dominant wetland type within the Town and are generally associated with the ridge/trough areas north of the Nipissing shorecliff. Imperfectly drained clay soils south of the shorecliff and river valleys/floodplains also support swamp forest communities. Marshes are characterized by robust emergent plants, anchored floating plants and/or submerged plant species. Extensive marsh features are associated with Cranberry Marsh and the Nottawasaga Bay shoreline. Globally rare Great Lakes coastal marsh communities are associated with the shoreline and are occasionally found inland as well. The shoreline marshes recede and expand in concert with rising and falling water levels in Georgian Bay Study Results Table 3 provides a breakdown of ELC wetland community types on the landscape as a percentage of the total landscape coverage and as a percentage of total natural heritage cover within the Town. Table 3: ELC Wetland Communities within the Town of Collingwood Wetland Type Number of Polygons Total Area (ha) Landscape Cover (%) Treed Wetlands Deciduous Swamp Mixed Swamp Non-Treed Wetlands Meadow Marsh Shallow Marsh Shallow Water Thicket Swamp TOTAL Natural Heritage Cover (%) Of the treed-wetland communities, deciduous swamps are most common, with 82 occurrences covering ha within the Town. Of all deciduous swamp communities, green ash swamps are most common (62 occurrences). The Town of Collingwood contains four provincially and globally rare wetland types (Great Lakes Coastal Marshes) with 36 occurrences covering approximately ha. Total wetland cover (treed-wetlands included) in the Town of Collingwood is approximately 11.8 %. Of available natural heritage cover within the Town, wetlands account for 31.9 %. Please see Appendix C for a drawing of ELC wetland communities within the Town of Collingwood. 6.5 Forest Cover The Town of Collingwood lies at the southern edge of the Great Lakes St. Lawrence Forest Region. Forest cover within the Town is depicted in Figure 8. Forest cover is concentrated between the Nipissing shorecliff and Nottawasaga Bay. Soils in this area were not conducive for farming and, aside from urban and recreational development, generally remain in forested condition. Trembling aspen, white cedar and green ash are typically the dominant tree species in this area, with silver maple occasionally dominant in wetter swamp Nottawasaga Valley Conservation Authority 32

42 habitats. This species composition has not changed appreciably since the first surveys of the area in the 1850s which noted gravelly flat land a scrubby series of bush cedar, tamarack, poplar and birch thickets (DERM, 1964), similar to the forests that dominate this area today. Several swamp forests located from Collingwood Harbour westward have been identified as components of the provincially significant Silver Creek Wetland Complex. A number of unevaluated swamp forests have also been identified through recent studies as well as field work undertaken as part of this study. Sandy, well-drained areas south of the Nipissing shorecliff are well-suited for farming and have generally been cleared for agriculture. Tree cover is minimal and is generally restricted to river/stream valley systems. Remnant sugar maple forests are found in better-drained areas and represent a relatively rare forest feature on the Town landscape, though they are often dominant elsewhere within jurisdiction Temporal Trends In southern Ontario, it is estimated that forest clearing between 1800 and 1920 left less than 1% of the land base in original older-growth condition and almost none in true old growth condition. More that 90% of the original upland woodlands were converted to non-forest land uses by 1920 (Larson et al., 1999), a rate that exceeds wetland losses. The low point in forest cover appeared to be reached in the early 1920s when the availability of fossil fuels and electricity began to relieve the pressure for fuel-wood consumption (Larson et al., 1999). Over the past eighty years, forest cover in southern Ontario has increased significantly as marginal farmland has been removed from production. This increase has been particularly dramatic in municipalities along the Niagara Escarpment where woodland cover increased by more than 36% from 1954 to Forest clearing within Simcoe County closely followed the general pattern observed in southern Ontario. The influx of settlers in the mid-1800s led to significant changes in the extent of forest cover within the watershed. The decline in forest cover is summarized below: Combined forest cover in Dufferin, Grey and Simcoe counties declined from 90% (1851) to 13% (1911) (DERM, 1964); Restoration and succession within these counties increased the forest cover to 15% by 1961 (DERM, 1964); Total forest cover within Simcoe County increased to 29% by 1978 (Larson et al., 1999); Relative to Simcoe County, the Town of Collingwood has exhibited a somewhat different pattern of forest change. Areas south of the Nipissing shorecliff were cleared in the 1800s to support agriculture. Areas south of the shorecliff generally remained in forest cover until the mid-late 1800s when the construction of the Ontario, Simcoe and Huron Union Railroad led to urban development around the harbour. Attempts were made to farm some areas north of the shorecliff; however, farmland was marginal and was generally abandoned during the latter portion of the 20th century. Forest regeneration is occurring in several portions of the Town generally where soil conditions are marginal for agriculture and where young forests/shrub thickets are regenerating following farmland abandonment. The southwest corner of Collingwood (Osler Bluff Road and 6 th Line), the area north of Mountain Road between 10 th and 11 th Lines, Batteaux Creek between old and Nottawasaga Valley Conservation Authority 33

43 new Highway 26, and areas along the Georgian Trail near Silver Creek are examples of regenerating areas. Forest loss continues to occur within the Town of Collingwood (Figure 9). Since 2002, significant forest loss has been associated with residential development, industrial development and highway construction (Highway 26 bypass). Loss of forest cover north of the Nipissing shorecliff has also occurred within the Town of Wasaga Beach, significantly degrading the forested core areas and corridor that historically existed between Collingwood and Wasaga Beach Forest Interior Habitat Forest interior habitat is generally defined as forest cover which is found a minimum of 100 m from a forest edge. Compact forest shapes such as circular and square woodlots provide more forest interior habitat than similarly sized forests that are elongate or irregular in shape. Large, compact forests provide specialized habitats in their interior that support many neotropical migrant and interior-specialist bird species. These species require sheltered, quiescent conditions away from the forest edge to successfully forage and reproduce. Forest interior species are typically insectivorous and are limited in distribution to forest over 10 ha in size (Riley and Mohr, 1994). Neotropical migrant bird species often raise only a single clutch of eggs whereas generalist and resident species will raise two or three clutches during the nesting season. These migrants tend to nest on or near the ground. As a result of their reproductive habits, neotropical migrants are highly susceptible to predation from domestic pets, common grackle, blue jay, raccoon and Virginia opossum as well as nest parasitism from brown-headed cowbird. Predation and nest parasitism tends to decrease away from the forest edge. Large tracts of intact forest cover provide forest interior habitat for a number of bird species in southern Ontario as listed in Table 4. Although these species may occasionally breed in smaller woodlots and forest edges, these habitats become population sinks as successful nesting and rearing is rare. In contrast, extensive areas of forest interior habitat act as population sources where annual production equals or exceeds annual mortality rates. Forest interior habitat also supports other species that require large tracts of forest for reproduction and shelter. Herpetiles such as wood frog and yellow spotted salamander are strongly associated with forest interior habitat. Similarly, mammals such as flying squirrels and porcupines require large forest tracts to carry out their life cycles. These large tracts of forests also provide habitat for larger mammals such as deer that utilize extensive mixed/coniferous forest and swamp cover as significant over-wintering areas. Table 4: Forest Interior Bird Species of Southern Ontario (Larson et al., 1999 and Landowner Resource Centre, 2000.) Acadian Flycatcher Barred Owl Black-and-white Warbler Blackburnian Warbler Black-throated Blue Warbler Black-throated Green Warbler Blue-headed Vireo Brown Creeper Broad-winged Hawk Canada Warbler Cerulean Warbler Hermit Thrush Nottawasaga Valley Conservation Authority 34

44 Hooded Warbler Louisiana Waterthrush MourningWarbler Northern Goshawk Northern Waterthrush Ovenbird Pileated Woodpecker Red-shouldered Hawk Scarlet Tanager Swainson s Thrush Winter Wren Veery Wood Thrush Yellow-throated Vireo Note: Species referenced in bold are considered neotropical migrants. Other species are resident or undertake relatively short migrations south of their breeding range. It should be noted that there is disagreement within the scientific community as to what species are true interior forest species. This list attempts to find a balance between exclusionary and inclusionary paradigms (Featherstone, 2002). Forest interior habitat is associated with relatively few large forest blocks within the Town of Collingwood (Figure 10). The Georgian Trail forests, northwest Collingwood forest and Batteaux Creek forest support the last remaining forest interior habitats within the Town Hydrological and Air Quality Functions Although the wildlife habitat and forestry values of forests are well-recognized, forests also play a critical role in the hydrological cycle of a watershed. Healthy, functioning watersheds naturally filter pollutants and moderate water quantity by slowing surface runoff and increasing the infiltration of water into the soil. The result is less flooding and soil erosion, cleaner water downstream and greater groundwater reserves (Ernst, 2004). A significant proportion (10%-50%; Norman, 2004) of precipitation is intercepted by the forest canopy where it then evaporates into the atmosphere instead of running off the land. Roughly three-quarters of the precipitation falling on a forest is returned to the atmosphere through evaporation and transpiration (FON, 2004). Tree rooting systems provide pathways for precipitation to infiltrate into the soil, further reducing surface runoff. Canopy shade slows snowmelt processes, reducing flood peaks. Woodlands provide erosion protection on the landscape, maintaining natural levels of erosion and sediment transport within the watershed. The value of forests in maintaining high quality recharge to groundwater aquifers is emphasized in cities such as New York (United States) and Augsburg (Germany) where large tracts of forests in recharge areas have been purchased and managed to maintain high quality drinking water supplies and reduce the need for expensive treatment systems. Reforestation of the Oak Ridges Moraine following deforestation, which reached an apex in the 1920s, has increased groundwater recharge to area aquifers (Imhof, 2004). Natural heritage features, which are generally dominated by forests (upland and swamps) within the Nottawasaga River watershed, provide a framework for aquatic ecosystems on the landscape. Aquatic biota are the ultimate integrators of land uses within a catchment and can be viewed as children of the watershed. Large areas of natural heritage cover well-distributed across the landscape provide a framework for healthy aquatic ecosystems. Local air quality benefits are associated with forest cover since leaf surfaces are able to trap and absorb noxious gases and particulates. In a larger global context, forests sequester carbon dioxide, a greenhouse gas, thereby moderating the effects of global warming Study Results Table 5 provides a breakdown of forest types on the Town landscape as a percentage of the total landscape coverage and as a percentage of total natural heritage cover. Nottawasaga Valley Conservation Authority 35

45 Table 5: ELC Forest Communities within the Town of Collingwood Wetland Type Number of Polygons Total Area (ha) Landscape Cover (%) Forests Cultural Plantation Coniferous Forest Deciduous Forest Mixed Forest Treed Wetlands Deciduous Swamp Mixed Swamp TOTAL Natural Heritage Cover (%) Deciduous forest communities are most common within the Town of Collingwood. Of the deciduous forest communities, poplar forests are most numerous with 57 occurrences covering ha. White cedar hardwood mixed forests are the most numerous mixed forest type with 61 occurrences covering ha with in the Town. Green ash swamps are the most common type of deciduous swamp within the Town, with 62 occurrences covering a total of ha. Total forest cover (treed-wetlands included) in the Town of Collingwood is approximately 19.5 %. Of available natural heritage cover within the Town, forests account for 53.3 %. Please see Appendix C for a drawing of ELC forest community within the Town of Collingwood. Nottawasaga Valley Conservation Authority 36

46 Nottawasaga Valley Conservation Authority 37

47 Nottawasaga Valley Conservation Authority 38

48 Nottawasaga Valley Conservation Authority 39

49 6.6 Non-treed Upland Habitats Functions and Historical Trends Non-treed upland habitats consist of a mix of cultural features and features maintained by natural processes such as drought, erosion and fire or dynamic beach processes. Cultural features include old field meadows, cultural thickets and cultural savannahs (thinly treed fields) that are regenerating on the landscape following a cessation of anthropogenic disturbances such as agriculture and resource extraction. When such land uses are abandoned, they typically revert, through natural succession, from forb (wildflower) and grass-dominated fields to shrubland/successional tree dominated communities to climax forest communities (Geomatics, 1995). Twenty-five to forty years is often required to establish the dominant species of the original, pre-disturbance community while complete community restoration has been estimated to take from 80 to 100 years (Geomatics, 1995). It is important to note that successional habitats are likely to evolve into mature woodlands given sufficient time and freedom from disturbance. Since less than 1% of southern Ontario s forests are considered old- growth, much of the forest cover in southern Ontario has regenerated as a direct result of these successional processes on the landscape. Successional habitats are typically undervalued since they are not viewed as natural habitats and are relatively abundant. Current provincial policy does not provide for the protection of these features unless they provide habitat for threatened and endangered species or support rare vegetation communities such as tallgrass prairies/savannahs, sand barrens, dynamic beaches or alvars. However, they can provide important breeding/foraging habitat for valued fauna (i.e. white-tailed deer, wild turkey) as well as suitable conditions for rare flora associated with early succession. Large expanses of successional habitat can provide habitat for area-sensitive bird species such as grasshopper sparrow (Ammodramus savannarum), eastern meadowlark (Sturnella magna) and bobolink (Dolichonyx oryzivorus) which require large areas of unbroken grasslands for breeding and rearing. Bobolink has recently been designated as a threatened species while eastern meadowlark has recently been proposed for threatened designation. Both species are relatively common within the watershed. Natural values of successional areas are particularly important in landscapes that are predominantly agricultural (Geomatics, 1995). These habitats can provide opportunities for ecological restoration or rehabilitation that will benefit and enhance the natural values of the natural heritage system particularly where they are contiguous or proximal to riparian areas, woodlands, and wetlands, and where they provide linkages between these features Study Results Table 6 provides a breakdown of non-treed upland habitats on the Town landscape as a percentage of the total landscape coverage and as a percentage of total natural heritage cover. Nottawasaga Valley Conservation Authority 40

50 Table 6: ELC Successional Communities within the Town of Collingwood Wetland Type Number of Polygons Total Area (ha) Landscape Cover (%) Cultural Woodland Cultural Meadow Cultural Savannah Cultural Thicket Open Alvar TOTAL Natural Heritage Cover (%) Cultural woodland and cultural meadow communities are most common within the Town of Collingwood. Total regenerating cover in the Town of Collingwood is approximately 9.9 %. Of available natural heritage cover within the Town, regenerating cover accounts for 27.1 %. 6.7 Watercourses Six main watercourses flow through the Town of Collingwood and into Nottawasaga Bay (Figure11). Five of these watercourses Batteaux Creek, Pretty River, Black Ash Creek, Silver Creek and Townline Creek arise along the slopes of the Niagara Escarpment south and west of Collingwood. Bower s Beach Creek arises on till plains near the village of Batteaux then flows north, discharging to the bay at the eastern limits of the Town. Several small local drainages also flow to Nottawasaga Bay including the Cranberry Marsh outflow, the Oak Street Canal, drainage from the Sandford Fleming industrial area, and past channels now associated with the Silver Creek spill area just west of Princeton Shores Boulevard. In some cases, these drainage features have been historically excavated to drain adjacent lands while, in others, these features represent remnants of historical watercourses Bower s Beach Creek Bower s Beach Creek arises from relatively flat till features southeast of Collingwood. Groundwater discharge is low compared to the Escarpment stream systems and flow can be intermittent during the summer and early fall. Refuge pools along the creek provide fish habitat during intermittent flow periods. Tolerant baitfish, such as creek chub, comprise the resident fish community. Large numbers of baitfish (shiner species) have been observed in mid-late fall in the downstream reaches of the creek near its confluence with the Bay suggesting that this small system represents a fall refuge for these species. White sucker have historically ascended this tributary in this spring to spawn (Collis, pers.comm.). Bower s Beach Creek is a highly altered system, with its headwaters flowing through agricultural fields. Entering the Town of Collingwood, the creek flows through a roadside ditch along the west side of (Nottawasaga) Sideroad. Recent construction associated with the Highway 26 bypass has removed significant amounts of riparian vegetation in this area. Downstream (north) of Highway 26, the creek flows through a ditched channel which extends north to Nottawasaga Bay. Nottawasaga Valley Conservation Authority 41

