Brunton Consulting Services
216 Lincoln Heights Road, Ottawa, Ontario K2B 8A8
Phone: (613) 829-7307 Fax: (613) 829-4688 e-mail: bruntonconsulting@rogers.com
Natural Environment Area boundary
in South March Highlands
Special Study Area
FINAL REPORT
June 2004
Delineation of Natural Environment Area in
the South March Highlands Special Study
Area, Kanata, City of Ottawa
FINAL REPORT
Daniel F. Brunton,
Brunton Consulting Services, Ottawa
June 2004
Special Study Area NEA boundary
CONTENTS
1) INTRODUCTION
........................................................................................42) METHODS AND CRITERIA
...................................................................52.1 N
ATURAL ENVIRONMENT AREA DEFINITION ......................................................................................62.2 W
ORK PLAN.................................................................................................................................................73) OVERVIEW OF THE SPECIAL STUDY AREA
(ADAPTED FROMBRUNTON 2000) ....................................................................................................10
4) ECOLOGICAL SIGNIFICANCE IN AND ABOUT SPECIAL STUDY
AREA.......................................................................................................................124.1 S
IGNIFICANT VEGETATION......................................................................................................................124.2 S
IGNIFICANT NATIVE SPECIES ................................................................................................................134.3 E
COLOGICAL CONNECTIVITY...................................................................................................................154.4 E
COLOGICAL INTEGRITY...........................................................................................................................164.5 H
ABITAT CONTINUITY .............................................................................................................................174.6 S
ITUATION AND OTHER ECOLOGICAL ASSETS ......................................................................................184.7 S
YNTHESIS OF ECOLOGICAL VALUES .......................................................................................................194.8 C
ONSTRAINTS TO NEA DELINEATION.....................................................................................................214.8.1 Ecological constraints ...........................................................................................................................21
4.8.2 Adjacent land use ....................................................................................................................................22
4.8.3 Terry Fox Road extension impact.........................................................................................................24
5) NEA BOUNDARY AND PROTECTION REQUIREMENTS
...255.1 P
ROPOSED NEA BOUNDARY ......................................................................................................................265.2 NEA
PROTECTION REQUIREMENTS..........................................................................................................295.3 L
INKAGE TO CARP RIVER ...........................................................................................................................306. CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
.............................316.1 E
COLOGICAL REPRESENTATION PROVIDED BY THE NEA.....................................................................316.2 P
ROTECTION ZONE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE NEA...............................................................................316.3 P
ROTECTION OF OTHER SSA NATURAL FEATURES AND VALUES.......................................................32
Brunton Consulting Services
, Ottawa, Ontario Page 2Special Study Area NEA boundary
7. REFERENCES
..................................................................................................32
FIGURES
Figure 1
: South March Highlands Special Study Areas (SSA)Figure 2
: Significant Vegetation in the SSAFigure 3
: Significant Native Plant Species ConcentrationsFigure 4
: Ecological Connectivity in the SSAFigure 5
: Ecological Situation and other AssetsFigure 6
: Provincially Significant LandscapeFigure 7
: Constraints to Ecological SignificanceFigure 8
: Proposed NEA BoundaryFigure 9
: Proposed NEA in Extended Study Area
APPENDICES
A
PPENDIX 1: Natural environment implications of the Terry Fox Drive alignment (Brunton2000)
A
PPENDIX 2: Native vascular plants of the Special Study AreaAppendix 3
: NEA BOUNDARY DEFINITION FIELD NOTES (4 JUNE 2004)
Brunton Consulting Services
, Ottawa, Ontario Page 3Special Study Area NEA boundary

1) I
NTRODUCTIONLands in the South March Highlands north of Richardson Side Road, west of the First
Line Road allowance and east of the proposed Terry Fox Drive extension are designated Special
Study Area (SSA) on Schedule B of the City of Ottawa Official Plan (Ottawa OP) (Figure 1).
Policy 3.11 of the Ottawa OP (Ottawa 2003a) outlines the intent of this designation, which is
generally to permit a refinement of designation boundaries within it. The policy states the
following:
"In particular, The City will undertake a study within 12 months of City Council’s adoption of
this Plan - in consultation with landowners, community groups, individuals and other
stakeholders with an interest to evaluate:
a)
the appropriate boundaries of the Natural Environment Area [NEA] found withinthe Special Study Area based on an assessment of natural values and its role as part of
a large greenspace in the area
;b) mechanisms to ensure public ownership of the Natural Environment Area lands;
c
) The relationship of all lands surrounding the Special Study Area, including theadjacent Natural Environment Area lands in the rural area to the west and north, to
determine the potential greenspace linkages, trail connections and opportunities for
lands acquisition
;d) the most appropriate land-use designations within the Special Study Area;
e) the location of the urban boundary.’‘
The present study addresses
a) and a portion of c) (in bold, above). The objectives of thisstudy include:
•
confirmation of evaluation criteria employed in Brunton (2000) for NEA boundarydelineation;
Brunton Consulting Services
, Ottawa, Ontario Page 4Special Study Area NEA boundary
•
delineation of the southern boundary of the South March Highlands NEA boundarywithin and adjacent to the SSA, including justification of any modifications of NEA
boundary delineated in Brunton (2000);
•
assessment of the ecological importance and function of the SSA NEA within the largercontext of the South March Highlands.
The present study does not involve original background field work. This was deemed
unnecessary, given the existing detailed in-house knowledge of the site and its surroundings.
There is also a substantial body of recent, additional natural environment documentation for this
area, as noted in Section 2.2. Nonetheless, the boundary recommendation of this study was
reviewed and confirmed in the field in June 2004 (Appendix 3).
2) M
ETHODS AND CRITERIAIn order to understand the ecological significance and contributions of the SSA it is
necessary to evaluate it within the context of its larger natural unit, the South March Highlands.
This is a science-based investigation which intentionally does not factor in social issues such as
recreational desires or aesthetic interests. The intention here is to provide a clearly defined,
ecologically defensible boundary which can be accepted by any interested parties as a
technically reliable, objective delineation.
Determinations in this study are consistent with the directions and standards of the
Ontario Provincial Policy Statement (Ontario 1997) and its Natural Heritage Reference Manual
(Ontario 1999), as well as the Natural Environment Areas directions and discussion of the
Ottawa OP (Ottawa-Carleton 1999; Ottawa 2003a). Criteria employed in the definition and
delineation of NEA boundaries reflect the significant weight given to ecological function values
by the province and the municipality in these policy documents.
Brunton Consulting Services
, Ottawa, Ontario Page 5Special Study Area NEA boundary
2.1 Natural Environment Area definition
"
Natural Environment Area designation applies to land having a high environmentalvalue as assessed through federal, provincial, and municipal studies. This designation identifies
sensitive areas where development could unduly stress ecological functions and where careful
management, restoration and enhancement are required.
[This] ... includes areas identified bythe Province as significant wetlands and related complexes on the Canadian Shield, such as the
Carp Hills and South March Highland .... These lands are designated to ensure that the natural
features and functions inherent in each area are protected and preserved."
(Ottawa 2003a)The criteria employed for the identification of lands satisfying the Natural Environment
Area (NEA) definition are consistent with those employed in the identification of High Value
regionally significant natural areas in the City of Ottawa (former Region of Ottawa-Carleton)
Natural Environment System Strategy (Ottawa-Carleton 1997). They include:
-
ecological integrity (level of ‘naturalness’, including representation of natural habitatdiversity of the larger natural area);
-
habitat continuity (uninterrupted (or lighted interrupted) interior forest area (woodlandcore not affected by disrupting ‘edge effect’) within which natural ecological functions
persist; ecologically appropriate size and shape of the area);
-
ecological corridor function (size and importance of linkage between natural habitatareas);
-
natural biodiversity (diversity of native species and habitats represented within thenatural habitat);
-
special features (number and population size of Provincial VTE (Vulnerable,threatened, Endangered) native species (Oldham 1999) or Regionally (City of Ottawa)
significant native species (Brunton 1998); Provincially or Regionally significant
vegetation types (Bakowski 1996; Geomatics International 1995, respectively).
Brunton Consulting Services
, Ottawa, Ontario Page 6Special Study Area NEA boundary
Sites found to most completely satisfy a number of these criteria (highest diversity,
largest interior forest area, effective ecological linkage, etc.) were rated as High Value natural
areas within the City of Ottawa (former Region of Ottawa-Carleton). The South March
Highlands rated High (Brunton 1997) and is designated Natural Environment Area (NEA) in the
City’s Official Plan (Ottawa 2003a). Consistent with those guiding municipal and provincial
policies then, the proposed SSA NEA boundary represents a qualification by practical protection
and sustainability considerations of landscapes otherwise satisfying NEA designation. These
qualifying factors include:
- vulnerability of NEA lands to physical impact by external activities (adjacent land use,
recreational and transportation activity, landform character, etc.);
- isolation or fragmentation of NEA component habitats (physical separation from other
potential NEA land);
- restrictive impact of other municipal or provincial directions (municipal zoning,
Provincial Policy Statement, etc.);
- degree of representation of compromised significant habitats (peripheral locations,
degraded condition) within the NEA.
2.2 Work Plan
A comprehensive review of the documentation of natural environment features, functions
and related planning considerations of the SAA and its surroundings was undertaken. These
include the Ontario Provincial Policy Statement (PPS) (Ontario 1997; 1999) and the City of
Ottawa Official Plan (OP) (Ottawa-Carleton 1999; Ottawa 2003a). A chronological review of
natural environment inventory and significance assessment documentation was also undertaken
as follows, commencing with the initial natural environment assessments for the area:
•
Natural Environment Inventory of the Kanata Lakes Study Area, Kanata, Ontario(Brunton 1992);
Brunton Consulting Services
, Ottawa, Ontario Page 7Special Study Area NEA boundary
•
South March Highlands Study Area: Natural Environment Assessment (Brunton 1992);•
Natural Environment Systems Strategy for the Regional Municipality of Ottawa-Carleton:Stage 1, Regional information base and ecological profile
. (Geomatics International Inc.1995);
•
Candidate Life Science Areas of Natural and Scientific Interest in Site District 6E-12: AReview and Assessment of Significant Natural Areas
(Draft) (Brunton 1995);•
Candidate Natural area evaluation (Ottawa-Carleton 1997);•
Summary Natural Area reports for Natural Areas west of the Rideau River (500 series)(Brunton 1997);
•
Provincial Policy Statement (Revised February 1, 1979) (Ontario 1997);•
Natural Heritage Reference Manual (revised) ( Ontario 1999);•
Official Plan, Regional Municipality of Ottawa-Carleton (Ottawa-Carleton 1999);•
Shirley’s Brook/Watts Creek Subwatershed Study (Dillon Consulting 1999;•
Natural environment implications of the Terry Fox Drive alignment in the South MarchHighlands, Kanata, City of Ottawa
(Brunton 2000)•
Terry Fox Drive Environmental Study Report (Dillon Consulting 2000)•
Kanata Lakes Natural Environment Area Implementation Plan (Draft) (CH2MHILL.2001);
•
Kanata Lakes North Serviceability Study (Cummings Cockburn Ltd. 2002);•
Richardson Lands, Kanata - Initial identification of NEA lands (Muncaster 2002c);•
Lots 8 and 9, Conc. I, Kanata - comments on natural environment features (Muncaster2002b);
•
Kanata Lakes NEA boundary definition, Shirleys Brook and tree-cutting mitigation(Muncaster 2002a);
•
Environmental Impact Statement: Kanata Lakes North, Kanata Ward, City of Ottawa(Muncaster 2003);
•
City of Ottawa Official Plan (Ottawa 2003a);•
Carp River Watershed/ Subwatershed Report (Draft) (Robinson Consultants 2003).