51 6.7.2 Batteaux Creek Batteaux Creek arises along the slopes of the Niagara Escarpment west of Duntroon. Coldwater habitat in the headwaters supports resident brook trout and spawning, nursery and juvenile habitat for migratory rainbow trout. Downstream, groundwater inputs diminish and the creek rapidly warms and becomes unsuitable for trout, though the creek continues to provide habitat for warmwater baitfish species. Smallmouth bass have been observed in the downstream reaches of Batteaux Creek and these areas may provide a thermal refuge for smallmouth bass during periods of cold water upwelling in Nottawasaga Bay Pretty River The Pretty River arises along the slopes of the Niagara Escarpment northwest of Duntroon and flows through a groundwater-rich outwash valley before entering the till plains that extend northeast toward Collingwood. Rich groundwater discharge in its upper reaches supports coldwater habitat for resident brook trout and spawning, nursery and juvenile habitat for migratory rainbow trout. Chinook salmon also utilize coldwater habitats in the Pretty River. Exposed limestone bedrock in the vicinity of the Pretty River Parkway forms a partial obstacle to upstream fish passage. Historically, the Georgian Triangle Anglers Association and MNR have excavated passage channels through the bedrock to facilitate fish passage (Gartner Lee, 2004). Coldwater habitat extends downstream to the south limits of Collingwood. The Pretty River was diked throughout most of the Town of Collingwood in 1975 (C.C. Tathum, 1997) to protect Town residents and businesses from flooding. To ensure floodwater conveyance is maintained, forest cover is discouraged within the diked system and warmwater habitat conditions prevail, though the creek continues to provide habitat for warmwater baitfish species. Similar to Batteaux Creek, the downstream sections of the Pretty River may provide a thermal refuge for smallmouth bass during periods of cold water upwelling in Nottawasaga Bay Black Ash Creek The Petun branch of Black Ash Creek arises along the slopes of the Niagara Escarpment near Castle Glen. Groundwater discharge along the Escarpment slopes supports coldwater habitat within this tributary downstream into Collingwood. Other tributaries of Black Ash Creek are generally associated with till plains and typically have minor groundwater contributions. Flows in these systems may become intermittent during droughty summer/early fall conditions. Brook trout are present only in the extreme headwaters near Castle Glen. Rainbow trout production occurs throughout the Petun tributary. Some coldwater potential is also present in tributary reaches south of Town. Other tributary reaches flowing east into Black Ash Creek (Underwood tributary and Georgian Trail tributary) support seasonal baitfish habitat. The downstream reaches of Black Ash Creek (north of Poplar Sideroad) were historically altered to accept drainage from watercourses that otherwise would have flowed through (and periodically flooded) urban Collingwood. The vertical profile of Black Ash Creek downstream of Campbell Street to Collingwood Harbour was lowered in 2002 to address flooding issues within the Town of Collingwood. Natural channel design was incorporated within its limestone bedrock base and side slopes were re-vegetated, though forest cover will likely be discouraged to ensure conveyance of flood flows. Connections to intermittent inflowing tributaries from the west were impacted by this work. Nottawasaga Valley Conservation Authority 42

52 6.7.5 Silver Creek Silver Creek arises along the slopes of the Niagara Escarpment near Castle Glen. Unlike other stream systems within the Town of Collingwood, coldwater habitat, associated with significant groundwater discharge in the Escarpment headwaters, is present downstream through Collingwood to its confluence with Nottawasaga Bay. Downstream of Highway 26, the main channel of Silver Creek was reconfigured in the early 1970 s as part of highway construction. Silver Creek supports resident brook trout and spawning, nursery and juvenile habitat for migratory rainbow trout and Chinook salmon. The Silver Creek tributary flowing eastward from Osler Bluff Road and Grey 19 also supports coldwater habitat for rainbow trout (Azimuth, *). Similar to Batteaux Creek, the downstream sections of Silver Creek may provide a thermal refuge for smallmouth bass during periods of cold water upwelling in Nottawasaga Bay Townline Creek Townline Creek arises along the slopes of the Niagara Escarpment just south of the Blue Mountain Ski Resort. The creek flows through the ski resort and the Monterra development before entering the Town of Collingwood at Osler Bluff Road. Townline Creek enters a roadside ditch just downstream of Georgian Trail and continues along the ditch north of Highway 26 before flowing east under Long Point Road toward the Silver Creek Wetlands. Townline Creek has been historically altered through this forested reach. Townline Creek supports spawning, nursery and juvenile habitat for migratory rainbow trout. Recent partnership monitoring efforts by the Blue Mountain Watershed Trust, Nottawasaga Valley Conservation Authority and Grey Sauble Conservation Authority have identified significant water quality impacts associated with high concentrations of suspended sediment and nutrients that appear to be originating from the ski hills. These impacts, combined with alterations associated with roadside ditches and other channel works, continue to impact stream health Local Drainage Features Several smaller drainage features course through the Town of Collingwood to Nottawasaga Bay (Figure 11). With the exception of the features in northwest Collingwood (former channels of Silver Creek), these features have been highly altered and flow through urban areas. The downstream portions of these features may support habitat for tolerant warmwater fish species. Nottawasaga Valley Conservation Authority 43

53 Nottawasaga Valley Conservation Authority 44

54 6.8 Groundwater Hydrogeology The Collingwood area is underlain by two aquifer systems: 1) an overburden aquifer to the south, and 2) a bedrock aquifer which is exposed at surface to the north (Golder Associates Ltd, 2004). The overburden aquifer consists of localized inter-till units, which are hydraulically confined to the south and become unconfined to the north. The overburden aquifer is up to approximately 10m thick (where it is confined), within the elevation range of approximately 170 m to 220 masl (Golder Associates Ltd, 2004). This unit thins out to the north, and eventually disappears where the underlying till and bedrock are exposed at surface. The groundwater flow is to the northeast, generally aligned to the direction of flow in the local stream. The recharge to the local aquifers is considered to originate largely from the area of the Niagara Escarpment, with local contributions to the north where the sand aquifer becomes unconfined, and further north where bedrock is exposed at surface. It is noted that the Town of Collingwood is serviced primarily by a municipal water supply system which obtains its supply from a surface water intake in Georgian Bay. Private water supply wells service the outlying areas and are constructed primarily in the shallow overburden aquifer or in a poorly confined bedrock aquifer. These areas are also typically serviced by individual private sewage treatment systems (e.g. septics) Groundwater Discharge Areas and Highly Vulnerable Aquifers Groundwater discharge areas are associated with stream and river corridors, particularly where these features cut into the landscape and intersect shallow, local aquifers. Discharge areas are also associated with large expanses of low-lying lands/wetlands. Within the Town of Collingwood, discharge areas are generally expressed as broad bands of low volume seeps rather than discrete springs, such as those observed in the Escarpment headwaters of Batteaux Creek, Pretty River, Black Ash Creek, Silver Creek and Townline Creek. Shallow groundwater areas, often associated with discharge zones, can be highly vulnerable to contamination from human activities. A highly vulnerable aquifer (HVA) is defined as the subsurface soils underlying areas of high groundwater vulnerability. Through Source Water Protection, an HVA is an aquifer (groundwater-bearing unit) on which external sources (generally human activities) have or are likely to have a significant adverse effect. The HVA includes the land/soils above the aquifer. In general, an HVA consists of permeable granular aquifer materials or fractured rock near the ground surface in association with a relatively shallow water table. Based on the intrinsic susceptibility index (ISI) method, a considerable percentage of the Town of Collingwood corresponds to an HVA (South Georgian Bay-Lake Simcoe Source Protection Committee, 2010). The HVA is generally located north of the Nipissing ridge in areas where there is minimal overburden (bedrock outcropping) and/or sand/gravel units on the surface accompanied by a shallow water table (Figure 12). Nottawasaga Valley Conservation Authority 45

55 Nottawasaga Valley Conservation Authority 46

56 Nottawasaga Valley Conservation Authority 47

57 6.8.3 Significant Recharge Areas Groundwater recharge zones, where precipitation and snowmelt infiltrate into the ground to feed groundwater aquifers and groundwater discharge zones, feed area watercourses and wetlands and are integral components of the natural heritage system. Significant recharge zones are typically associated with coarse-grained soils (i.e. sands and gravels) covering upland areas on the landscape. A significant groundwater recharge area (SGRA) is an area where a relatively large percentage of water recharges from the ground surface to an aquifer (South Georgian Bay-Lake Simcoe Source Protection Committee., 2010). SGRAs represent important areas for groundwater to recharge the water table. The SGRA in the Town of Collingwood is limited to the overburden area running northwest to southeast along the lower flanks of the Niagara Escarpment in the southwest part of the Town (Figure 13). 6.9 Shoreline The nearshore zone is considered the most productive portion of Lake Huron with influences that extend offshore and inland (LHBCSCT, 2010). Almost all fish inhabiting Georgian Bay utilize the coastal wetlands, sand, gravel or cobble substrates associated with the nearshore zone at some point during their life cycle. Most Great Lakes fish utilize coastal wetlands for at least one life cycle stage, while nearshore reefs provide critical habitat for lake herring, lake trout and lake whitefish. Several significant fish habitat areas have been identified along the Collingwood shoreline by the Ministry of Natural Resources. These areas are reflected in Schedule B of the Town s Official Plan (Figure 5). The nearshore zone of Nottawasaga Bay supports a variety of substrates and areas of aquatic vegetation that provide habitat for shorebirds, waterfowl and fish. Exposed reefs and islands provide thickets and open forests that provide habitat for colonial nesting bird species such as terns, gulls, herons, egrets and cormorants. The nearshore area is intrinsically connected to coastal terrestrial features within 2 km of the shoreline (LHBCSCT, 2010). Relative to the remainder of southern Georgian Bay, the Collingwood shoreline has a shallow shoreline profile including several islands and reef formations that appear to provide for a high level of biodiversity within the southern Georgian Bay context. Informal cruises of the Collingwood shoreline were undertaken on May 22 and November 16, 2010 in support of this study. The intent of these cruises was to identify general substrate characteristics along the shoreline and to identify key areas of biodiversity in the nearshore area (Figure 14). The results of these cruises suggest that the Town shoreline can be effectively divided into east and west shoreline areas. The east shoreline (east of Collingwood Harbour) is dominated by boulder/cobble substrates with shallow bedrock shelves becoming prominent between the Pretty River mouth and the harbour. Shoreline substrates are generally fully exposed to wave action and seiche events from Georgian Bay. A shallow offshore reef east of the Batteaux Creek mouth provides a small, relatively sheltered inshore environment that supports finer substrates (sand) and aquatic vegetation (elodea and watermilfoil). Water depths tend to be fairly shallow and drop off uniformly to deeper offshore basins. The east shoreline is fully developed and connections to coastal terrestrial features are tenuous at best. Groynes are common along this shoreline but are relatively short and Nottawasaga Valley Conservation Authority 48

58 constructed from native substrates (boulder/cobble). A more significant hardening of the shoreline is associated with the development west of Huronia Parkway. The west shoreline (west of Collingwood Harbour) has a relatively high diversity of habitat types compared to the east shoreline. Offshore reefs and islands effectively shelter inshore areas, reducing exposure to Georgian Bay storms and seiche events. Substrates range from bedrock to silt/clay with areas of gravel shoals, sand bars and boulder/cobble also present. Beds of aquatic vegetation are present over some areas of finer substrate. Water depths are variable with shallow shoals intermixed with areas of deep water (up to 3 m deep). Substrates and depths can change from year to year as a result of storm and ice action (G. Reid, pers.comm.). Development is variable along the west shoreline. Areas immediately west of the harbour are highly developed with significant shoreline hardening and marina development. The shoreline along Princeton Shores Boulevard and Bartlett Boulevard has been highly altered via dredging. Conversely, the shoreline between Bartlett Boulevard and Madeline Drive represent the last undeveloped shoreline in the Town of Collingwood and provides important connectivity between the nearshore zone (including the offshore islands) and the inland terrestrial coastal zone. Nottawasaga Valley Conservation Authority 49

59 Nottawasaga Valley Conservation Authority 50

60 6.9.1 Shoreline Impacts Shoreline hardening effectively removes nearshore habitats and eliminates/degrades connections to wetland and terrestrial features along the shoreline (MNR, 2010). Further, this hardening disrupts natural nearshore coastal processes that drive erosion and sediment transport. Disruption of these processes alters the character and extent of nearshore habitat and the vegetation and habitat structure of the shoreline. Groynes alter shoreline processes, particularly water flow and sediment transport; structures that extend out further into the lake (150 m -300 m) are particularly disruptive. The east shore of Collingwood has more than 30 groynes/km while the remainder of Collingwood has 1-10 groynes/km (MNR, 2010). The east shore tends to have many small, single lot-based groynes whereas those associated with the central shoreline, though fewer, are much larger in scale. Recent low water levels have exacerbated impacts to the nearshore zone. In some areas, shoreline residents have responded to sustained low water levels by dredging to maintain boat access. Suspension of colloidal material during dredging, even with best mitigation efforts, often results in sediment plumes that extend far beyond the project area. Beach raking and removal of riparian vegetation also contribute to ongoing impacts that extend beyond the initial impacts caused by development. On average, much of the Collingwood shoreline has 1-10 dredging events/km; however, this increases to events/km between Bartlett Boulevard and Collingwood Harbour (MNR, 2010) Watershed land uses also impacts the nearshore system. Sediment loading from tributary rivers and streams can introduce excessive nutrients and turbidity into the nearshore zone. Excessive nutrients and suspended sediment loadings identified in Townline Creek (*,*) move into West Black Bass Bay during storm events, resulting in significant turbidity in the nearshore zone which impairs foraging activity of visual predators such as smallmouth bass Islands With over islands, the Great Lakes have the world s largest collection of freshwater islands containing significant biodiversity (Henson et al., 2010). They are important breeding and staging areas for colonial nesting waterbirds, important stopover sites for migrating birds, and contain rare habitats as well as endemic plant and animal species (Henson et al., 2010). Islands are important for their biological and physical diversity, and are highly sensitive to anthropogenic disturbances. Many of the islands in Lake Huron and Georgian Bay were connected to the mainland after the last period of glaciation. Because of isostatic rebound and changes in outflows during the Lake Nipissing stage (approximately 5,500 years ago), water levels rose to about 8 m above presentday levels, submerging and subsequently re-emerging some lands once water levels fell (Henson et al., 2010). This led to the current combination of land-bridge and primary islands we see today. Islands of Life: A Biodiversity and Conservation Atlas of the Great Lakes Islands, prepared by Nature Conservancy Canada, Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources, and The Nature Conservancy, identifies 4 key islands for biodiversity conservation along the Collingwood portion of Nottawasaga Bay: East Black Bass Bay Island Complex, Hen and Chicken Island, Nottawasaga Island, and Sunset Point Island Complex. Islands are defined as any land mass...that is surrounded by an aquatic ecosystem. A particular island can be periodically Nottawasaga Valley Conservation Authority 51

61 connected to the mainland or part of a reef depending on water levels. Rock, shoals, shallow reefs and breakwaters can all be considered islands in the context of this report. East Black Bass Bay Island Complex received high scoring due to its biological diversity, while Hen and Chicken Island received high scoring for both its physical and biological diversity. Both islands were categorized as having a medium to high threat level, primarily due to agriculture and building development though soils are poor and not conducive to agriculture and planning and regulatory policy generally protect these features from development. Sunset Point Island Complex was top scoring for its biological diversity and its relative threat level is perceived as low. These three islands are generally protected via Town zoning and/or regulations and portions lie within the Silver Creek PSW. Development pressure along adjacent shorelines is high. Nottawasaga Island received top scoring as it is significant habitat for colonial nesting waterbirds. It is the only Island in the Town of Collingwood that holds a natural heritage designation. The Nottawasaga Island Important Bird Area (IBA) is one of only four large Great Egret colonies in Canada, and is home to almost three percent of the Canadian population of Black-crowned Nightherons (Henson et al., 2010) Climate Change Climate change can be defined as a long term shift in overall weather patterns over time, measured by changes in temperature, precipitation, wind, snow cover, and other indicators (Government of Canada, 2010). On a global scale, climate change can be due to natural causes, such as volcanic activity, or human causes, such as fossil fuel burning and the clearing of natural features on the landscape. It is this human-induced climate change that is of such great concern. Climate change is not just global warming. Rising temperatures can lead to changes in wind and water currents, precipitation, and frequency of severe weather events. All of these factors can have severe impacts not only on the environment, but on the social and economic well being of societies around the world (Government of Canada, 2010). The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change recommends that climate change adaptation and mitigation be addressed at all levels of government to identify the root cause of climate warming and to minimize its potential damages, such as loss of biodiversity (Peel Region, 2008). At a municipal level, this involves including natural heritage system approaches as a critical element of sustainable community design (Peel Region, 2008). The following information on climate change in the Lake Huron area was excerpted from La Mer Douce The Sweet Sea: An International Biodiversity Conservation Strategy for Lake Huron, prepared by the Lake Huron Biodiversity Conservation Strategy Core Team. Over the last 100 years, the average global surface temperature has increased approximately 0.8 ⁰C, with an increase of another 1.1⁰C to 6.4⁰C or more projected in the next 90 years. Being at moderate latitude, climate change projections for the Great Lakes region are slightly higher than global average projections, with most effects being seen in maximum summer temperatures and minimum winter temperatures. It is expected that global climate change will lead to six major changes in Lake Huron: 1) increased annual averages in air and surface water temperatures, 2) increased duration of the stratified period, 3) changes in direction and strength of wind and water currents, 4) flashier precipitation, 5) decreased ice cover, and 6) changes in lake levels. Nottawasaga Valley Conservation Authority 52