Brunton Consulting Services
, Ottawa, Ontario Page 8Special Study Area NEA boundary
Brunton (2000) provides considerable background information on the SSA and is appended to
this report for reference purposes (Appendix 1).
Established and verified ecological data were extracted from the above and employed in
the determination of ecological significant sites and landscapes (1) within the SSA, and (2)
within the Extended Study Area. The Extended Study Area (Figure 1) includes the landscape
between the SSA and adjacent natural lands to the north, east and west (i.e. the remainder of the
South March Highlands and westward to the Carp River). The ecological data derived from the
assessment of existing documentation are summarized and compiled below in order to identify
the overall area within and adjacent to the SSA containing ecologically significant landscapes
definable under terms of the PPS (Ontario 1997).
As noted above in 2.1) Natural Environment Area definition, the proposed NEA
boundary within the SSA directly reflects this objective analysis of the ecological feature and
function data which have been documented within and adjacent to the SSA. It is qualified,
however, by considerations of the ecological implications of land use designations and zoning,
the land management history of particular sites, and recent land management actions. Areas with
a recent history of intensive logging activity, otherwise significant unforested habitats
demonstrating several agricultural grazing impact, and sites with ecologically disruptive adjacent
land use practices, have poorer long-term ecological prospects. To achieve ecological
significance comparable to other SSA landscapes in such areas, if even possible, would require
substantial mitigation efforts.
This NEA boundary also reflects how the ecologically significant area within the SSA
connects with and relates to comparable ecologically significant lands in adjacent portions of the
South March Highlands. The boundary designation also considers the ecological connectivity
requirements between the SSA NEA and the natural lands in the Extended Study Area to the east
and north, and towards the Carp River. The Provincial Policy Statement (Ontario 1997)
requirement for ecological protection zones adjacent to Significant Natural Heritage Area
Brunton Consulting Services
, Ottawa, Ontario Page 9Special Study Area NEA boundary
Woodlands are then addressed in order to allow for physical protection of the NEA from
proposed development.
The NEA boundary within the SSA was reviewed and confirmed through an on-site
examination on 4 June 2004, with the boundary revisited and discussed with a group of
landowner representatives, City planners and review agency specialists on 9 June 2004. This
allowed for some additional natural environment features and function documentation (e.g.
degraded quality of open habitat immediately north of the Compensation Lands, additional
significant species observations). The on-site examination confirmed the location of the
proposed boundary line within the SSA at a finer scale and accommodated the landscape
changes which had occurred since the 2000 field season thereafter.
3) O
VERVIEW OF THE SPECIAL STUDY AREA (ADAPTED FROM BRUNTON 2000)The Special Study Area is situated at the southern end of the Precambrian Shield bedrock
outcrop known as the Carp Hills which extends from Kanata northwestward to the Ottawa River
in the Galetta area. This wetland-rich landform is unique in the City of Ottawa, constituting a
'island' of rugged, heavily-glaciated, rocky, Gatineau Hills-like habitat on the otherwise ±level,
sedimentary lowlands. The end result is a landscape with severely limited agricultural potential
and substantial challenges to residential/ commercial development. It has remained largely
undeveloped, constituting one of the largest areas of continuous natural landscape in the City.
The more or less original natural state coupled with a uniquely complex geology has resulted in
the southern portion of the Carp Hills (the South March Highlands) supporting a diverse and
significant natural biodiversity including Provincially and Regionally significant features and
habitats (Brunton 1992a; 1992b; 1997).
The South March Highlands incorporates a number of watercourses and their watershed
areas. The SSA incorporates catchment areas for the Carp River, Shirley’s Brook and Watts
Creek. Most of the drainage in the SSA is westward down the Hazeldean Escarpment slope and
Brunton Consulting Services
, Ottawa, Ontario Page 10Special Study Area NEA boundary
into the Carp River. The northeastern corner of the area drains eastward, however, flowing into
the south branch of Shirleys Brook. So too does the Watts Creek headwaters which commence
immediately west of the First Line Road ROW in the southern half of the area and flows easterly
through Kanata (‘Kizell Drain’), eventually discharging into the Ottawa River (Dillon
Consulting 2002). Numerous small and/ or intermittent drainage channels occur in the many
depressions and ravines occurring in this rugged landscape, all other eventually reaching the
Carp River system.
The SSA (Figure 1) is part of the South March Highlands natural area which, in various
configurations, has been identified as a candidate Provincially Significant Area of Natural and
Scientific Interest (ANSI) (Brunton 1995), a High Value Natural Environment System Strategy
(NESS) natural area (Ottawa-Carleton 1997; Brunton 1997) and Natural Environment Area-A
and Natural Environment Area B (Ottawa-Carleton 1999). The significance of this area is
reflected in the purchase of over 225 ha of natural landscape north of the railway for long-term
ecological protection purposes by the former Region in 2000 (Figure 9). This ‘Regional
Conservation Land’ area was enlarged by the City of Ottawa through the purchase of an
additional 20 ha of adjacent natural landscape in 2002.
The SSA supports a rich diversity of native plant and animal species typical of superior
examples of their respective habitats within the South March Highlands (Brunton 1992a). Some
of these species are found within the Highlands only in or immediately adjacent to the SSA (see
section 4.1, Significant native species, below). The mature upland deciduous forest habitat in the
northern half of the study area contributes the greatest number of these representative and locally
unique species (Brunton 1992b).
The SSA contains an extensive complex of common and rare habitats demonstrating a
high degree of ecological integrity. Over 80% of this area supports Regionally rare vegetation
types (Geomatics International 1995). A number of the nesting bird species present here and in
the adjacent forested landscape to the east breed successfully only in extensive woodlands
Brunton Consulting Services
, Ottawa, Ontario Page 11Special Study Area NEA boundary
(Brunton 1992b; Muncaster 2002c). Habitat fragmentation is rare here, with the First Line Road
ROW providing the only physical interruption crossing the length of the SSA.
A high level of natural biodiversity is identified as an important contributor to the
identification of a Provincially Significant natural area (Ontario 1997). The contribution of the
SSA to the ecological integrity of the larger South March Highlands natural area is an important
element of the latter area’s overall significance and conservation value.
4) E
COLOGICAL SIGNIFICANCE IN AND ABOUT SPECIAL STUDY AREAThe following summarizes the data presented in the existing documentation concerning
the ecological features and values of the SSA.
4.1 Significant vegetation
As noted above, a remarkably high proportion of the natural habitat of the SSA and its
surrounding lands constitutes Regionally Significant vegetation (
viz., community/ landformtypes covering less than 0.1% of the City of Ottawa - Ottawa-Carleton 1997). Over 80% of the
SSA is so rated, as is over 50% of the land between here and the Goulbourn Forced Road and
better than 90% of the uplands area westward along the Hazeldean Escarpment towards Huntmar
Road Geomatics Interntional 1995; Brunton 1997). Much of this significance comes from the
Regionally unusual granitic and marble bedrock underlying most of the South March Highlands
(and the Carp Hills). Among other unusual habitats resulting from this situation are the natural
bedrock barrens and meadows found commonly along the driest portion of the Hazeldean
Escarpment in the SSA.

Figure 2 illustrates the distribution of Regionally Significant vegetation in and about the
SSA. Beyond its intrinsic value as an unusual natural asset, Regionally Significant vegetation
Brunton Consulting Services
, Ottawa, Ontario Page 12Special Study Area NEA boundary
provides habitat for a wide variety of Regionally uncommon plant and animal species (see also
Figure 3).
Significant vegetation addresses the Natural Biodiversity, Ecological Integrity and
Special Features criteria for NEA identification and delineation.
4.2 Significant native species
A substantial diversity of significant vascular plant species occurs in and/ or immediately
adjacent to the SSA. While none constitute Provincially Rare species (Oldham 1999), a number
are Regionally Rare, being known from fewer than 10 contemporary populations in the City of
Ottawa (Brunton 1998). These significant species include:
Rusty Woodsia (
Woodsia ilvensis) - [largely in KNL lands east of First Line Road ROW; alsoRichardson Forest, Hazeldean Escarpment outcrops]
Southern Blue Grass (
Poa saltuensis) - throughout hardwoods in SSAWood-rush (
Luzula acuminata) - throughout hardwoods in SSALong-leaved Chickweed (
Stellaria longifolia) – deciduous swamp forest at north endSpiny Coon-tail (
Ceratophyllum echinatum) [extirpated in 2003 by destruction of wetlandhabitat in Richcraft Property east of First Line Road ROW]
Other native vascular plant species found in the SSA are considered to be Regionally
Significant, but at a lesser level of importance. These include taxa formerly considered
Regionally Rare but for which additional field studies have determined more than ten City of
Ottawa populations. Their occurrence in fewer than 20 known populations, however, indicates
that such Regionally Uncommon taxa (frequently indicative of unusual and/ or pristine natural
habitats) remain significant within the City of Ottawa as local indicators of ecological value.
The Regionally Significant (Uncommon) native vascular plant species known within the
SSA are as follows:
Brunton Consulting Services
, Ottawa, Ontario Page 13Special Study Area NEA boundary
- Short-husk Grass (
Brachyelytrum erectum)- Bear Sedge (
Carex albursina)- Head Sedge (
Carex cephaloidea)- Hairy Sedge (
Carex hirtifolia) – largest known population in City of Ottawa in Lot 8 hardwoodforest habitat
- Bur-reed Sedge (
Carex sparganioides)-Cleavers (
Galium aparine)- White-licorice (
Galium circaezans)- Bicknell’s Geranium (
Geranium bicknellii)- Virginia Stickseed (
Hackelia virginiana)- Mountain-rice Grass (
Oryzopsis racemosa)- White Vervain (
Verbena urticifolia)- Purslane Speedwell (
Veronica peregrina ssp. xalopensis)The number of known City of Ottawa populations for each of these Regionally Significant (Rare
and Uncommon) species are noted with the appropriate entries in Appendix 2.

Figure 3 illustrates areas within and about the SSA where significant vascular plant
species are concentrated. These designations include locations for the Regionally Rare species
noted above as well as Regionally uncommon species (Brunton 1992a; Brunton 1992b). These
are defined as being known from fewer than 20 City of Ottawa populations and/ or which are
very locally distributed in Ottawa (Brunton, in prep.).
The habitat in these areas also tends to concentrate populations of breeding bird species
requiring uncommonly pristine forest habitats (Brunton 2000). In the SSA these include
Regionally uncommon nesting species such as Pileated Woodpecker, Scarlet Tanager, Blackthroated
Green Warbler, Ovenbird and Winter Wren (Brunton 1992a; Brunton 1992b; Muncaster
2002a).
Brunton Consulting Services
, Ottawa, Ontario Page 14Special Study Area NEA boundary
Significant native species addresses the Natural Biodiversity and Special Features criteria
for NEA identification and delineation.
4.3 Ecological connectivity
Brunton (1992a; 1992b; 1995; 1997; 2000), Ottawa-Carleton (1997), Ontario (1999) and
Dillon Consulting (2003) make it clear that the ecological connectivity of natural habitats in
general and of the natural lands in the SAA area in particular, is critical to the maintenance of
high quality, self-sustainable natural values here. Linkages between natural habitats contributes
significantly to the establishment and maintenance of natural biodiversity as well as permitting
for ecological recruitment and renewal within habitats.