62 These expected changes pose a threat to all biodiversity features. Because climate change and its effects are occurring at such fast rates, species are not able to adapt due to physiological and/or mobility limitations or because changes in their habitat hinder their adaptive ability. Many species will experience climate change as a stressor that reduces survival and/or reproduction. In general, most species will respond to climate change by changes in their range or local abundance and viability, or changes in timing of seasonal events. In order for species to make long-term shifts into new areas, there must be a way for them to move, a path for them to follow, and a place to go that has climactic and habitat conditions that will allow individuals to survive and reproduce. Habitat loss and disconnected or fragmented natural features (such as wetlands and forests) will hinder the ability of species to move into new areas. Species unable to disperse will also have the added stress of species from lower latitudes invading their habitats and competing for resources. Climate change is also a high threat to aerial migrants due to the loss of key habitats such as nesting, foraging, and staging habitats (most importantly wetlands), the depletion of food resources within those habitats, and phenology mismatches (the idea that migrant birds experience greater warming on their breeding grounds than their wintering grounds and will miss the early stages of the breeding season, leading to global population declines). The rapid changes associated with climate change in the Great Lakes area suggest a high potential for species to respond at different rates which can have negative implications for inter-species interactions. With species making shifts into new areas at different rates, the potential exists for the disruption of symbiotic relationships between species which can critically affect the survival of one or both species and lead to changes in ecosystem function. It is also suggested that climate change will contribute to the disruption of entire food webs. Of other considerable concern in the Great Lakes area is the extreme threat to rare coastal communities. Decreased lake levels result in a change of area, distribution, and abundance of coastal wetlands which can severely affect the ecology of these globally rare and important natural features. Impacts of climate change are likely to exacerbate human disturbances such as dredging and filling, water diversion, and pollution. Also occurring with decreased water levels is the colonization of coastal systems by invasive species, such as Phragmites, which outcompete native species and change the ecology and hydrology of the wetlands. Increased drought and intensity of rainfall have the potential to increase erosion and reduce the viability of sensitive coastal systems. Changes in wind and current patterns can also cause changes in the physical processes that shape coastal communities by causing changes in sediment movement patterns and distribution of near shore habitat types. Alterations and disruptions to these habitats can negatively impact foraging areas for many species as well as near shore fish spawning areas. Warmer near shore water temperatures and longer stratified periods will lead to higher summer oxygen depletion which will severely impact food web dynamics. All of the above changes create the potential for phenological mismatches that reduce the viability of key species. Climate change also has implications for native fish species. Each species has a preferred water temperature which, as ectotherms, matches closely with their body temperature. Foraging, metabolism, growth, and mating behavior are all very closely intertwined with a species preferred water temperature. Because of this dependence on optimal water temperature for survival and reproduction, fish will respond strongly to changes in water temperature, water volume, and water flow by either shifts in distribution or in overall productivity. Coupled with potential changes in critical near shore habitat, the impact of climate change on native, migratory fish species could be severe. Nottawasaga Valley Conservation Authority 53

63 The role of natural heritage systems in the context of climate change is to help ensure that ecosystems are as connected and resilient as possible so that species can move and remain viable under both current and future climate conditions Invasive Species Terrestrial and aquatic invasive species harm native ecosystems and impact a range of human activities. From a natural heritage perspective, invasive species often find no natural enemies in their new habitat and rapidly expand their populations, adversely impacting native vegetation communities, wildlife habitat, and overall biodiversity. Invasive species are considered the second-most significant threat to biodiversity after habitat loss (ref***). The Town of Collingwood hosts a range of invasive species. Some are well-established and likely beyond all but local control while others are found in relatively isolated pockets and may still be effectively controlled through concerted community action. Key invasive species and affected areas are described below. Common buckthorn (Rhamnus cathartica) is a common and often dominant component of the shrub layer in fresh-moist mixed and deciduous forests in Collingwood. This invasive shrub is also present along wetland forest fringes. Forests in the east portion of Collingwood are particularly infested. Common buckthorn berries are ingested by birds they are a diuretic and seeds pass through the digestive system unharmed and are rapidly introduced to adjacent forest areas. Giant hogweed (Heracleum mantegazzianum) and wild parsnip (Pastinaca sativa) are members of the carrot family. Both species can cause photodermatitis when bare skin exposed to sap is exposed to sunlight, resulting in severe skin blisters and burns in some individuals. Giant hogweed is found along much of the Oak Street Canal downstream into Harbourview Park. The Town of Collingwood and have been working at controlling this population over the past three years. Giant hogweed has recently (2010) been declared a noxious weed under the Ontario Weeds Act. Several municipalities (i.e. Wellington County) have passed bylaws under the Municipal Act to control plants in areas other than on agricultural lands where there is a potential for risks to human health and safety. Wild parsnip is present along portions of the Pretty River dyke trail as well as along trails in Harbourview Park. Town staff continue to control wild parsnip along these trail sections. The non-native strain of common reed (Phragmites australis) has colonized shoreline areas along the east shore of Lake Huron and portions of Georgian Bay. Recent low water levels have created habitat opportunities for common reed which, in suitable environments, can form dense monocultures that exclude native marsh/beach species. Common reed has colonized the rare shoreline marshes along the Collingwood shoreline. Dense monocultures are not typically associated with these colonies though disturbed shoreline areas and areas with high nutrient inputs do have denser stands. The low nutrient regime associated with the coastal marsh may limit their distribution and density; however, these colonizing stands could also become denser and have increasing impacts over time. Dog-strangling vine (Vincetoxicum nigrum) is a highly invasive vine that has colonized portions of the White s Bay/Hen and Chicken Island shoreline in Collingwood. This species will likely expand throughout dry to moist shoreline habitats as well as inland unless control efforts are forthcoming. Nottawasaga Valley Conservation Authority 54

64 Natural communities associated with Harbourview Park and adjacent areas have been impacted by invasive species. Hybrid poplars are present in the forests. Japanese knotweed (Polygonum cuspidatum), garlic mustard (Alliaria petiolata) and Tatarian honeysuckle (Lonicera tatarica) are abundant in forest understorey and along forest edges. A non-native forest dominated by black locust (Robinia pseudocacia), common buckthorn and garlic mustard is present east of the boardwalk trail. Invasive aquatic species are present along the Collingwood shoreline. Zebra mussels are present on rocky substrates in the nearshore area. Round gobies are abundant and can be observed feeding off sheet piles along the harbour walls. Common carp are present in large numbers along the shoreline, uprooting wetland vegetation and creating turbid conditions through their foraging and spawning activities. 7.0 Provincial Policy Statement - Natural Heritage Features and Functions The PPS identifies a number of natural heritage features that are of provincial interest. Identification of provincially significant wetlands and significant habitat of Endangered and Threatened species falls under the mandate of the Ministry of Natural Resources. Identification of significant woodlands and significant wildlife habitat is the mandate of the planning authority. Various levels of protection are provided to these features based on PPS policy (Section 3.1 ). An assessment of these features, based on background investigations and field work associated with this study, is provided below. 7.1 Provincially Significant Wetlands Evaluation of wetlands in southern Ontario began in 1984 in an attempt to recognize and protect provincially significant wetlands on the landscape. Scoring is based on a wetland s biological, hydrological, social, and special features attributes. Wetlands which are connected by local surface flows or proximity are grouped together and evaluated as a wetland complex. The first two editions of the evaluation protocol ranked wetlands as Classes 1 through 7 with Classes 1, 2 and 3 designated as provincially significant wetlands. The 3 rd edition of the evaluation system dropped the class distinctions. Wetlands scoring 600 or more points (or at least 200 points in biological or special features) are designated provincially significant while other wetlands are identified as non-provincially significant. A key change from the 2 nd edition to the 3 rd edition is a significant revision of the hydrological scoring component within the evaluation system. Evaluated wetlands in the Town of Collingwood (Silver Creek Wetland Complex) are shown in Figure 15. These wetlands have been evaluated using the 1 st and 2 nd editions of the MNR Wetland Evaluation System (MNR, 1984). A broad update of the Silver Creek Wetland Complex was undertaken by MNR in Since that time several wetland unit boundaries have been refined in the field by consultants/mnr and previously unevaluated wetlands have been added to the complex. A number of unevaluated wetlands have recently been documented within the Town of Collingwood. Wetland units east and south of the evaluated Silver Creek Wetland Complex were identified as part of the Generic Regulation update exercise in 2005/2006. Several of these units have been verified and boundaries refined through consultant and studies. Nottawasaga Valley Conservation Authority 55

65 Provincially significant wetlands in southern Ontario (south of the Canadian Shield) are protected from development by Section 2.1 of the PPS which states development and site alteration shall not be permitted within provincially significant wetlands in Ecoregions 5E, 6E and 7E and shall not be permitted on adjacent lands (within 120 m) unless it has been demonstrated that there will be no negative impacts on the wetland or its ecological functions (MMAH, 2005). The Town of Collingwood lies within Ecoregion 6E Silver Creek Wetland Complex This provincially significant wetland is over 327 ha in size and lies within one kilometer of the Nottawasaga Bay shoreline. A portion of this complex extends west into the Town of Blue Mountains. Earlier wetland evaluations identified three separate wetland complexes Cranberry Marsh, Collingwood Harbour and Silver Creek; however, all three wetlands were complexed into one unit in 199*. From a functional standpoint, Cranberry Marsh and its contiguous swamp forests comprise an island which is separated from other portions of the complex by urban and golf course development. Wetlands extending westward along the shoreline from Collingwood Harbour through Princeton Shores are generally narrow and abut urban development. Larger blocks of wetland and contiguous upland cover are present north of Highway 26 in northwest Collingwood in the vicinity of Silver and Townline Creeks. The Silver Creek Wetland Complex consists of a mosaic of swamp, marsh and rich fen habitats. Globally rare Great Lakes coastal marsh communities are present along the Nottawasaga Bay shoreline. These communities expand and contract in association with lower and higher lake levels. Inland and west of Princeton Shores Boulevard, a variety of deciduous, mixed, coniferous and thicket swamps are intermixed with upland habitats. These community associations are generally absent to the east due to urbanization. A large cattail marsh is associated with Cranberry Marsh this habitat historically supported area-sensitive marsh birds Unevaluated Wetlands A number of unevaluated wetlands exist within the Town of Collingwood (Figure 16) and additional wetlands have been identified south and east of the provincially significant Silver Creek Wetland Complex. Field work undertaken in support of this study (and also through private sector consultant studies) confirmed and refined wetland boundaries in several areas north and south of Georgian Trail between Townline Creek and Black Ash Creek. These wetlands generally consist of a mosaic of forested swamp and thicket swamp habitats. A Great Lakes coastal marsh unit was identified just north of the former Goodyear plant on the south side of the Georgian Trail. Unevaluated wetlands that meet a set of criteria identified within the Ontario Wetland Evaluation System can be complexed with identified wetland complexes. The criteria that must generally be met are outlined below: Wetland size generally 2ha though MNR often considers wetlands 0.5 ha as part of wetland complexes (G. Findlay, MNR; pers.comm.) Proximity within 750 m of the provincially significant wetland complex Hydrological connectivity lying within same catchment as the provincially significant wetland complex Nottawasaga Valley Conservation Authority 56

66 Based on field work associated with this study, several of these units could potentially be complexed with the Silver Creek Wetland Complex based on unit size, proximity and hydrological connection. Smaller wetland units have been identified east of the Pretty River. Wetland units one with potential coastal marsh affinities - have been identified within the Batteaux Creek Greenland. A Great Lakes coastal marsh has also been identified along the Nottawasaga Bay shoreline just west of Huronia Parkway. These smaller, relatively isolated wetland units may meet provincially significant criteria by virtue of community rarity. Several smaller, isolated wetland units with relatively common vegetation communities have also been identified as part of this study. These wetlands likely do not meet tests for provincial significance. A subset of these wetlands is protected via their presence in floodplain/valley Nottawasaga Valley Conservation Authority 57

67 Nottawasaga Valley Conservation Authority 58

68 Nottawasaga Valley Conservation Authority 59

69 7.2 Species At Risk - Threatened and Endangered Species Since 1977, the Committee on the Status of Endangered Wildlife in Canada (COSEWIC) has been providing advice to the Canadian federal government on the status of wildlife species. Provincially, the Committee on the Status of Species at Risk in Ontario (COSSARO) performs a similar role. Recently, the Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources has implemented changes to provincial species at risk terminology and status that will reduce confusion and move the province toward conformity with the federal Species At Risk Act (SARA, 2003). Five categories of risk are assigned to species at risk in Canada: Extinct no longer exists anywhere in the world (i.e. passenger pigeon) Extirpated native species no longer existing in the wild in Canada/Ontario (i.e. timber rattlesnake) but may exist in other countries Endangered any native species that is at risk of becoming extinct or extirpated (i.e. butternut) Threatened any native species that is at risk of becoming endangered (i.e. eastern hognosed snake) Special Concern any native species that is sensitive to human activities or natural events (i.e. red-shouldered hawk) Review of the OMNR Natural Heritage Information Centre database and historical reports indicates the presence of eight Species At Risk (SAR) in the Town of Collingwood (Table 7). A brief overview of species designated as endangered or threatened can be found below. Table 7: Species at Risk in the Town of Collingwood Species Name Butternut Spotted Turtle Blanding s Turtle Chimney Swift Bobolink Snapping Turtle Northern Map Turtle Eastern Ribbonsnake Provincial Status Endangered Endangered Threatened Threatened Threatened Special Concern Special Concern Special Concern Butternut Endangered Butternut (Juglans cinerea) is a medium-sized tree of the Walnut family, which is easily recognizable by its compound leaves of leaflets, arranged in a feather-like pattern. It is found throughout central and eastern North America. In Ontario, Butternut can be found throughout the southwest, north to the Bruce Peninsula, and south of the Canadian Shield [MNR, n.d (a)]. Butternut prefers moist, well-drained soils or gravel, and can often be found along stream banks. The species grows in deciduous forests and can be found growing alone or in small groups in sunny openings or along forest edges [MNR, n.d (a)]. A major threat to Butternut trees is the Butternut canker, a fungal disease that can quickly spread and kill infected trees. This fungus has already ravaged Butternut populations across North America. There is no known cure for the canker disease, although experts are hopeful that Nottawasaga Valley Conservation Authority 60

70 Butternut populations can be restored by using seeds from canker resistant trees for propagation [MNR, n.d (a)]. In Ontario, Butternut trees are protected under the Endangered Species Act, 2007, which protects against any type of harm to the species Spotted Turtle Endangered The Spotted Turtle (Clemmys guttata) is named for the bright yellow spots that can be found on its black carapace. It is a small turtle that prefers ponds, marshes, and bogs which have an abundant supply of aquatic vegetation. After emerging in the spring and mating, females lay eggs in soil and leaf litter in wooded areas that are close to wetlands (Royal Ontario Museum, 2008a). They remain active until the fall when they return underground to hibernate in groups. The Spotted Turtle can be found in Eastern North America, from Ontario south to Florida, and west to Michigan. There are approximately 75 known locations in Ontario (ROM, 2008a). Spotted Turtles are highly sensitive to habitat alteration, nest predation, and pollution. Hatching success is very low, and the ability of the turtles to recover from population declines are slow and very limited (ROM, 2008a). Spotted Turtles are also highly sought after for illegal pet trade, and are particularly vulnerable during spring and fall when large numbers of turtles congregate together. Spotted Turtles are protected under Ontario s Endangered Species Act, 2007, which prohibits the harming, collecting, possessing, trading, or killing of the species. Spotted Turtles are also protected under Ontario s Fish and Wildlife Conservation Act Blanding s Turtle Threatened Blanding s Turtles (Emydoidea blandingii) are easily distinguishable by their bright yellow throat and jaw. They are a medium-sized turtle that moves between streams, lakes, and shallow wetlands, also spending a significant amount of time in upland areas moving between preferred habitats. Blanding s Turtles can be found in the southern Great Lakes region, from Nebraska, to Illinois, to Ontario (ROM, 2008b). There are also isolated populations in Quebec, Nova Scotia, and the East coast of the United States. In Ontario, the turtles are found in the southern and central parts of the province, except for along the Bruce Peninsula and the far southeast (ROM, 2008b). Threats to Blanding s Turtles include: habitat loss and fragmentation, road mortality, nest predation, collection for the pet trade, and cool summer weather which results in fewer hatchlings. As Blanding s can take up to 25 years to reach reproductive maturity, loss of even a few individuals from the population can have devastating effects (ROM, 2008b). Blanding s Turtles are protected under Ontario s Endangered Species Act, 2007, and any actions which cause harm to the species is prohibited. Blanding s are also protected under the Fish and Wildlife Conservation Act. The Provincial Policy Statement (under Ontario s Planning Act) also provides protection to significant habitat of threatened species Boblink Threatened Bobolinks (Dolichonyx oryzivorus) are medium-sized songbirds that can be found in grasslands and hayfields, foraging for insects and seeds on the ground. Nests are also built on the ground in thick grasses [MNR, n.d.(b)]. The Bobolink breeds throughout North America, and in Ontario can be found wherever suitable habitat exists. In North America, both the degradation of nesting Nottawasaga Valley Conservation Authority 61