Based on original faunal investigations, Dillon Consulting (2003) identifies areas of
important linkage value along the proposed Terry Fox Road ROW. Illustration of these are
accompanied in Figure 4 by the identification of other floristic and faunal linkages. These were
indicated by the continuous extent of particular habitats across watersheds and topographic
features (e.g. extensive upland forest and wetlands), and/ or by the identification of
geographically key locations between major natural habitat areas. The relatively greater
importance of particular linkage areas is subjectively indicated by more prominent graphic
symbols in Figure 4.
Based on the extent and location of their natural features and values the four most significant
areas for ecological connectivity in the SSA (Figure 4) are:
1) ‘The Saddle’ across the high, narrow ridge of mature deciduous forest connecting the
southwestern South March Highlands with natural habitats along the Hazeldean
Escarpment;
2) the area of mature upland and swamp forest habitats straddling the watershed divide
between the headwaters of Watts Creek and the Carp River;
3) the forested and sloping, scrubby western edge of the Hazeldean Escarpment;
Brunton Consulting Services
, Ottawa, Ontario Page 15Special Study Area NEA boundary
4) The upland forest habitat (the ‘Richardson Forest’) straddling the First Line Road
ROW between SSA Lot 6 and the upland/ lowland complex south of Watts Creek.
Other distinctive but ecologically less critical linkages are also noted on Figure 4, most of these
being identified from the faunal data in Dillon Consulting (2003).
Ecological connectivity addresses the Ecological Corridor Function and Habitat Continuity
criteria for NEA identification and delineation.
4.4 Ecological integrity
The degree of ‘naturalness’ of particular landscapes is determined through the consideration
of a number of over-lapping ecological factors. It is usually difficult, however, to quantitatively
measure the ecological condition of a particular site. The Coefficient of Conservation (CC)
rating, however, is useful in this regard. It represents a determination on a scale of 0 (lowest) to
10 (highest) of the degree to which particular native vascular plant species require undisturbed,
pristine habitat conditions. Accordingly, a calculation of the average CC rating of the native
vascular flora provides a useful absolute and relative measure of the ecological integrity of
particular areas (Oldham et al., 1995), particularly in regards to distinguishing the relative
ecological integrity of areas similar habitats.
Coefficient of Conservation ratings of 7 to 10 represent at given to species which are
particularly representative of intact natural habitats. An unusually number of species found in the
mature deciduous and mixed forests of the central and northern portion of the SSA and others on
the open, native outcrop barrens (over 35) have such high CC ratings (Appendix 2). These
include Wild Leek (
Allium tricoccum), Rusty Woodsia (Woodsia ilvensis), Ground-pine(
Lycopodium complanatum (s. str.)), Horse-gentian (Triosteum aurantiacum), White Bedstraw(
Galium circaezans), Speedwell (Veronica peregrina ssp. xalapensis), Spiny Coon-tail(Ceratophyllum echinatum
), Rose Twisted-stalk (Streptopus lanceolatus) and Wood Lily (Liliumphiladelphicum
) (Brunton 1992a; 1992b; 2000).
Brunton Consulting Services
, Ottawa, Ontario Page 16Special Study Area NEA boundary
The average CC rating of the 268 species of native vascular plants known from the SSA is
4.47 (Appendix 2). This is an exceptionally high level for an urban area within the City of
Ottawa, likely placing amongst the top 10 ratings of the ±185 candidate natural sites being
examined in the on-going Urban Natural Areas study (pers. obs.).
The exceptional level of native biodiversity representation within the South March Highlands
as a whole is largely attributable to the relatively pristine condition of major habitats best
represented within the SSA (Brunton (1992a; 1992b). The mature hardwood forest and bedrock
outcrop barrens are particularly notable in this regard.
Invasive plant species - non-native plants which aggressively invade native habitats and
degrade or replace native vegetation - pose a serious threat to the ecological integrity of natural
habitats in southern Canada (White et al., 1993), particularly so in and around urban areas. The
relatively large areas of intact natural habitat within the SSA in particular and the South March
Highlands in general, however, has maintained the number and severity of invasive plant impacts
here at a level well below that typically encountered in the City of Ottawa (Brunton 2000;
perobs.
).4.5 Habitat continuity
The extent of interior forest - the area of woodland unaffected by negative external ‘edge
effects’ - offers a valuable indication of site ecological integrity as well as identifying potential
concentration areas for disturbance-intolerant flora and fauna (Ottawa-Carleton 1997). It is
defined in the on-going City of Ottawa Urban Natural Areas study as constituting the area of
continuous woodland occurring 100 m or more in from the edge of natural forest habitat. Figure
5 indicates the approximate position of the large areas of interior forest in and about the SSA.
The size and shape of natural habitat areas are also important contributing factors for the
sustainability of a natural area, with smaller, more irregular areas being more exposed and thus
Brunton Consulting Services
, Ottawa, Ontario Page 17Special Study Area NEA boundary
vulnerable to ‘edge effect’ (Harris 1984; Riley & Mohr 1994). The existence of a large block of
native habitat centred on the First Line Road ROW (Figures 5 and 7) and presently connected to
even larger natural areas to the west (Hazeldean Escarpment), north (the Regional Conservation
Lands and interior South March Highlands) and east (Watts Creek system), is important for the
sustainability of natural values in the SSA.
4.6 Situation and other ecological assets
The highland situation of much of the SSA reduces the vulnerability of many natural habitat
areas within it to upstream negative impacts such as catastrophic pollution events and the
cumulative impact of smaller pollution events and habitat disturbance. Conversely, this enhances
the importance of the headwater areas within the SSA as these provide ecological resources and
protection for the down-stream areas along Shirleys Brook, Watts Creek and the Carp River
(Figure 5). In establishing a policy of no-net-loss of subwatershed aquatic habitat, the City of
Ottawa Infrastructure Master Plan (Ottawa 2003b) acknowledges increased municipal and
provincial responsibilities for enhanced levels of source water planning and protection for both
short-term and long-term conservation purposes.

One area abutting the SSA constitute an element of the Provincially Significant South March
Highlands Wetland Complex (CH2MHILL 2001). This Provincially Significant Wetland (PSW)
element constitutes the eastern end of the thicket swamp by the railway at north end of the First
Line Road ROW (Figure 5). Development (such as residential housing) is prohibited within
Provincially Significant Wetlands in the City of Ottawa (Ottawa 2003a).
The mature maple swamp forest draining into the Carp River through Lot 7 constituting
much of the 14.4 ha ‘Compensation Lands’ area established as part of the mitigation for illegal
forest clearing in parts of the KNL lands, is a Locally Significant, Class 4 Evaluated Wetland.
This Kizell Drain Wetland was evaluated as scoring 585 of a the required minimum of 600
points required to be considered a Provincially Significant Wetland (Ontario 1994; S. Murphy,
pers. comm.). A review of this classification may or may not determine that PSW scores are
Brunton Consulting Services
, Ottawa, Ontario Page 18Special Study Area NEA boundary
achieved in this wetland, although it clearly is very closely to achieving that status. Protection of
Locally Significant Wetlands is stated as a goal in the City of Ottawa’s Official Plan.
This attribute addresses the Ecological Integrity, Natural Biodiversity and Habitat Continuity
criteria for NEA identification and delineation.
4.7 Synthesis of ecological values
The Natural Environment Area designation within the SSA identifies ecologically
sustainable and manageable landscapes contained within topographically measurable habitat
limits. Sections 4.1 through 4.6 have addressed the significance of the various natural
environment assets which combine to identify those areas which satisfy the Ottawa OP criteria
(Ottawa 2003a) for NEA lands. They also, however, satisfy criteria for identifying Provincially
Significant areas ("
ecologically important in terms of features, functions, representation oramount and contributing to the quality and diversity of an identifiable geographic or natural
heritage-system
" (Ontario 1999)).To have ecological assets within a particular area which satisfy the criteria for one of these
Provincially Significant natural heritage values is notable. To have ecological resources within a
particular area which satisfying the criteria for three of these Provincially Significant natural
heritage values is exceptional, however, and attests the remarkable nature of the SSA in
particular and the South March Highlands in general. The particular natural heritage systems
satisfied are described below.
Provincially Significant Wetland (PSW): "
identified as provincially significant by theMinistry of Natural Resources using evaluation procedures established by the province
; thisapplies to elements of the South March Highlands Wetland complex found at the north end
of the SSA.
Brunton Consulting Services
, Ottawa, Ontario Page 19Special Study Area NEA boundary
Significant Woodlands: "…
treed areas that provide environmental and economic benefitssuch as erosion prevention, water retention, provision of habitat, recreation and the
sustainable harvest of woodland products …and vary in their level of significance
" (Ontario1997). Provincially Significant Woodlands are identified through consideration of woodland
size, ecological function, fragmentation characteristics and rarity (including old age)
(Ontario 1999). These values are well represented within the SSA, as identified in both the
Site District 6E-12 assessment (Brunton 1995) and the Natural Environment System Strategy
study (Brunton 1997), as well as this review (above).
Significant Wildlife Habitat: "
Specific wildlife habitats of concern may include areas wherespecies concentrate at a vulnerable point in their annual life cycle; and areas which are
important to migratory or non-migratory species"
(Ontario 1997). This is determinedthrough the identification of significant values including 1) seasonal concentration of
animals, 2) rare vegetation communities or specialized habitats for wildlife, 3) habitats for
species of conservation concern and 4) wildlife movement corridors (Ontario 1999). Again,
these values are well represented within the SSA, as identified in both the Site District 6E-12
assessment (Brunton 1995) and the Natural Environment System Strategy study (Brunton
1997), as well as this review (above).

Figure 6 illustrates a simple additive accounting of areas in and about the SSA containing the
Provincially Significant ecological values identified above. This does not, however, factor in
significant landscape changes presently underway, habitat degradation of peripheral areas,
adjacent conflicting land uses and land use projections, habitat fragmentation, etc. These latter
considerations (see 4.8, below) are also important in establishing the limits of a sustainable,
ecologically manageable Natural Environment Area. This designation of provincial significance
does not simply repeat the candidate ANSI boundary suggestion (Brunton 1995) but represents
an independent delineation of areas which support features and functions of sufficient kind and
quality to satisfy the standards established by the Ontario Provincial Policy Statement (Ontario
1997).
Brunton Consulting Services
, Ottawa, Ontario Page 20Special Study Area NEA boundary
4.8 Constraints to NEA delineation
Although fundamentally science-based, NEA boundaries are not determined in isolation of
existing and future natural environment conditions and human activities, both on and off site.
Review of the objective ecological information with consideration of existing and anticipated
external land use qualifies our understanding of the long-term natural sustainability of particular
areas. This provides direction for the delineation of NEA boundaries. Discussion of the most
important of these considerations follows.
4.8.1 Ecological constraints
Fragmentation and isolation: The SSA in particular and the South March Highlands in general
have increasingly become ‘islands’ of natural habitat at the edge of the expanding residential and
commercial core of the City of Ottawa urban landscape. Such development and related activities
pose a significant threat to the long-term sustainability and ecological integrity of the natural
values described above.
Intensive agricultural activity (cropping and pasturing) long ago transformed the deeper soil
areas closer to the Carp River from their former natural condition. A large agricultural area east
of the SSA at the railway line is similarly no longer in natural condition (Figure 7) and presents a
physical barrier to most ecological processes along the edge of adjacent natural habitats.