71 habitat and the inadvertent disturbance and killing of nesting adults, eggs, and young birds, occurs during the mowing of hay and as a result of modern day hay production practices [MNR, n.d.(b)]. Bobolinks are protected under Ontario s Endangered Species Act, 2007, which also protects their habitat from damage and destruction Chimney Swift Threatened Chimney swifts (Chaetura pelagica) are rather small, sooty-coloured birds, which can be easily distinguished by their erratic flight pattern while foraging for flying insects in the air [MNR, n.d.(c)]. While Chimney swifts historically nested in caves or tree cavities, they are most likely to be found near urban settlements where they nest and roost in chimneys and other manmade structures. Chimney swifts breed in eastern North America and can be found throughout most of Ontario, but they are most concentrated in the Carolinian zone in the south and southwest of the province [MNR, n.d.(c)]. Scientists are unsure what is causing current Chimney Swift population declines, although there is speculation that it is likely related to a decline of the flying insects they prey upon. It is also likely that habitat loss is affecting population sizes, as the modernization of chimney structures has prevented the swifts from using potential nesting sites [MNR, n.d.(c)]. Chimney swifts are protected under Ontario s Endangered Species Act, 2007, which also protects their habitat from damage and destruction. 7.3 Significant Woodlands The PPS (Section 2.1.4) states that development and site alteration shall not be permitted in significant woodlands south and east of the Canadian Shield unless it has been demonstrated that there will be no negative impacts on the natural features or their ecological functions and that development and site alteration shall not be permitted on adjacent lands 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 functions. Significant woodlands (SW) are features intended to be identified and protected by Planning Authorities (i.e. the Town of Collingwood). Significance, in regard to woodlands, is associated with areas that are ecologically important in terms of features such as species composition, age of trees, and stand history; functionally important due to their contribution to the broader landscape because of their location, size or due to the amount of forest cover in the planning areas; or economically important due to site quality, species composition or past management history (PPS, 2005). Criteria used to evaluate SW are outlined in the NHRM (MNR, 2010) and are broadly grouped into the following categories: woodland size, ecological functions, uncommon characteristics, and economic/social functional values. Woodlands that meet a suggested minimum standard for any one of the criteria should be considered significant (MNR, 2010). Criteria within each category are described below followed by an analysis of broad Town of Collingwood woodlands and assessment of how they may meet each criterion. Nottawasaga Valley Conservation Authority 62

72 7.3.1 Woodland Size The woodland size criterion is related to the percentage of woodland cover within a municipality. This criterion should also account for differences in landscape-level physiography (NHRM, 2010). Woodland cover in the Town of Collingwood is approximately 19.5 %; however, there is a distinct difference in forest cover north and south of the Nipissing ridge. Based on scarcity of forest cover south of the Nipissing ridge, woodlands south of the ridge may be considered significant at smaller sizes relative to woodlands north of the ridge. The NHRM notes that, as a consideration in addressing the potential loss of biodiversity, the largest woodland in the planning area should be identified as significant. Where woodland cover is between % of the land cover, woodlands 20 ha in size or larger should be considered significant. Within the Town of Collingwood, the following forests meet this criterion: Braeside Forest (22 ha) Batteaux Creek Forest (40 ha) Georgian Trail Forest (70+ ha) Silver Creek North Forest (60+ ha) South of the Nipissing ridge, where woodland cover is significantly lower, the Southwest Forest (19 ha; 6 th Street and Osler Bluff Road) would likely meet the woodland size criterion (where woodland cover is between 5-15% of the land cover, woodlands 4 ha in size or larger should be considered significant) Ecological Functions Woodland Interior Woodland interior is defined as woodland habitat located more than 100 m from woodland edge. Gaps of less than 20 m generally do not create a separate woodland; however, the NHRM notes that a maintained public road is considered an edge, even if the opening is less than 20 m. Where woodlands cover between 15-30% of the planning area, woodlands should be considered significant if they support 2 ha or more of interior habitat. Where woodland cover is less than 15% (i.e. south of the Nipissing ridge), any interior habitat should be considered significant. Within the Town of Collingwood, the following woodland features meet this criterion: Braeside Forest (5 ha) Batteaux Creek Forest (11 ha) Georgian Trail forests (3 units; 24 ha total) Silver Creek North forests (4 ha) Southwest Forest (3 ha) Proximity to Other Woodlands or Other Habitats Woodlands that overlap, abut, or are close to other significant natural heritage features or areas could be considered more valuable or significant than those that are not. Patches close to each other are of greater mutual benefit and value to wildlife (MNR, 2010). Woodlands should be considered significant if a portion of the woodland is located within a specified distance of a Nottawasaga Valley Conservation Authority 63

73 significant natural feature or fish habitat likely receiving ecological benefit from the woodland and the entire woodland meets the minimum area threshold (0.5 ha 20 ha, depending on circumstance). In the Town of Collingwood context, woodlands abutting river valleys and streams could be considered significant even if they do not meet other significant woodland criteria (i.e. size). Woodlands that do not meet size/forest interior criteria but which likely are significant based on the proximity criterion include those woodlands associated with: Linkages Pretty River Black Ash Creek (and tributaries) Townline Creek Silver Creek South (and tributaries) Small shoreline woodlands abutting shoreline PSW units Linkages are important connections providing for movement between habitats. Woodlands that are located between other significant features or areas can be considered to perform an important linkage function as stepping stones for movement between habitats. Woodlands should be considered significant if they are located within a defined natural heritage system or provide a connecting link between two other significant features, each of which is within a specified distance and meets the minimum area threshold (1-20 ha, depending on circumstance). Natural heritage system development within the Town of Collingwood is discussed in Section 8 and provides a rationale for inclusion of linkages that meets the SW linkage criterion for linkage identification. Water Protection Source water protection is important for the Town of Collingwood and adjacent municipalities. Protection of woodlands located over sensitive recharge and discharge areas can be an important component of source water protection and is needed to maintain natural hydrological processes (MNR, 2010). Woodlands should be considered significant if they are located within a sensitive or threatened watershed or a specified distance of a sensitive groundwater discharge, sensitive recharge area, sensitive headwater area, watercourse, or fish habitat, and meet the minimum area threshold ( ha, depending on circumstance). Within the Town of Collingwood, this criterion generally overlaps with the SW proximity criterion. Woodlands overlie shallow groundwater over bedrock north of the Nipissing ridge. These shallow groundwater areas are considered sensitive aquifers due to their proximity to the ground surface and potential for contamination. This sensitivity is somewhat offset by the Town water intakes which are located in Nottawasaga Bay and that most of the Town no longer relies on private well supplies. Contamination of this shallow groundwater aquifer could still potentially impact remaining private well users as well as watercourses, wetlands, and the nearshore environment of Nottawasaga Bay. Protection of woodlands (typically meeting other SW criteria) over this area combined with municipal policies requiring best management practices for any development (as per the Source Water Protection Act) is required to protect shallow groundwater resources north of the Nipissing ridge. Nottawasaga Valley Conservation Authority 64

74 Woodland Diversity Certain woodland species have had major reductions in representation on the landscape and need special consideration. Native biodiversity is valuable on the landscape (MNR, 2010). Woodlands should be considered significant if they have: A naturally occurring composition of native forest species that have declined significantly south and east of the Canadian Shield and meet a minimum area threshold (1-20 ha, depending on circumstance) A high native diversity through a combination of composition and terrain and meeting a minimum area threshold (2-20 ha, depending on circumstance) Although not rare from a watershed or subwatershed perspective, sugar maple woodlands have declined significantly within the Town of Collingwood largely due to clearing for agricultural purposes in the 19 th and early 20 th centuries. Remaining sugar maple forests that meet the minimum area threshold should be considered significant. Most, if not all, of these woodlands are located adjacent to or within valleylands, and meet the proximity and water protection criteria as well as the high native diversity subcriterion associated with woodland diversity. Woodlands associated with the Georgian Trail, Silver Creek North and Townline Creek natural heritage features support a high native diversity. Ridge/trough terrain associated with the proglacial stages of the Nipissing introgression, support a mosaic of upland woodlands which are intermixed with a mosaic of swamp communities. This significant diversity of forest and swamp habitats provides a variety of habitat opportunities for wildlife Uncommon Characteristics Woodlands that are uncommon in terms of species composition, cover type, age or structure should be protected. Older woodlands (i.e. woodlands greater than 100 years old) are particularly valuable for several reasons, including their contributions to genetic, species and ecosystem diversity (MNR, 2010). Woodlands should be considered significant if they have: A unique species composition or the site is represented by less than 5% of overall woodland cover and meets a minimum area threshold (0.5 ha, depending on circumstance) A vegetation community with a provincial ranking of S1, S2 or S3 and meets a minimum area threshold (0.5 ha, depending on circumstance) Habitat of a rare, uncommon or restricted woodland plant species and meets a minimum area threshold (0.5 ha, depending on circumstance) Characteristics of older woodlands or woodlands with larger tree size structure in native species and meet a minimum area threshold (1-10 ha, depending on circumstance) Woodlands that likely meet the older woodland criterion (greater than 100 years old) are present north of the Nipissing ridge. Poor soils and moist-wet conditions precluded agricultural clearing in this area. These same conditions provided unsuitable habitat for merchantable timber. With the exception of grazing in some woodlands, the ash/poplar/cedar forests in this area have remained relatively undisturbed since settlement. However, the species composition of these forests (and slow growth associated with soil conditions) does not lead to the typical conditions associated with older woodlands (i.e. trees greater than 100 years of age or trees of large diameter Nottawasaga Valley Conservation Authority 65

75 40-50 cm). The NHRM does not provide direction for older woodlands of this type. Most older woodlands within the Town of Collingwood are encompassed within other SW criteria. Portions of the remnant forests within the Sandford Fleming Drive area may meet this criterion Economic and Social Functional Values Woodlands that have high economic or social values through particular site characteristics or deliberate management should be protected (MNR, 2010). Woodlands should be considered significant if they have: High productivity in terms of economically valuable products together with continuous native natural attributes, and meet a minimum area threshold (2-10 ha, depending on circumstance) A high value in special services, such as air-quality improvement or recreation at a sustainable level that is compatible with long-term retention and meet a minimum area threshold ( ha, depending on circumstance) Important identified appreciation, education, cultural or historical value and meet a minimum area threshold ( ha, depending on circumstance) Within the Town of Collingwood, woodlands associated with the award-winning Town trail system could be considered to have high social functional value. Local air quality improvement is broadly provided by larger forests within the Town of Collingwood (as well as those in adjacent municipalities and at a much broader regional level). Within the Town of Collingwood, these woodlands are generally encompassed within other SW criteria Significant Woodlands Summary Significant woodlands and associated criteria overlap with a number of other PPS natural heritage policies including those associated with significant wildlife habitat and provincially significant wetlands. Natural heritage system development for the Town of Collingwood (Section 8) considers inclusion of significant woodlands as a key component of preferred system form. 7.4 Significant Wildlife Habitat Significant Wildlife Habitat (SWH) is identified within the PPS as a feature to be identified and protected by Planning Authorities (i.e. the Town of Collingwood) any proposed development within SWH is subject to an Environmental Impact Study which must demonstrate no negative impacts to SWH functions. SWH covers a wide range habitat functions from rare vegetation communities to Species of Special Concern to specialized habitats that support more common wildlife. SWH features identified by MNR (MNR, 2000) are listed below. Those features likely present within the Town of Collingwood based on field work and background investigations undertaken as part of this report are discussed in greater detail below. Seasonal Concentrations of Animals Winter deer yards Moose late winter habitat (not present in Collingwood) Colonial bird nesting sites Waterfowl stopover and staging areas Nottawasaga Valley Conservation Authority 66

76 Waterfowl nesting Shorebird migratory stopover areas Landbird migratory stopover areas Raptor winter feeding and roosting areas (none known in Collingwood) Wild turkey winter range Turkey vulture summer roosting areas (most likely on Escarpment cliffs southwest of Collingwood) Reptile hibernacula Bat hibernacula (most likely on Escarpment features southwest of Collingwood) Bullfrog concentration areas (none known in Collingwood) Migratory butterfly stopover areas Rare Vegetation Communities Alvars Great Lakes Coastal Marsh Tall-grass prairies (not present) Savannahs (none observed in Collingwood) Rare forest types Talus slopes (on Escarpment features southwest of Collingwood) Rock barrens (not present) Sand barrens (not present) Great Lakes dunes (not present) Specialized Wildlife Habitats Habitat for area-sensitive species Forest providing a high diversity of habitats Old-growth or mature forest stands Foraging areas with abundant mast (limited/none in Collingwood) Amphibian woodland breeding ponds Turtle nesting habitat Specialized raptor nesting habitat Moose calving areas (not present) Moose aquatic feeding areas (not present) Mineral licks (not present) Mink, otter, marten and fisher denning sites Highly Diverse Areas Cliffs (not present) Seeps and Springs Habitats of Species of Conservation Concern Animal Movement Corridors Nottawasaga Valley Conservation Authority 67

77 7.4.1 Seasonal Concentrations of Animals Winter Deer Yards White-tailed deer congregate in sheltered coniferous and mixed forests in the winter months to find shelter, provide ease of movement, protection from predators, and forage. The closest MNRidentified deer yard lies just east of Collingwood. Similar forest types are present in the Braeside Street-Batteaux Creek area and locally significant numbers of white-tailed deer appear to be using these habitats based on staff observation. Similarly, mixed and conifer forest stands in west Collingwood (larger forest/wetland complexes along Georgian Trail and near Silver Creek) provide local winter deer yard habitat based on and private sector consultant observations (Azimuth, *). Colonial Bird Nesting Sites Offshore islands in west Collingwood provide significant colonial bird nesting sites. Nottawasaga Island supports dozens to hundreds of nesting pairs of great blue heron, blackcrowned night heron, great egret and double-crested cormorant. Thousands of pairs of ring-billed gulls and herring gulls utilize this island and other island habitats to the south and west. Common terns and Caspian terns nest on a smaller island northwest of Long Point Road. Great blue herons formerly nested in the forested swamps near the mouth of Silver Creek but abandoned their colony in * (G. Reid, pers.comm.), likely due to work along the shoreline. A black tern colony was historically present at Cranberry Marsh (Gartner Lee, 2004); however, the status of this colony is unknown. Waterfowl Stopover and Staging Areas The Nottawasaga Bay shoreline provides important stopover and staging habitat during the spring and fall months. Hundreds of ducks and geese were observed along the shoreline during the November shoreline survey. The invertebrate-rich vernal pool wetlands in the forest/wetland complexes along Georgian Trail and Silver Creek likely provide important waterfowl stopover habitat during spring migration. Cranberry Marsh likely provides locally important waterfowl stopover and staging habitat during the spring and fall. Waterfowl Nesting Waterfowl nesting occurs along the Nottawasaga Bay shoreline, Cranberry Marsh, and likely in the forest/wetland complexes along Silver Creek and Georgian Trail. Although significant concentrations of nesting waterfowl have not been identified, protection of shoreline wetlands, broader forest/wetland complexes, and adjacent upland habitats should protect waterfowl nesting habitats within the Town of Collingwood. Shorebird Migratory Stopover Areas Shorebirds are comprised of a diverse group of species, aptly named as they spend most of their time in wetland habitats and can often be found on the shores of lakes, oceans, and other wet and marshy areas (Environment Canada, 2001). The province of Ontario provides critically important staging and breeding habitat for Western Hemisphere shorebirds (Environment Canada, 2003). Both James and Hudson Bays are vitally important within the province and provide a major migration route for arctic-nesting species; however, 35 species of migratory shorebirds in smaller Nottawasaga Valley Conservation Authority 68