Physical impact: Forest clearing in the spring of 2002 significantly impacted several hectares of
woodland immediately east of the First Line Road ROW (Muncaster 2002a). This canopy
disturbance negatively impacts ecological functions (most notable, ecological connectivity and
habitat integrity) in the surrounding woodlands. Numerous unofficial trails have been developed
throughout the South March Highlands and surrounding landscape by hikers, cross-country
skiers and most notably in recent years by mountain bicycle riders. Soil erosion and tree root
damage on steep slopes, in wet depressions and in shallow soil areas is locally significant in
many areas along these trails (
pers. obs.).
Brunton Consulting Services
, Ottawa, Ontario Page 21Special Study Area NEA boundary
Extent of interior forest: The First Line Road ROW transects continuous natural habitat area.
Despite a recent (post 1999 ice-storm ?) clearing and leveling of the surface, however, the ROW
constitutes a relatively minor negative impact on adjacent natural habitat. Forest habitat has been
maintained up to and out over the edge of the ROW for much of its length along both sides,
though it is severely disturbed adjacent to the new residential development north of Richardson
Side Road (Richcraft Homes property). Native shrubbery and ground vegetation has developed
in many places within the ROW and contributes to habitat continuity.
Although too disturbed and degraded in and of themselves to constitute viable natural
habitat, portions of this narrow corridor, if managed in association with adjacent natural forest,
demonstrate considerable potential for ecological rehabilitation. Accordingly, the concession
ROW does not constitute a significant, permanent limitation to the extent of interior forest. At
present, however, the open condition of the ROW facilitate the spread of invasive, non-native
vegetation along the eastern side of the SSA.
4.8.2 Adjacent land use
The land uses on adjacent properties have a substantial influence on the ecological integrity,
function and significance of natural areas (see Sections 4.1 through 4.6 for a discussion of the
relative importance of such factors within the SSA). Residential development presently
underway as well as future changes resulting from residential and transportation development
commitments on other adjacent properties (Figure 1), have important implications for the
ecological significance and sustainability of the natural landscape within the SSA. The major
adjacent land use issues affecting the SSA are discussed below.
Richcraft Homes Property: Extensive forest clearing has been conducted for residential
development on the urban lands immediately north of the Richardson Side Road, east of the First
Line Road (photo below). These lands are in the process of being converted from a natural
condition. This action reduces the overall ecological diversity and significance of the South
Brunton Consulting Services
, Ottawa, Ontario Page 22Special Study Area NEA boundary
March Highlands and directly affects ecological connectivity values and the extent of interior
forest in the Richardson Forest portion of the SSA.
Developer representatives, City planning staff and review agency specialists along First
Line ROW by cleared forest on Richcraft Homes property (9 June 2004)
KNL lands: Residential development is committed in the majority of the KNL lands between the
First Line Road ROW and Goulbourn Forced Road. This has major implications for the
ecological significance of both the SSA in particular and the South March Highlands in general.
That includes a major reduction in the ecological corridor function presently active between the
Regional Conservation Lands north of the Terry Fox Road ROW and the Trillium Woods Urban
Natural Feature (UNF) within and immediately east of the Extended Study Area, along either
side of Goulbourn Forced Road (Figure 9). It will also increase the edge effect impact of the
Terry Fox Road ROW on the adjacent Regional Conservation Lands habitat. The KNL
Brunton Consulting Services
, Ottawa, Ontario Page 23Special Study Area NEA boundary
residential development area is transected by Kizell Pond Urban Natural Feature along Watts
Creek.
The KNL development plan dramatically reduces the existing area of ecological connectivity
between the SSA and other significant natural areas of the South March Highlands (Brunton
1992a; 1992b; 2000). The remaining UNF west of Goulbourn Forced Road constitutes about 100
ac (40 ha) of upland and wetland habitat (S. Murphy, pers. comm.). The Richardson Forest in
Lot 6 will be particularly negatively effected, being completely isolated from comparable natural
habitats to the north and east. As well, virtually all of the interior forest values of the Richardson
Forest will be eliminated.
The loss of continuous forest habitat within the KNL lands north of Watts Creek in the West
Block will have similar though less intense impacts on the northern portion of the SSA. The
negative impact is lessened in that area by the existence of continuous natural habitat along the
top and face of the Hazeldean Escarpment to the west of the SSA (Figures 2, 3, 4 and 5).
Development of portions of the West Block on the KNL property will result in the loss of native
biodiversity, a reduction in biological restoration and recruitment potential and the initiation of
microclimatic changes. It will inevitably reduce the self-sustainability and overall ecological
significance of the adjacent portion of the SSA. Without detailed on-site examination of the
lands involved, however, it is difficult to quantify the loss of particular natural features.
4.8.3 Terry Fox Road extension impact
Dillon Consulting (2003) has established that construction of the proposed Terry Fox Road
extension across the SSA will have a significant, negative ecological impact ....
"Terry Fox Drivewill form a barrier and break between the northern and southern portions of the presently
continuous South March Highlands [natural] area
". Recognizing the importance of maintainingecological connectivity across this barrier, Dillon Consulting. (2003) proposes a system of
modified culverts and a major sub-roadway ecological passageway along the preferred roadway
ROW to partially mitigate these loses.
Brunton Consulting Services
, Ottawa, Ontario Page 24Special Study Area NEA boundary
As part of the recent discussions on the design of this road, an alternative route crossing the
SSA and located slightly west of the preferred route (Dillon Consulting 2003) was suggested by
a landowner. Dillon Consulting (2003) considered that the Balys & Associates alternative route
would have "
a higher impact on the environment (volume of rock knolls to be removed, andwetland impacted)".
In a later assessment of the natural environment implications of the Balys &Associates proposed route, it was suggested (Muncaster 2002b) that the degree of ecological
disturbance along this alternative route for the crossing of the Hazeldean Escarpment and the
SAA might be no greater or even somewhat reduced to that of the preferred Terry Fox Road
ROW. That opinion, however, does not address the question of maintaining ecological
connectivity across the roadway ROW other than to suggest that roadway development along
either alternative will inevitably have some impact.