78 numbers can also be found in Southern Ontario (Environment Canada, 2003). It is estimated that tens of thousands of shorebirds regularly use southern Ontario habitats during both northward and southward migration periods, and are found widely dispersed among the many wetlands, rivers, ponds, lakes, mudflats, sewage lagoons, wet fields and pastures, as well as along the entire length of the Great Lakes coasts (Environment Canada, 2003). These sites are important stop over areas which allow the birds to rest, forage, and replenish fat reserves essential for long flights to staging areas on the Atlantic coast or to wintering areas in South America (Environment Canada, 2003). Shorebirds are exposed to a wide variety of threats throughout their life cycle. In Ontario, most of these factors are directly related to human activity and are most prominent in heavily populated southern Ontario (Environment Canada, 2003). Wetland drainage for agriculture and development lands has been a significant cause of wetland loss in southern Ontario, while intact wetlands are being degraded by invasive plants, livestock, and pollution (Environment Canada, 2003). Similarly, wetlands and shoreline habitats are being degraded or filled for cottage or recreational property development. Shoreline and near shore recreation such as walking/hiking, jogging, boating, wildlife watching, dog-walking, use of recreational vehicles, and beach clearing is also a threat to shorebirds by causing disturbances which can limit their access to nesting and food availability and can impact their physical condition (Environment Canada, 2003). Although current environmental regulations have slowed the removal and degradation of wetland and shoreline habitats, these threats still exist and should be monitored in order to maintain suitable stop over and breeding habitat for shorebirds. Landbird/Butterfly Migratory Stopover Areas Recent international studies (LHBCSCT, 2010) have identified the importance of coastal terrestrial habitats as migratory stopover habitats for shorebirds, landbirds, bats, butterflies and dragonflies. These aerial migrants show a high fidelity for the Lake Huron (including Georgian Bay) shoreline. The broader Lake Huron region is known to be an important flyway for many species of migrating birds and its shoreline provides stopover sites for millions of birds especially landbirds which utilize coastal shoreline and terrestrial habitats as important refueling sites and shelter. Key habitat areas lie within 2 km of the shoreline, with importance increasing with proximity to the shoreline habitats within 400 m of the shoreline are considered of very high importance while those within 400 m m of the shoreline are considered of high importance (MNR, 2010). Within the Town of Collingwood, key habitat areas (based on international studies) include the Braeside-Batteaux forests and the Georgian Trail-Silver Creek forest/wetland complexes. Wild Turkey Winter Range Dense conifer forests near agricultural fields (particularly those with groundwater seeps) are most important for winter survival. Wild turkeys are relatively common on the Collingwood landscape and may potentially use the mixed/conifer forest stands near Braeside Street/Batteaux Creek and along Georgian Trail/Silver Creek for winter cover. Reptile Hibernacula A variety of snakes and turtles are present within the Town of Collingwood. All species require some form of hibernacula to survive through the winter months; however, province-wide, few hibernacula are known and they are normally very difficult to find. Radiotelemetry studies have been used to identify hibernacula sites for one species in Collingwood. Protection of wetlands Nottawasaga Valley Conservation Authority 69

79 serves to protect potential hibernacula for species such as snapping turtle and painted turtle while abandoned structures/foundations may provide hibernacula for a variety of snake species Rare Vegetations Communities A combination of fluctuating lake levels and exposure of shallow, shelving limestone bedrock along the Collingwood shoreline provides conditions suitable for development of endemic coastal marshes that are globally rare and found only here and along similar portions of Great Lakes shorelines. Two types of Great Lakes Coastal Marsh are present along the Town of Collingwood shoreline and in regenerating nearshore areas (north of the Nipissing ridge) graminoid coastal marsh and shrubby cinquefoil coastal marsh. These endemic wetlands are dependent on high natural seasonal and year-to-year variability in water levels. Regulation of water levels in Lake Ontario has adversely affected coastal wetland systems, reducing plant species diversity and altering habitat values for many animals that depend wholly or partly on wetlands to thrive (LHBCSCT, 2010). Two rare mineral fen meadow marshes also associated with coastal features are also present in the Town of Collingwood. These rare communities are depicted in Figure 17 and described below. Nottawasaga Valley Conservation Authority 70

80 Nottawasaga Valley Conservation Authority 71

81 Table 8: Rare Vegetation Communities in the Town of Collingwood ELC Vegetation Community Type Graminoid Coastal Meadow Marsh Shrubby Cinquefoil Meadow Marsh Mineral Fen Meadow Marsh Tallgrass Mineral Fen Meadow Marsh ELC Code Global Rank Provincial Rank Comment MAM4-1 G2? S2 Endemic to Great Lakes. Dominated by rushes, sedges. MAM4-2 G2? S2 Endemic to Great Lakes. Mix of forbs and graminoid species. MAM5-1 G3 S1 Associated with coastal processes similar to MAM4 communities. Tamarack, green ash, cedar with coastal marsh graminoids and forbs MAM5-2 G2 S1 Associated with coastal processes similar to MAM4 communities. Little bluestem dominant with scattered green ash/cedar. Global ranks for each element are assigned by The Nature Conservancy (United States), based upon consideration of the provincial and state ranks assigned by heritage programs for the element across the range of its distribution, as well as the opinion of scientific experts. The two major criteria used in determining a community's rank are the total number of occurrences and the total areal extent of the community range-wide. G2 G3 Imperiled globally because of extreme rarity (6 to 20 occurrences or few remaining hectares) or because of some factor(s) making it very vulnerable to extinction throughout its range. Either very rare and local throughout its range or found locally (even abundantly at some of its locations) in a restricted range (e.g. a single province or physiographic region) or because of other factor(s) making it vulnerable to extinction throughout its range; in terms of occurrences, in the range of 21 to 100. The NHIC assigns subnational ranks (SRANKS) for species and vegetation communities in Ontario (NHIC website). These SRANKS parallel the global ranks (GRANKS), and range from S1 (extremely rare in Ontario, generally 5 or fewer locations) to S5 (demonstrably secure in Ontario). Non-native species are not ranked. S1 S2 S3 Extremely rare in Ontario; usually 5 or fewer occurrences in the province, or very few remaining hectares. Very rare in Ontario; usually between 5 and 20 occurrences in the province or with many individuals in fewer occurrences; often susceptible to extirpation. Rare to uncommon in Ontario; usually between 20 and 100 occurrences in the province; may have fewer occurrences, but with a large number of individuals in some populations; may be susceptible to large-scale disturbances. Most species with an S3 rank are assigned to the watch list, unless they have a relatively high global rank. Great Lakes Coastal Meadow Marsh/Fens Natural portions of the Collingwood shoreline (and, in some cases, areas lakeward from shoreline development) often support rare, endemic Great Lakes coastal marsh communities. Associated with shallowly sloping limestone bedrock, these wetlands support rare species assemblages that are endemic to similar Great Lakes settings and are not found elsewhere in the world. This wetland type is very rare in Ontario and may be globally imperiled. Nottawasaga Valley Conservation Authority 72

82 These endemic marshes are dynamic and respond to changes in water levels in Georgian Bay/Lake Huron. With recent low water levels in Lake Huron/Georgian Bay, these communities have expanded lakeward to colonize newly-exposed shorelines. Ohio goldenrod (Solidago ohioensis), rushes (Juncus spp.), small-flowered agalinis (Agalinus paupercula), shrubby cinquefoil (Potentilla fruticosa), smaller fringed gentian (Gentiana procera), prairie loosestrife (Lysimachia quadriflora) and Kalm s St. John s wort (Hypericum kalmianum), are characteristic of these marsh communities. Graminoid marshes tend to be dominated by sedges and rushes while shrubby cinquefoil marshes support a mix of graminoid and forb species. Regenerating areas inland between the shoreline and Nipissing ridge occasionally support Great Lakes Coastal Marsh communities. These areas tend to be dominated by the forb-rich shrubby cinquefoil coastal marsh (often transitional between marsh and fen communities) and appear to have regenerated from existing seedbanks in formerly grazed landscapes. These communities may be transitional and may succeed to conifer/mixed/deciduous forest cover over time. Some evidence of this succession has been observed in northwest Collingwood north of Highway 26. Based on review of the coastal marsh community on the former Goodyear property over time (air photo analysis), natural succession in these areas is a relatively slow process occurring over decades. Shallow bedrock, tight soils, and moist-wet soil moisture regimes appear to combine to slow succession rates within these inland coastal marsh communities. Locally Significant Vegetation Communities Sugar maple forests, though common in the broader watershed context, are relatively rare in Collingwood comprising less than 5 percent of forest cover within the Town. Conditions north of the Nipissing ridge are unsuitable for sugar maple forests. The sand-silt loams which predominate south of the ridge likely supported large stands of sugar maple forest prior to settlement; however, these prime agricultural soils have largely been cleared. Clearing and grazing activities in creek valleys have further impacted historical habitat. Remaining sugar maple stands are largely restricted to creek valley slopes upstream of urban Collingwood along Silver Creek, Black Ash Creek and their tributaries Specialized Habitats for Wildlife Habitat for Area-sensitive Species The SWH Technical Guide identifies area-sensitive species in both forest and grassland contexts. Area-sensitive habitat is generally defined as forest cover which is found a minimum of 100 m from a forest edge. Compact forest shapes such as circular and square woodlots provide more forest interior habitat than similarly sized forests that are elongate or irregular in shape. A description of forest interior functions and species is provided in Section Forest interior/area-sensitive habitat is associated with relatively few large forest blocks within the Town of Collingwood. The Georgian Trail forests, northwest Collingwood forest and Braeside Street-Batteaux Creek forest support the last remaining core forest habitats within the Town. Similarly, area-sensitive grassland bird species require large grassland areas for breeding habitat. Species such as bobolink, savannah sparrow and grasshopper sparrow generally require grasslands at least 10 ha in size. These habitats are associated with hayfields and abandoned farmfields in south-central and southwest Collingwood. Without active manipulation, these Nottawasaga Valley Conservation Authority 73

83 habitats quickly revert to shrub/sapling and, eventually, forest cover and lose their ability to support grassland fauna. Forests Providing a High Diversity of Habitats Forests with a variety of vegetation communities, particularly with complexes of upland and wetland habitat are likely to have the highest diversity of plant and wildlife species. Trembling aspen and white cedar the dominant species in many Collingwood forests readily form cavities that are important to wildlife (MNR, 2000). The Georgian Trail and northwest Collingwood forest complexes appear to provide a high diversity of habitats within the Town of Collingwood. Old-growth or Mature Forest Stands North of the Nipissing ridge, there are a number of forests that have been on the landscape for over 75 years (possibly much longer); however, the underlying soils/bedrock and imperfect drainage combine to support species not typically associated with old growth/climax forest conditions. Many of these stands have been impacted by past activities such as livestock grazing. Stands that could be considered old-growth should exhibit little or no such disturbance. Typical old-growth forests such as climax sugar maple forest stands are rare within the Town of Collingwood. Likely limited to areas south of the Nipissing ridge in pre-settlement times, remaining sugar maple stands are small and often associated with the slopes of creek valley systems. Most of these stands are currently protected as Category 1 features in the Town Official Plan. Amphibian Woodland Breeding Ponds Vernal pools within upland forests and forested wetlands provide breeding habitat for several species of frogs and salamanders. Pools with diverse structure and surrounded by diversestructured woodlands are of highest value. Habitat complexes with several pond and/or ponds close to creeks are especially valuable (MNR, 2000). The broad forest/wetland complexes associated with Georgian Trail, Silver Creek and Townline Creek appear to provide this component of significant wildlife habitat within the Town of Collingwood. Turtle Nesting Habitat In late spring/early summer, turtles lay their eggs in open sand/gravel areas, often close to water/wetlands. Environmental impact studies are generally required to determine large concentrations of turtle nesting activity. Consultant work in northwest Collingwood suggests that most turtles are nesting along sand/gravel trails as well as open sand areas next to ponds and wetlands (Azimuth, 200*). These findings can likely be extrapolated throughout Collingwood. Unfortunately, turtles also nest on road shoulders, resulting in significant mortality. Specialized Raptor Nesting Habitat Mature, closed canopy forests preferred by species such as red-shouldered hawks are rare in Collingwood and are generally too small to support forest hawk species. Shoreline forests in northwest Collingwood may provide future nesting/habitat opportunities for species such as osprey and bald eagle. Nottawasaga Valley Conservation Authority 74

84 Mink, Otter, Marten and Fisher Denning Sites Mink are likely common in shoreline, pond and wetland habitats within the Town of Collingwood. River otter and fisher are likely rare, if present, while marten are absent. The SWH Technical Guide suggests that long-term survival of these species is best assured by taking a broad, landscape approach to natural heritage system planning including protection of large natural areas that include the best quality habitat for these species Highly Diverse Areas Broad natural features with a variety of forest types, wetlands, regenerating fields, watercourses and/or shorelines are important elements of biodiversity. The Batteaux Creek, Georgian Trail and northwest Collingwood complexes of natural heritage features appear to provide significant habitat diversity within the Town of Collingwood. From a bioregional perspective, an extraordinary level of biodiversity is associated with connected forest/wetland blocks extending from the Georgian Trail/Silver Creek/Townline Creek north to the Silver Creek Wetland coastal marshes and then extending lakeward to the diverse, sheltered nearshore substrates/habitats and offshore islands off northwest Collingwood shoreline (Figure 18). Nottawasaga Valley Conservation Authority 75

85 Nottawasaga Valley Conservation Authority 76

86 7.4.5 Seeps and Springs Groundwater discharge areas are present in the Town of Collingwood and are generally associated with Highly Vulnerable Aquifers (Figure 12); however, these discharges are typically expressed as groundwater seepages rather than full-blown springs. Seeps were occasionally observed along the base of valley systems during field work and may be associated with areas north of the Nipissing ridge. Seeps north of the ridge may be seasonal and may dissipate/disappear during the summer months. Protection of valley systems and broader forests/wetlands north of the Nipissing ridge would protect most seep habitats within Collingwood Habitat of Species of Conservation of Concern Species that can be considered species of conservation concern include: species identified as nationally endangered or threatened by the Committee on the Status of Endangered Wildlife in Canada, which are not protected in regulation under Ontario s Endangered Species Act (2007) species identified as Special Concern based on Species At Risk lists that are updated periodically by the OMNR (Figure 7) species that are listed as rare or historical in Ontario based on records kept by the Natural Heritage Information Centre in Peterborough (S1 is extremely rare, S2 is very rare, S3 is rare to uncommon) species that have a high percentage of their global population in Ontario and are rare or uncommon in the planning area species that are rare within the planning area, even though they may not be provincially rare (i.e. regionally rare plant species) Planning authorities are urged to protect species of conservation concern and their habitats in the following order of priority (MNR, 2000): globally rare nationally rare provincially rare regionally rare locally rare species species of concern to the planning authority Habitat of species of conservation concern does not include habitat for species that have been designated threatened or endangered by the MNR. These species are protected under the Habitat of Endangered and Threatened Species component of the Natural Heritage section of the Provincial Policy Statement (Section 3.1). Many habitats for species of conservation concern will be under-represented within the planning area and therefore should be considered significant. A variety of factors can guide evaluation of significance: Habitats that support large populations of a species of concern should be considered significant. If a species habitat is to be protected, sufficient area (based on the species Nottawasaga Valley Conservation Authority 77

87 known requirements) should be retained to ensure a viable and sustainable population (MNR, 2000). Highly diverse sites that support one or more species of conservation concern are most significant. Habitats that provide the best opportunity for long-term protection are usually more significant than similar habitats with little opportunity for protection or are facing an uncertain future due to potential threats such as isolated habitats in close proximity to expanding urban development. Habitats that could be lost or severely degraded and cannot be replaced by similar habitats in the planning area are highly significant. The planning authority should focus its effort on habitats and species of conservation concern that will not be adequately protected through the identification/protection of other natural heritage system components Table 9 identifies species of conservation concern known to present within the Town of Collingwood based on background literature review and field work associated with this study. The following sources were used to identify these species: federal Species At Risk lists (COSEWIC) provincial Species At Risk lists (COSSARO) provincial rare species lists (S-ranks 1-3; NHIC, 2009) regionally rare vascular plant species list (Riley, 1989) Azimuth (2007) Regionally Rare Species Although not considered SAR, a number of provincially and regionally rare vascular plants are present within the Town (Table 8). In most cases, these rare species are associated with provincially rare habitat types (Figure 17). Table 9: Regionally/Provincially Rare Species in the Town of Collingwood Species Name Provincial S-Rank Species Name Regional R-Rank Sullivant s Milkweed S2 Great Ragweed R3 Moss Campion S1 Tall Goldenrod R4 Shrubby St. John s Wort S2 White Heath Aster R2 Sharp-fruit Rush S3 Canadian St. John s Wort R1 Greene s Rush S3 Stiff Dogwood R2 Grassleaf Rush S3 Crawford s Sedge R6 Large Purple Agalinis S1 Livid Sedge R3 Great Egret S2 Gentian R4 Black-crowned Night-heron S3 Wild Cranes-bill R2 Stiff Yellow Flax S3 Black Walnut R1 Schweinitz s Sedge S3 Sharp Fruit-Rush R5 Torrey s Rush R1 False Pennyroyal R1 Stiff Yellow Flax R4 Nottawasaga Valley Conservation Authority 78

88 Species Name Provincial S-Rank Species Name Wirestem Muhly Wood Anemone Purple Meadowrue Rough Avens Marsh Grass-of-parnassus Slender Agalinis Provincial R-Rank R4 R1 R3 R3 R0 R1 Data referenced from Azimuth (2007) and NHIC (2009) Animal Movement Corridors Ecosystems cannot be considered in isolation because life moves and changes across landscapes. The connections between habitat patches and the distances between patches are important. Biodiversity can only be maintained if effective dispersal between patches is occurring (Larson et al., 1999). In southern Ontario, the density of forest fragments on the landscape and the overall proportion of habitat may be more critical to long-term stability of populations than the size of individual habitat blocks (Riley and Mohr, 1994). Effective dispersal between patches occurs through natural corridors and linkages. Corridors are generally elongated, naturally-vegetated areas that link or border natural areas within and between watersheds (Riley and Mohr, 1994). Corridors provide passage for animals which require a variety of habitats to survive and corridor definition may shift depending on the species of interest. For example, agricultural lands and meadows can form corridors for species such white-tailed deer and wild turkey whereas they would be inappropriate areas for river otter and salamander passage. Corridors allow the movement and reproductive interchange between populations of plant and animal species and can buffer natural areas and processes from adjacent land-use activities (Riley and Mohr, 1994). Properly designed corridors and linkages may counter the effects of habitat fragmentation since the viability of habitat islands (i.e. woodlots) as suitable wildlife habitat often depends on outside recruitment of animals (Noss, 1987a,b). In southern Ontario, the re-establishment of corridors over time may lead to the re-colonization and range expansion of species which were extirpated or suffered significant range contractions since European settlement (i.e. river otter and fisher). Corridors with a minimum width of 200 m are of highest value and facilitate the safe movement of most wildlife species (Gartner Lee, 1996; MNR, 2000). Wider corridors are generally required to support forest interior and area sensitive wildlife and to provide dispersal areas for some species (i.e. breeding amphibians). Although a number of benefits may be derived from natural corridors, they may also occasionally be associated with adverse impacts. Narrow corridors may provide habitat for edge species such as European starling (Sturnus vulgaris), common grackle (Quiscalus quiscula), brown-headed cowbird (Molothrus ater), garlic mustard (Alliaria officinalis) and common buckthorn (Rhamnus cathartica) which may then move into more intact forest communities (Ambuel and Temple, 1983). However, overall, natural corridors provide important habitat connections within watersheds and provide linkages to adjacent watersheds. In most cases, the ecological benefits of corridors far outweigh any adverse impacts, particularly in agricultural and urban settings (Noss, 1987a,b) such as those found within the watershed. Nottawasaga Valley Conservation Authority 79

89 Nottawasaga Valley Conservation Authority 80

90 Town of Collingwood Context Within the Town of Collingwood, corridors exist at different scales (Figure 19). With the exception of Silver Creek, stream and valley systems within and adjacent to the Town of Collingwood tend to be narrow, altered features and provide local connectivity though they are part of regional system that connect the Niagara Escarpment with Nottawasaga Bay. The Silver Creek valley system and contiguous natural features provides a broader, albeit occasionally fragmented, corridor from Escarpment to Bay. The Georgian Trail Corridor, though relatively wide, is essentially a local corridor connecting the Black Ash Creek, Silver Creek and Townline Creek systems. The Nottawasaga Bay shoreline and associated nearshore and contiguous onshore habitats is part of a larger provincial-scale corridor that provides seasonal stopover habitat for migrating waterfowl and landbirds as well as corridors for seasonal fish movement. 8.0 Natural Heritage System Development The intent of natural heritage system development is to integrate natural features on the landscape including core areas and connecting links which support significant vegetation features, fish and wildlife habitat and groundwater and surface water systems. This approach is consistent with the natural heritage policy framework in Section of the PPS, which states that the diversity and connectivity of natural features in an area, and the long-term ecological function of natural heritage systems, should be maintained, restored or improved where possible, recognizing linkages between and among natural heritage features and areas, surface water features and ground water features. From a human perspective, this model provides for a natural heritage system that supports human amenities such as clean drinking water, clean air, passive recreational opportunities (on public lands) and community aesthetics. Following field work and background review associated with this study, staff worked closely with study stakeholders to review natural heritage features and functions on the Town landscape, including connections with adjacent municipal systems. Hazard lands associated with watercourses were included as part of these discussions. Through these discussions, it became clear that broad groupings of features could be considered within a Greenland context similar to that developed by Simcoe County. Greenland systems and associated functions were identified and reviewed in context with existing Official Plan designations and zoning as well as short-term development priorities for the Town. Based on the Greenland framework, three natural heritage system scenarios were developed by staff and vetted through stakeholders, after which a draft proposed natural heritage system was derived and presented to stakeholders. The Greenland framework and iterative process used to move toward a proposed natural heritage system is described in the following subsections. 8.1 Town of Collingwood Candidate Greenlands Following initial analysis of vegetation community mapping and assessment of habitat functions, it was apparent that there were natural groupings of habitats with variable levels of connectivity within the Town of Collingwood. Following the Simcoe County example, staff suggested that a Town Greenlands approach would be appropriate to describe potential components of the natural heritage system and to provide these components with a recognizable nomenclature that would resonate with community residents. Study stakeholders agreed with this proposed approach. Candidate Town Greenlands are depicted in Figure 20 and are discussed below. Nottawasaga Valley Conservation Authority 81

91 Nottawasaga Valley Conservation Authority 82

92 8.1.2 Fairgrounds Forest The Fairgrounds Forest is located at the east end of Collingwood northeast of the Hwy 26 bypass between Fairgrounds Road and Nottawa Sideroad (36/37 Sideroad). This Greenland consists of a fragmented forest (<10 ha) that appears to be more than 75 years old. Recent construction associated with highway bypass construction as well as residential and recreational clearing has fragmented this feature. An altered seasonal drainage feature cuts through the forest. Located less than 1 km from Nottawasaga Bay, the forest provides minor stopover habitat for migratory birds. Fairgrounds Forest is weakly linked to the Braeside Forest located north of Nottawa Sideroad. This forest is mostly in private ownership with several undeveloped lots present Braeside Forest The Braeside Forest Greenland is located northeast of the Highway 26 bypass between Nottawa Sideroad and Broadview Street. This Greenland consists of core forest habitat (approximately 22 ha) that appears to be more than 75 years old. Core forest habitat supports breeding habitat for area-sensitive and forest interior bird species as well as stopover habitat for migratory birds. Mixed and coniferous forest cover likely supports locally significant wintering habitat for whitetailed deer. Construction of the Highway 26 bypass has removed some forest cover from this unit and will degrade landscape connections for species such as white-tailed deer. An unevaluated wetland potentially supporting amphibian breeding habitat - is present within the Braeside Forest. Bower s Beach Creek flows along the north side of Nottawa Sideroad and supports habitat for tolerant warmwater baitfish species such as creek chub. This creek system provides linkages south into Clearview Township. Braeside Forest is also linked to Fairgrounds Forest (south) and the Batteaux Creek Greenland to the northwest. The Braeside Forest is mostly in private ownership with several undeveloped residential-sized lots at the south end of Braeside Street Batteaux Creek The Batteaux Creek Greenland is located on either side of Batteaux Creek and is bracketed by Poplar Sideroad to the north and Broadview Street to the southeast. This Greenland consists of core forests (approximately 40 ha) that are more than 75 years old as well as regenerating woodlands and thickets (approximately 28 ha) that are recovering from past agricultural use (likely grazing). Core forest habitat supports breeding habitat for area-sensitive and forest interior bird species as well as stopover habitat for migratory birds. Mixed and coniferous forest cover likely supports locally significant wintering habitat for white-tailed deer. Construction of the Highway 26 bypass has removed some forest cover from this unit and will degrade landscape connections for species such as white-tailed deer. Unevaluated wetlands potentially supporting amphibian breeding habitat are present northwest and southeast of Batteaux Creek. Wetlands to the west of Batteaux Creek may support coastal marsh communities. The reach of Batteaux Creek within the Greenland provides a migratory corridor for rainbow trout and Chinook salmon and provides habitat for a variety of warmwater fish species. The downstream reach of Batteaux Creek may provide refuge habitat for smallmouth bass and other centrarchids during the summer when cold upwellings along the Nottawasaga Valley Conservation Authority 83

93 shoreline provide unsuitable conditions within the bay itself. stream-based hazards are associated with the watercourse. Significant floodplain and other Batteaux Creek provides linkages south into Clearview Township. Forest and regenerating cover is linked to the Braeside Forest to the southeast and the Sandford Fleming Forest to the northwest. Most of this Greenland is encompassed within a large private land-holding Sandford Fleming The Sandford Fleming Greenland is bracketed by old Highway 26 (north), Poplar Sideroad (south), Raglan Street (west) and Sixth Line (east). This Greenland consists of several fragmented forests ranging from 0.8 ha to 7 ha in size with some forest units more than 75 years old. These fragmented forests are less than 1.4 km from Nottawasaga Bay and support minor stopover habitat for migratory birds. Unevaluated wetlands are present and may support amphibian breeding habitat. An ephemeral/intermittent drainage feature flows northeast toward Nottawasaga Bay. Construction of the Highway 26 bypass and commercial/industrial development has removed significant forest cover from this Greenland. There is limited connectivity between the Sandford Fleming Greenland and the Batteaux Creek Greenland to the southeast. Similarly, there is limited connectivity between Sandford Fleming and the Pretty Creek Greenland to the west. Most of the Sandford Fleming Greenland is privately owned and designated and zoned for industrial/commercial land uses Pretty River The Pretty River Greenland courses north through Collingwood, discharging into Nottawasaga Bay, east of Collingwood Harbour. Downstream of Lynden Street, the river flows through a dyke system which protects urban areas from flooding. Significant forest cover is discouraged through active management to provide sufficient capacity to convey larger flood events. The only large forest within the Greenland is located just downstream from the Barrie-Collingwood Railroad tracks. This forest is approximately 4 ha and supports Butternut, an endangered tree species. Located approximately 2 km from Nottawasaga Bay, this forest has moderate potential to support migratory bird stopover habitat. The reach of the Pretty River within the Greenland provides a migratory corridor for rainbow trout and Chinook salmon and provides habitat for a variety of warmwater fish species. The downstream reach of the Pretty River may provide refuge habitat for smallmouth bass and other centrarchids during the summer when cold upwellings along the shoreline provide unsuitable conditions within the bay itself. Significant floodplain and other stream-based hazards are associated with the watercourse. The Hamilton Drain a narrow drainage feature flows eastward into the Pretty River just north of Poplar Sideroad. This drainage feature provides habitat for warmwater baitfish as well as wetland habitat for amphibians. The Pretty River provides linkages south and west into Clearview Township and extending upstream into Grey Highlands. This Greenland corridor is weakly linked to the Sandford Fleming Forest to the east. Most tableland areas next to the Pretty River have been developed or are draft approved for development. Nottawasaga Valley Conservation Authority 84

94 8.1.7 Black Ash Creek The Black Ash Creek Greenland consists of Black Ash Creek, adjacent natural features and its adjoining tributaries. The main corridor associated with the Greenland follows Black Ash Creek north through Collingwood downstream to Collingwood Harbour. Downstream of Campbell Street, the creek has recently (2002) been lowered within a constructed creek block to protect urban areas from flooding and to facilitate new development. Significant forest cover within the creek block will likely be discouraged through active management to provide sufficient capacity to convey larger flood events. Forests, unevaluated wetlands, and regenerating woodlands and thickets are present along Black Ash Creek alongside the reconfigured channel. Natural cover in this area continues to be fragmented by residential and commercial development. A large block of mixed natural habitats (approximately 30 ha) is present along the west side of the channel south of Mountain Road. Located less than 1 km from the bay shoreline, these habitats likely support stopover habitat for migratory birds. Formerly connected to the floodplain, recent channel works have effectively decoupled these natural features from the Black Ash Creek floodplain. Tributaries of Black Ash Creek flowing eastward along Georgian Trail and through the Blue Mountain Golf and Country Club have similarly been affected. A mix of forest, unevaluated wetlands and regenerating habitats (approximately 24 ha) is also present near the upstream terminus of the channel works. The natural area east of High Street has been draft approved for residential development and, with the exception of parkland/drainage areas, will be fully developed. Tableland areas west of High Street are typically regenerating from past land use and have been lotted out for future development (though pre-dating amalgamation). A locally rare sugar maple forest is present along the west side of Black Ash Creek upstream of the constructed channel. Butternut (Endangered) have been observed upstream from the constructed channel within the Black Ash Creek floodplain and (remotely viewed from gate) within the sugar maple forest. Black Ash Creek provides a migratory corridor for rainbow trout and Chinook salmon with coldwater habitat present in the Petun branch which parallels Sixth Street to the west of the main branch. The main branch of Black Ash Creek provides habitat for a variety of warmwater fish species. The Georgian Trail and Blue Mountain Golf & Country Club tributaries provide marginal habitat for warmwater baitfish. Significant floodplain and other stream-based hazards are associated with Black Ash Creek and its tributaries in some cases (i.e. through the Blue Mountain Golf & Country Club), the Greenland may be based solely on these hazards (and potential fish habitat). The Black Ash Creek Greenland is linked to the Harbour West Greenland to the north, the Georgian Trail Greenland to the west and, via the Blue Mountain Golf & Country Club tributary, to the Southwest Regeneration Greenland. Black Ash Creek itself provides linkages south and west into Clearview Township and extending upstream into the Town of Blue Mountains. Development designations and zoning are associated with lands abutting the reconfigured Black Ash Creek channel which, at least in part, was designed to facilitate future development Harbour East Owned by the Town of Collingwood, the Harbour East Greenland is located east of Collingwood Harbour and is bordered by Highway 26 to the south, Sunset Point to the east, the harbour pier to Nottawasaga Valley Conservation Authority 85

95 the west and Nottawasaga Bay to the north. This Greenland consists of swamp forests and wetlands associated with the Silver Creek Wetlands. The fringe forest is small with significant encroachment of invasive, exotic species such as hybrid poplar, common buckthorn and dame s rocket. Lakeward, endemic coastal marshes are dominant, providing stopover and staging habitat for migratory shorebirds and waterfowl, and foraging habitat for a variety of resident shorebirds and colonial nesting birds. Nearshore areas provide suitable spawning and nursery habitat for a variety of fish species. The entire area lies within flooding hazards associated with water levels and wave heights in Georgian Bay and is protected from direct impacts, though impacts associated with adjacent urban areas are evident. Aside from linkages to Nottawasaga Bay, the Harbour East Greenland is not connected to other Greenland areas in Collingwood and is surrounded to the south, east and west by residential, commercial and recreational development Harbour West Owned by the Town of Collingwood, the Harbour West Greenland is located on Collingwood Harbour and is bordered by Water Street to the south, the harbour pier to the east, Black Ash Creek to the west and Collingwood Harbour to the north. The Collingwood Harbour was identified as a Great Lakes Area of Concern in 1977 due to excessive algal growth (WWTP). Sediment contamination (metals and PCB) was discovered in the early 1980s. In 1986, a Remedial Action Plan for the Harbour was developed and implemented (Gartner Lee, 2004). Improved total phosphorus removal processes were implemented at the Sewage Treatment to reduce nutrient and algae levels within the harbor. Rehabilitation works were undertaken along Black Ash Creek (which flows into the Harbour) and contaminated sediments were removed via a partnership between the Collingwood Shipyards and Public Works Canada (Gartner Lee, 2004). These remedial activities led to the harbour s delisting as AOC (the first AOC to be delisted in the Great Lakes), in Now delisted as an AOC, the Harbour West Greenland consists of swamp and lowland forests, thickets and wetlands associated with the Silver Creek Wetlands. Shallow portions of the harbor support submerged aquatic vegetation which provide fish habitat and foraging areas for waterfowl. A mosaic of marsh types is present along the harbor fringe these marshes provide amphibian breeding habitat. Shoreward, a mix of swamp and upland forests extends toward urban Collingwood. A small endemic coastal marsh is embedded between the harbor marsh and forest communities. The forest units are relatively small (though larger than Harbour East) and may provide stopover habitat for migratory birds. Significant encroachment of invasive, exotic species such as Phragmites, common buckthorn, garlic mustard and Japanese knotweed is present in most vegetation communities. The harbor shoreline provides stopover habitat for migratory shorebirds and foraging habitat for a variety of resident shorebirds and colonial nesting birds. Nearshore areas provide suitable spawning and nursery habitat for a variety of fish species. Much of the area lies within flooding hazards associated with water levels and wave heights in Georgian Bay and is protected from direct impacts though impacts associated with adjacent urban areas are evident. The Harbour West Greenland is connected to the Black Ash Creek Greenland Black Ash Creek enters the harbour at the west end of this unit. Nottawasaga Valley Conservation Authority 86

96 White s Bay The White s Bay Greenland is located west of Collingwood Harbour and is bordered by urban Collingwood to the south and marina development to the east and west. Hen and Chicken Island is part of this Greenland. White s Bay is dominated by wetlands associated with the Silver Creek Wetlands. Gravel/cobble bars, particularly on Hen and Chicken Island, provide inclusions of upland habitat. Endemic coastal marshes are dominant, providing stopover and staging habitat for migratory shorebirds and waterfowl, and foraging habitat for a variety of resident shorebirds and colonial nesting birds. Nearshore areas provide suitable spawning and nursery habitat for a variety of fish species. Invasive species such as Phragmites and dog-strangling vine are present in portions of the coastal marsh. The entire area lies within flooding hazards associated with water levels and wave heights in Georgian Bay and is protected from direct impacts, though impacts associated with adjacent urban areas are evident. Aside from lakeward linkages to Nottawasaga Bay (including strong connectivity to offshore nesting islands), the White s Bay Greenland is not connected to other Greenland areas in Collingwood and is surrounded to the south, east and west by residential and recreational development Lighthouse Bay Similar in character to White s Bay, the Lighthouse Bay Greenland is located between Princeton Shores Boulevard (west) and marina development to the east and is bordered by urban Collingwood to the south. Lighthouse Bay is dominated by wetlands associated with the Silver Creek Wetlands. Nearshore gravel and cobble bars provide narrow inclusions of upland habitat. Endemic coastal marshes are dominant, providing stopover and staging habitat for migratory shorebirds and waterfowl, and foraging habitat for a variety of resident shorebirds and colonial nesting birds. Nearshore areas provide suitable spawning and nursery habitat for a variety of fish species. Invasive species such as Phragmites are present in portions of the coastal marsh. The entire area lies within flooding hazards associated with water levels and wave heights in Georgian Bay and is protected from direct impacts, though impacts associated with adjacent urban areas are evident. Lakeward linkages to Nottawasaga Bay (including strong connectivity to offshore nesting islands) are associated with Lighthouse Bay. A narrow inland linkage to the Silver Creek North Greenland is present at the east end of Princeton Shores Boulevard. Inland linkages are highly constrained by adjacent residential, commercial and recreational development Georgian Trail The Georgian Trail Greenland encompasses a broad area (more than 200 ha) of forest, wetland and regenerating habitats extending north and south of the Georgian Trail between Silver Creek (west) and Black Ash Creek (east). The Nipissing ridge is generally associated with southern edge of this Greenland, while portions extend north to Highway 26. This Greenland consists of three core forest blocks. The central forest block is approximately 70 ha while the Goodyear block (proximal to the former Goodyear plant) is 17 ha. A 14 ha forest block is located just west of Silver Creek. Much of the forest cover in the central block and the Goodyear block is more than 75 years old. Core forest habitat supports breeding habitat for area-sensitive and forest interior bird species as well as stopover habitat for migratory birds. Mixed and coniferous forest cover likely supports locally significant wintering habitat for white-tailed deer. Nottawasaga Valley Conservation Authority 87

97 Within the Georgian Trail Greenland, Cranberry Marsh and several smaller wetlands proximal to Highway 26 form components of the Silver Creek Wetland complex. A number of unevaluated wetlands are embedded in forest cover north and south of the trail. Cranberry Marsh historically provided significant habitat for a number of sensitive marsh bird species. Wetlands embedded within forest cover provide important breeding habitat for several amphibian species including the federally threatened Western Chorus Frog. Endemic coastal marshes have regenerated near the former Goodyear plant, along the north edge of Cranberry Marsh (near Pretty River Academy) and along the periphery of a small portion of the Cranberry Golf Resort. Floodplain and other stream-based hazards are associated with portions of the Georgian Trail Greenland. The Georgian Trail Greenland provides significant east-west connectivity between the Black Ash Creek and Townline Creek Greenland units. It provides significant north-south connectivity between Silver Creek North and Silver Creek South Greenlands as well as southward to the Mountain Road Regeneration Greenland. Portions of the Georgian Trail Greenland are owned by the Town of Collingwood and Simcoe County while other portions are currently zoned for rural, residential and industrial uses Mountain Road Regeneration The Mountain Road Greenland is bracketed by the Nipissing ridge (north), Mountain Road (south), 11th Line (west) and 10th Line (east). This Greenland consists of a mosaic of meadows, thickets, small forests and plantations and regenerating woodlands. These communities have regenerated from past agricultural use. High water table in this area may have contributed to abandonment of agriculture uses. The small forests may support minor stopover habitat for migratory birds. Vernal pools within some vegetation communities may support amphibian breeding habitat. The Mountain Road Regeneration Greenland is contiguous with the Georgian Trail Greenland to the north; however, there is limited connectivity to other Greenlands. Much of this Greenland is currently zoned for residential use Silver Creek North The Silver Creek North Greenland encompasses a broad area (more than 140 ha) of forest, wetland and regenerating habitats extending north of Highway 26 between Long Point Road (west) and to the east of Princeton Shores Boulevard with strong connections to the Nottawasaga Bay shoreline between Madeline Drive (west) and Bartlett Boulevard (east). This Greenland consists of a 60+ ha core forest block (some of which is greater than 75 years old) which supports breeding habitat for area-sensitive and forest interior bird species as well as stopover habitat for migratory birds. Mixed and coniferous forest cover supports locally significant wintering habitat for white-tailed deer. Coastal and inland wetlands associated with the Silver Creek North Greenland are part of the Silver Creek Wetland complex. Endemic coastal wetlands are associated with the Nottawasaga Bay shoreline and with regenerating habitats inland from the shoreline. Shoreline coastal marshes provide stopover and staging habitat for migratory shorebirds and waterfowl, and foraging habitat for a variety of resident shorebirds and colonial nesting birds. Nearshore areas provide suitable spawning and nursery habitat for a variety of fish species. Invasive species such as Phragmites are present in portions of the coastal marsh. Lake-based hazards are associated with the shoreline and proximal low-lying inland areas of this Greenland. Nottawasaga Valley Conservation Authority 88

98 A variety of deciduous, mixed and thicket swamps are present inland from the shoreline. Several of the marsh and swamp features within the Silver Creek North Greenland provide amphibian breeding habitat as well as habitat for turtle species. The federally threatened Western Chorus Frog and other Species At Risk are present within this Greenland. Silver Creek and Townline Creek provide migratory corridors for rainbow trout and, in the case of Silver Creek, Chinook salmon. Coldwater habitat is associated with Silver Creek while Townline Creek provides warmwater habitat within the Greenland. Floodplain and other streambased hazards are associated with both systems. Lakeward linkages to Nottawasaga Bay (including strong connectivity to offshore nesting islands) are associated with Silver Creek North. The Silver Creek North Greenland also provides significant connectivity south to the Georgian Trail Greenland albeit partially fragmented by Highway 26. This Greenland is also linked to natural areas west of Long Point Road (Town of Blue Mountains) and upstream to the Townline Creek Greenland. Much of this Greenland has been subject to extensive planning studies attempting to strike a balance between potential development and natural heritage protection Silver Creek South The Silver Creek South Greenland extends along Silver Creek and its tributaries upstream (south) of the Georgian Trail Greenland to the southwest corner of Collingwood. Forests, small unevaluated wetlands and regenerating woodlands/thickets/fields are present within this Greenland unit. Forests are typically associated with floodplain and valley slopes with limited tableland forest cover present along the valley systems. Core forest habitats (more than 100 m from forest edge) are absent. Located farther from the lake than most Town Greenland forests, potential stopover habitat function for migratory birds is correspondingly smaller. Sugar maple forests rare on the municipal landscape are occasionally associated with valley slopes. Butternut (endangered) has been observed in a publicly-owned portion of the valley system (off Holly Court). Unevaluated wetlands are small and confined to bottomlands within the valley systems of this Greenland. They likely provide habitat for breeding amphibians. Regenerating fields and other open floodplain habitats associated with this Greenland may support habitat for grassland bird species which are generally in decline in southern Ontario. One of these species Bobolink has recently been listed as a threatened species and threatened status has also been proposed for eastern meadowlark (*,*). Both species are relatively common in the watershed. Silver Creek provides a migratory corridor and coldwater habitat for rainbow trout and Chinook salmon. Coldwater habitat is also present in the tributary system located south of Holly Court (Azimuth,*). Other tributaries likely support permanent/seasonal warmwater fish habitat. Significant floodplain and other stream-based hazards are associated with Silver Creek and its tributaries. The Silver Creek South Greenland is linked to the Georgian Trail Greenland to the north and to the Southwest Regeneration Greenland to the south. This Greenland is also linked to natural features west of Collingwood within the Town of Blue Mountains. Nottawasaga Valley Conservation Authority 89

99 Townline Creek The Townline Creek Greenland consists of Townline Creek and contiguous forests and wetlands extending north and south of Georgian Trail. It is bounded on the north by Highway 26 and by the closed County landfill to the south. The Greenland consists of an 8 ha block north of the trail and a 17 ha block south of the trail these blocks are connected by a narrow riparian corridor along Osler Bluff Road (Townline Creek). Wetlands are strongly associated with the Townline Creek Greenland. Most wetlands north of Georgian Trail are part of the Silver Creek Wetland complex while those to the south are unevaluated. Deciduous swamp forests are dominant north of the trail. A mosaic of deciduous swamp and marsh habitats are present south of the trail. Although core forest habitat is absent, forest cover in this area supports migratory bird stopover habitat. Marshes and wetter swamps provide amphibian breeding habitat. The federally threatened Western Chorus Frog has been documented in suitable habitats along the Georgian Trail. Townline Creek provides a migratory corridor for rainbow trout and may provide coldwater habitat (though this function is likely more significant upstream within the Town of Blue Mountains). Significant floodplain and other stream-based hazards are associated with the creek. The Townline Creek Greenland is linked to the Georgian Trail Greenland to the east and to the Silver Creek North Greenland to the north. This Greenland is strongly linked to forest and wetland cover to the west within the Town of Blue Mountains (including portions of the Silver Creek Wetland complex) Southwest Regeneration The Southwest Regeneration Greenland lies east of Osler Bluff Road at the junction between the Southwest Forest Greenland, the Silver Creek South Greenland and the Black Ash Creek Wetland (west tributaries). This Greenland consists of a mosaic of meadows, thickets, regenerating forest and a small wetland that have regenerated over abandoned agricultural lands. High water table in this area may have contributed to abandonment of agriculture uses. Vernal pools within some vegetation communities may support amphibian breeding habitat. Regenerating fields and other open floodplain habitats associated with this Greenland may support habitat for grassland bird species which are generally in decline in southern Ontario. One of these species Bobolink has recently been listed as a threatened species and threatened status has also been proposed for eastern meadowlark (*,*). Both species are relatively common in the watershed. The Greenland is contiguous with, and links, the Southwest Forest, Silver Creek South and Black Ash Creek Greenlands. Much of this Greenland is currently zoned for rural use Southwest Forest The Southwest Forest Greenland is located in the southwest corner of Collingwood at the intersection of Osler Bluff Road and Sixth Street. This Greenland consists of core forest habitat (approximately 19 ha) that appears to be more than 75 years old. Core forest habitat likely supports breeding habitat for area-sensitive and forest interior bird species. Vernal pools appear to be present and may provide amphibian breeding habitat. Nottawasaga Valley Conservation Authority 90

100 The Southwest Forest Greenland is linked to the Southwest Regeneration Greenland to the north and east. This Greenland is also connected to forest cover in Clearview Township (south of Sixth Line). 8.2 Natural Heritage Scenario Development Initial and ongoing stakeholder discussion of Greenlands and natural heritage system considerations resulted in consensus on a number of matters. All draft plan approved properties were excluded from the natural heritage system these properties have undergone an extensive planning process and with approvals subject to various planning conditions some of which may be environmental. Lots of Record were generally excluded from the natural heritage system unless they are undeveloped and within hazard zones. For example, forest cover in development lots south of Campbell Street was excluded from the system since development rights were assumed to be in place in this fully serviced area. Small, isolated natural heritage features within urban areas (i.e. the green ash swamp near the Collingwood General and Marine Hospital, remnant features southwest of Collins Road and Peel Street) were also excluded from the natural heritage system. Relatively low natural heritage values combined with existing development designation and zoning made it impractical/inappropriate to include these remnant natural heritage features within the natural heritage system. Regenerating areas were challenging decision-points for natural heritage system development. As per the PPS, these areas can be important building blocks for natural heritage system development; however, they are typically younger, more disturbed natural heritage elements that are often deemed to have less significance from a natural heritage perspective. Unlike significant forests and wetlands, regenerating or early successional upland habitats do not have specific protective policies within the PPS except in conjunction with other PPS elements (i.e. rare flora and fauna). For the purposes of the Town of Collingwood natural heritage system study, regenerating areas were considered for inclusion within the NHS if they: Were located outside of existing development designations/zones; Contributed to creation of large core habitats; and/or, Provided linkages between otherwise disconnected or fragmented natural heritage features Regenerating areas were generally excluded from NHS consideration if they did not meet a combination of these criteria. For example, the Mountain Road Regeneration Greenland was excluded from all three natural heritage system scenarios (see below). Although inclusion of this Greenland would contribute to the Georgian Trail Greenland, it is an area with existing development designations and is not strongly linked to other Greenland features within the Town. Based on stakeholder discussions, three scenarios were developed for review: the PPS/Existing OP Scenario, the Middle Scenario and the Protective Scenario. These sample scenarios were Nottawasaga Valley Conservation Authority 91

101 intended to generate discussion toward a consensus-based system that can be supported by the Town and brought into Official Plan schedule and policy updates as part of Official Plan review. Stakeholders were advised that elements from various scenarios could be brought together to achieve a preferred natural heritage system. Broader provincial direction (NHRM; MNR, 2010) to work iteratively to achieve a balance between development and natural heritage system protection in urbanizing areas, as well as direction to provide stronger protection for identified natural heritage systems in urbanizing areas, was used as a starting point. staff noted their role as providing a natural heritage science framework and acting as a facilitator for stakeholder discussion. The three scenarios are described below: PPS/Existing Official Plan Scenario This scenario (Figure 21) was based on natural heritage/hazard policies within the Provincial Policy Statement and the existing Town Official Plan. Category 1 lands, which are generally protected within the Town Official Plan, consisted of: Valleylands, watercourses, floodplains Provincially significant wetlands Old forests >4 ha (> 75 years of age) Category 2 lands, which have a lower level of protection but still must meet tests similar to no negative impact to features and functions (PPS, 2005) consisted of: Young forests >10 ha (< 75 years of age) Unevaluated wetlands Forests contiguous with valleylands (PPS direction) This scenario includes additional >10 ha forests (as identified through this study) not currently depicted in OP schedules. Provincially significant wetlands were expanded or contracted based on field work (although this requires MNR confirmation). Unevaluated wetlands identified through this study were added as Category 2 features. Although not fully encompassed in Figure 21, review of 1954 air photos suggests that additional forest cover meets >75 years forest age criterion and should be considered Category 1 lands Middle Scenario This scenario (Figures 22) was based on stronger protection of existing core natural heritage features and functions outside of core development areas within the Town. Category 1 lands consisted of: Valleylands, watercourses, floodplains All wetlands except fragmented features Core forests Forest contiguous with valleylands Regenerating areas that connect core features (Georgian Trail) Nottawasaga Valley Conservation Authority 92

102 Category 2 lands consisted of: Forests/regenerating areas along reconfigured Black Ash Creek (residential/industrial) Regenerating areas that connect/rebuild core areas (Silver Creek South, Black Ash Creek near Campbell Street) Compared to the PPS/OP Scenario, forest blocks and unevaluated wetlands changed from Category 2 to Category 1. Category 2 blocks were added along Black Ash Creek (south of Mountain Road and near Campbell/High Street). Forest/regeneration blocks contiguous with other natural heritage features were added as Category 2 features Protective Scenario This scenario (Figures 23) was based on strong protection of existing core natural heritage features and functions as well as restoration of fragmented Greenlands and connections within the Town. Category 1 lands consisted of: Valleylands, watercourses, floodplains All wetlands except fragmented features Core forests/core areas (all) Forest contiguous with valleylands Regenerating areas that connect core features (Georgian Trail) Category 2 lands consisted of: Fragmented forests and linkages (Sandford Fleming Greenland) Regenerating areas that connect/rebuild core areas (Southwest Collingwood) Compared to the Middle Scenario, the Southwest Regeneration, Fairgrounds Forest and Sandford Fleming Greenlands were brought into the system as Category 2 features. The Black Ash Creek blocks (south of Mountain Road and near Campbell/High Street) changed from Category 2 to Category 1. Forest and regeneration blocks that are contiguous with other natural heritage features were added as Category 2 features. Nottawasaga Valley Conservation Authority 93

103 Nottawasaga Valley Conservation Authority 94

104 Nottawasaga Valley Conservation Authority 95

105 Nottawasaga Valley Conservation Authority 96

106 8.3 Scenario Discussion During the February 4, 2011 stakeholder meeting, there was general consensus among stakeholders that the Protective Scenario included elements that constrained short-term development needs within the Town of Collingwood. The Sandford Fleming Greenlands, in particular, was identified as a strong node for commercial/industrial development and that fragmented/isolated forests and wetlands associated with this Greenland were impractical or inappropriate to include within the natural heritage system. Although all stakeholders recognized provincial direction regarding natural heritage systems in urbanizing areas, there was some discomfort expressed regarding implications for stronger protection of an identified natural heritage system particularly along Black Ash Creek where recent (2002) channel works were intended, in large part, to facilitate development in former flood-prone areas. Discussion centred on potential changes to the Category 2 land definition within the Official Plan to facilitate development within Category 2 lands where it could be demonstrated that significant features and functions (i.e. Species At Risk, rare vegetation communities, significant amphibian breeding habitat) were absent. 8.4 Draft Proposed Natural Heritage System Following the February 4, 2011 stakeholder meeting, staff were directed to develop a draft proposed natural heritage system for further discussion. staff developed this system in April 2011 and met with Nancy Farrer, Director of Planning (Town of Collingwood) to discuss refinements based on draft approved plans and other planning imperatives. The proposed natural heritage system was refined based on this meeting. A stakeholder meeting was convened on May 13th, 2011 and additional refinements to the system based on consensus discussion were undertaken. The proposed natural heritage system (Figures 24 and 25) has been designed to meet the intent of natural heritage system development within Settlement Areas, as per the Natural Heritage Reference Manual (MNR, 2010), which recognizes the need to balance natural heritage system protection with mandates for municipal growth. Recommendations to expand the more protective Category 1 land designations within the identified natural heritage system is consistent with NHRM direction to provide stronger protection for lands that are to remain natural within urbanizing areas. The proposed natural heritage system builds on past natural heritage system work and identifies and protects core areas, ecological linkages and landscape features on the Collingwood landscape. Protection of this system will facilitate the maintenance of ecological functions and biodiversity within the Town and in adjacent municipalities. It will provide an ecological framework that will assist natural systems to adapt to climate change. The system allows for the restoration and improvement of natural heritage features and functions via community stewardship. The system is strongly aligned with Town Official Plan statement: the primary municipal aim in developing new Official Plan policy is to establish a strategy for growth which addresses the long-term living, working and recreational needs of the municipality s residents while remaining true to the Plan s broader environmental, social and economic goals. The proposed system is also aligned with the mission statement of the Town of Collingwood Strategic Plan (1995): Nottawasaga Valley Conservation Authority 97

107 Nottawasaga Valley Conservation Authority 98

108 We, the community of Collingwood, working in partnership with our elected leaders, our business sector, and our community service organizations, will maintain our small-town atmosphere, our natural environment, and our heritage, while embracing opportunities to enhance our quality of life and to acquire economic benefits through stainable development, four -season tourism and active participation in the global economy. Nottawasaga Valley Conservation Authority 99

109 Nottawasaga Valley Conservation Authority 100

110 8.5 Key NHS Components The key elements of the consist of the following Town Greenland areas: Braeside and Batteaux Creek Greenlands Pretty River Greenland Collingwood Harbour Greenlands Black Ash Creek Greenlands White s Bay and Lighthouse Point Greenlands Georgian Trail Greenland Silver Creek North and Silver Creek South Greenlands Townline Creek Greenland Southwest Forest and Southwest Regeneration Greenlands Several Town Greenland units were refined to address areas draft approved for development or where current or future ecological functions were not deemed significant within an urbanizing context. Two candidate Greenland units Mountain Road Regeneration and Sandford Fleming were removed from natural heritage system consideration due to a combination of habitat fragmentation, weak linkages, and presence of existing planning designations or zoning. Other natural areas outside of the candidate Greenlands were excluded due to small size and isolation on the landscape. 8.6 Category 1 and Category 2 Recommendations Most areas within the proposed natural heritage system are identified as Category 1, in part to recognize the NHRM principle of providing stronger protection for identified natural heritage systems within urbanizing areas. Category 2 areas generally consist of: Large natural heritage blocks along the west side of Black Ash Creek which lie outside of natural hazards and which lie within preferred development areas Smaller natural heritage blocks in northwest Collingwood that are subject to ongoing mediation as part of active planning applications A large regenerating block in southwest Collingwood (Southwest Regeneration Greenland) The large forest/regenerating habitat blocks along the west side of Black Ash Creek support a variety of habitats and functions all of which appear to be relatively common in other forest/regenerating blocks north of the Nipissing ridge. They are also within an area preferred for short-term development goals within the Town. The Black Ash Creek channelization project (completed in 2002 with the support of several agencies including MNR, DFO and ) was intended to reduce floodplain constraints and hazards and, in part, to facilitate future development. The proposed Category 2 recommendation in this area could include less restrictive OP policies that would facilitate development provided that an EIS demonstrating no negative impacts on key ecological functions is prepared to agency satisfaction. This is similar to the approach recently used for the Black Ash Lifestyle Community on the west side of Black Ash Creek north of Georgian Trail. The smaller natural heritage blocks in northwest Collingwood are subject to ongoing discussions and study as part of active planning applications that predate this study. The results of these Nottawasaga Valley Conservation Authority 101

111 studies and associated negotiations will determine natural heritage designations on these properties. The Southwest Regeneration Greenland provides an excellent opportunity to connect the Silver Creek South, Black Ash Creek and Southwest Forest Greenlands in southwest Collingwood. This area appears to be marginal farmland and is currently dominated by regenerating fields. The most appropriate configuration of this Greenland has yet to be determined and its Category 2 status reflects a further opportunity to refine this important linkage through further study in the future. 8.7 Integration with Settlement Area Needs The proposed natural heritage system excludes isolated forest and wetland areas within urban Collingwood to allow flexibility for development within the existing urban area. Forests and wetlands in draft approved subdivisions are similarly excluded from the natural heritage system. Core development areas, such as the commercial/industrial zones associated with Sandford Fleming Drive, were excluded from the system. Strong development mandates along Black Ash Creek are recognized through less-restrictive natural heritage designations which will allow for development subject to Environmental Impact Studies these studies could be scoped to become due diligence reports that would focus on presence/absence of provincially significant species/vegetation communities (i.e. if these features are absent, development could proceed with few natural heritage constraints aside from watercourses and associated hazards). The exclusion of the Mountain Road Regeneration Greenland (regenerating fields and small forests) also provides significant future development opportunities proximal to the existing urban area. 8.8 Integration with PPS Features The proposed natural heritage system encompasses the provincially significant Silver Creek wetland complex as well as most unevaluated wetlands that could potentially be added to the complex. All valleylands and almost all fish habitat (possible exception of local drains) are contained within the system. Significant woodlands are encompassed within the system. Inclusion of the Braeside Forest, Batteaux Creek, Silver Creek North, Georgian Trail and Southwest Forest Greenlands provides protection of core forest areas and key areas of forest interior habitat within the Town of Collingwood. Diverse habitats and associated functions associated with a mosaic of upland forest and swamp forest communities are encompassed within the Georgian Trail and Silver Creek North Greenlands. Older forests including locally rare sugar maple forests as well as atypical poplar/ash/birch/cedar forests - are well-represented in the system. A number of significant wildlife habitat components are present within the Town of Collingwood. The full range of these components (described in Section 7) are encompassed within the natural heritage system. The following broad significant wildlife habitat categories are supported within the proposed system: seasonal concentrations of animals rare vegetation communities specialized wildlife habitat highly diverse areas habitats of species of conservation concern springs and seepages Nottawasaga Valley Conservation Authority 102

112 animal movement corridors. The proposed natural heritage system represents the full range of landforms and vegetation types within the Town of Collingwood. Natural heritage features within the system are strongly linked wherever possible. Linkages to natural heritage systems and features in adjacent municipalities have been identified and protected. The natural heritage system includes local corridors such as the Pretty River and Black Ash Creek Greenlands which support fish habitat and urban-tolerant wildlife movement as well as broader corridors that provide habitat and movement opportunities for area-sensitive wildlife and wildlife that require a variety of habitat types to fulfill their life cycle requirements. 8.9 Integration with Simcoe County Greenlands The proposed natural heritage system generally encompasses and, in many cases, builds upon the County Greenlands system. The Collingwood Shores-Northwest Collingwood Greenland (WL1) is represented in the Town system by the Georgian Trail, Silver Creek North and Townline Creek Greenlands. This Greenland has been expanded within the proposed natural heritage system to integrate the full extent of large forest/wetland mosaics along Georgian Trail as well as regenerating fields that link these habitat blocks to Silver Creek. Linkages to forest and wetland (Silver Creek Wetlands) cover in the Town of Blue Mountains are identified and protected within the proposed natural heritage system. Portions of the Stayner Swamp (WL2) within the Town of Collingwood are encompassed within the Town system via the Batteaux Creek and Braeside Forest Greenlands. Forest cover included in the County Greenlands at the easternmost boundary of the Town has been excluded due to significant recent fragmentation associated with construction of the Highway 26 bypass, residential lot development and commercial development. The portion of the Pretty River (WL5) Greenland within the Town of Collingwood has been incorporated into the proposed natural heritage system and linkages south into Clearview Township have been clearly identified. The portion of the Batteaux Creek (WL6) Greenland within the Town of Collingwood has been incorporated into the proposed natural heritage system. This Greenland has been expanded within the natural heritage system to integrate the full extent of the large core forest east of Batteaux Creek as well as regenerating wetlands and woodlands to the west. Linkages south into Clearview Township have been clearly identified Integration with Adjacent Municipal Environmental Protection Features The proposed natural heritage system is closely linked to natural features in adjacent municipalities (Figure 26; Clearview Township and the Town of Blue Mountains), as currently protected through environmental protection designation and zoning, or identified through regulation mapping (generally associated with wetlands and watercourses). The proposed system could be viewed as a building block for both of these municipalities should they wish to embark on their own respective natural heritage systems in the future. Nottawasaga Valley Conservation Authority 103

113 Lands at the easternmost limit of the Town of Collingwood support small, fragmented natural features. Adjacent lands in the Town of Wasaga Beach are similarly fragmented, have few environmental designations and are associated with ongoing development applications. Ongoing fragmentation has significantly impacted the natural corridors that once connected Collingwood and Wasaga Beach, and natural heritage links between the two municipalities are not provided/recommended within the proposed natural heritage system. The proposed natural heritage system supports strong westward connections into the Town of Blue Mountains along Silver Creek and its tributaries, as well as along Townline Creek. Similarly, the system provides east-west linkages along core portions of the Silver Creek PSW (and adjacent natural features) both north and south of Highway 26. Regenerating natural features in southwest Collingwood are closely associated with similar features west of Osler Bluff Road, representing a potential broader natural heritage block for future planning consideration between the two municipalities. Watercourse-related corridors provide the primary linkages extending south and southwest from the Town of Collingwood into Clearview Township. Black Ash Creek and its tributaries, Pretty River and Batteaux Creek are all linked to environmental protection features currently identified within the Clearview Township Official Plan. Nottawasaga Valley Conservation Authority 104

114 Nottawasaga Valley Conservation Authority 105

115 8.11 Integration with Areas of Concern Habitat Targets An Area of Concern (AOC) is a specific area along the Great Lakes shoreline that has been subject to environmental degradation and has been designated by the International Joint Commission. Once designated, an AOC must have a Remedial Action Plan (RAP) completed to provide guidance for restoration and protection of the site. However, before an AOC is considered restored and de-listed as an AOC, targets must be developed to measure progress and act as a point of reference (Environment Canada, 2004). A number of habitat targets have been established for the Great Lakes AOCs (Environment Canada et al., 2004). The Collingwood Harbour Area of Concern was the first Great Lakes AOC to be delisted in 1994, in partnership with federal, provincial and local agencies and groups. Table 10 outlines habitat targets which, if achieved or exceeded, will support a natural heritage system that exhibits a high degree of biodiversity and robustness. The results of natural heritage analysis conducted for the Town of Collingwood in support of this study are provided in Table 11. Figure 27 depicts ELC community cover that is currently on the landscape in the Town of Collingwood and is outside the boundaries of the draft proposed natural heritage system. Table 10: Habitat Targets for Great Lakes Areas of Concern (adapted from Environment Canada, 2004) Parameter Target Rationale Percent Forest Cover > 30% Will support most bird species expected within range Size of Largest Forest Patch 200 ha Will support most bird species (minimum 500 m wide) expected within range Percent of Municipality that is Forest Cover 100 m or farther from edge > 10% Will support most forest interior and forest edge bird species Percent of Municipality that is Forest > 5% Will support most forest interior Cover 200 m or farther from edge Percent of First to Third Order Streams * with at least 30 m wide buffers Percent of Municipality that is Impervious Percent Wetlands species expected within range > 75% Maintain high water quality and stream integrity < 10% Maintain water quality/quantity; preserve biotic density and biodiversity >10% watershed >6% subwatershed Ensure that wetlands are distributed throughout the watershed; ensure tangible hydrological and ecological benefits on a subwatershed basis * Stream order is a method of ranking stream segments in a drainage basin in which larger segments are given higher order numbers. Headwater tributaries are assigned order 1; where two order 1 streams combine, the next downstream segment becomes order 2; where two order 2 segments combine, the next downstream segment becomes order 3, etc. (Newbury and Gaboury, 1993). For this study, only the main Nottawasaga River has not been considered as its stream order is greater than 3 and its catchment area is between 800 km 2 to 1500 km 2. Other streams within Essa Township could be assigned a 4 th order designation (possibly due to smaller tributary patterns on the landscape and/or available mapping); however, the catchment areas of all the tributaries to the main Nottawasaaga River are considerably less than 100 km 2. The decision to include all of these tributaries was based on in-house knowledge of the watercourses within Essa Township and best professional judgment. Nottawasaga Valley Conservation Authority 106

116 Table 11: Comparison of Town Natural Heritage Features to AOC Habitat Targets Great Lakes AOC Parameter AOC Target Town of Collingwood Forest Cover >30% 19.5% Largest Forest Patch >200 ha and >500 m TBD wide Forest Interior Habitat (>100 m from >10% 7% forest edge) Deep Forest Interior Habitat (>200 m >5% TBD from forest edge) Riparian Habitat (30 m vegetated 75% TBD buffers on either side of creek) Wetland Coverage (including swamps) >10% watershed >6% subwatershed 11.75% a Caution should be used when interpreting the impervious area metric. This metric should be assessed at the catchment level. For example, intensive development in the headwaters of small streams may result in significant stream impairment while imperviousness, when viewed over the entire Town, remains below the target threshold. b calculated as percent urban area (excluding open space) X 0.2 (assumed impervious percentage of 20% in urbanized areas) Nottawasaga Valley Conservation Authority 107

117 Nottawasaga Valley Conservation Authority 108