Regardless of the route selected, it is clear that the extension of the Terry Fox Road arterial
across the South March Highlands will constitute a major ecological challenge to the
Provincially Significant values in and about the SSA and throughout a large segment of the
South March Highlands. Major mitigation measures, as described above, will be required to at
least reduce the losses of significant ecological value here.

5) NEA B
OUNDARY AND PROTECTION REQUIREMENTSThe proposed NEA boundary encloses a representative, self-sustainable natural landscape
which satisfies Natural Environment Area criteria of the Ottawa OP (Ottawa 2003a) as well as
Provincially Significant Woodland, Provincially Significant Wetland and Provincially
Significant Wildlife Habitat delineation standards called for in the Ontario Provincial Policy
Statement (Ontario 1997; 1999). As described above, the NEA considers not only the present
ecological assets and capabilities of the landscape in question but addresses long-term
sustainability in light of the on-going development of adjacent lands.
Brunton Consulting Services
, Ottawa, Ontario Page 25Special Study Area NEA boundary
5.1 Proposed NEA boundary
The SSA NEA boundary proposed as a result of this investigation is illustrated in Figure 8.
As noted previously, the natural features and functions of adjacent landscapes are important to
long-term ecological sustainability of this area. Accordingly, NEA identification criteria are
applied to the Extended Study Area as well and the resulting boundary is also depicted on Figure
8. Definition of all portions of the NEA boundary within the Extended Study Area have not been
defined with the same degree of rigour, however, as has been applied within and immediately
adjacent to the SSA. The location of the proposed NEA boundary within the SSA was reviewed
and confirmed by D. F. Brunton and S. Murphy during the field inspection of 4 June 2004. A
summary of decision points and observations is provided in Appendix 3. The proposed NEA
boundary in the larger Extended Study Area has not been field checked beyond the SSA.
The present critical analysis of NEA boundary requirements is largely consistent with and
supportive of the conclusions drawn by the earlier NEA boundary analyses for the lands west of
the First Line ROW (Brunton 1992a; Brunton 1992b; 2000). For the lands east of the First Line
Road ROW, the present analysis is largely consistent with the NEA boundary conclusions of
Brunton (1992a), Brunton (1992b), CH2MHILL (2001) and Ottawa-Carleton (1999). It does not
match well, however, with the significantly smaller NEA boundary proposed by Muncaster
(2002a; 2003) (see also 4.8.2, above).

The NEA boundary proposed in this study (Figure 8) involves substantial reductions in the
area of provincial ecological significance depicted in Figure 6. The reductions are intended to
exclude only natural landscape areas for which development approvals have been granted and/ or
habitats which, subsequent to adjacent development being completed, will no longer sustain the
significant ecological features and values they presently possess. The proposed NEA, however,
still retains all of the ecological functions identified as significant within the SSA, as well as a
large majority of the significant ecological features. The major areas to be excluded and the
implications of their removal are as follows:
Brunton Consulting Services
, Ottawa, Ontario Page 26Special Study Area NEA boundary
•
Richardson Forest (Lot 6)- moderately significant upland forest vegetation isolated from the remainder of South March
Highlands significant landscape by long-standing agricultural development to the north and
by on-going residential development to the east for which the City of Ottawa has committed
development approvals;
- linkage area with the proposed SSA NEA near the First Line Road ROW negatively
impacted by the 2002 forest clearing and to be completely severed by proposed residential
development of Urban lands south of Watts Creek;
- ecological function of the forest area also increasingly impacted by expanding residential
development south of Richardson Side Road (Heritage Hills);
- preservation of locally or Regionally significant features (e.g. White Pine forest area) can
be addressed at the site plan level of subdivision design.
•
Drainage route to Carp River from Lot 7 Evaluated Wetland- degraded upland scrub habitat which is regenerating from extensive, long-term agricultural
activity and which supports few natural values;
- wetland protection requirements can be accommodated by typical fisheries habitat
protection measures in subwatershed planning (including 30 m no-development buffer),
subdivision site planning and/ or through landowner stewardship initiatives (water course
enhancements, etc.) (see 5.3, below).
•
Rock outcrop habitat in Lot 7 to south of Evaluated Wetland- habitat severely degraded by long-term agricultural activity (grazing) with few natural or
representative vegetation elements remaining.
•
KNL Lands south of Terry Fox Road to Kizell Pond UNF boundary- area is entirely committed to urban scale residential development.
Brunton Consulting Services
, Ottawa, Ontario Page 27Special Study Area NEA boundary
Although reduced in size and ecological significance by the constraints identified above in
Section 4.8 (see also Figure 9), the proposed SSA Natural Environment Area remains a highly
significant natural asset. Key sustainable ecological values include:
•
Biodiversity:- retains a rich assembly of native biodiversity with no known SSA native species excluded
from the proposed NEA.
•
Special features:- full representation of the significant vegetation types and of all known SAA significant
species (Regionally Significant fauna, uncommon flora) retained;
- Provincially and Locally Significant Wetland components.
•
Ecological connectivity:- linkages with the remainder of the West Block to the east and with the Regional
Conservation Lands to the north retained; the latter linkage has the additional ecological
benefit of including PSW habitat.
•
Ecological integrity:- retains extensive area of natural, unfragmented forest habitat with little or no significant
non-native elements.
This combination of ecological assets indicates that the proposed NEA area would remain
large enough and with sufficient ecological function to be self-sustainable despite the negative
impacts of surrounding development. This capacity is enhanced by the upland nature of most of
the site, making it potentially less vulnerable than down-slope areas. Protection of these
significant values will require designation of a buffer zone between proposed development areas
and retained NEA lands (see 5.2, below).
Brunton Consulting Services
, Ottawa, Ontario Page 28Special Study Area NEA boundary

5.2 NEA protection requirements
Ecological buffer areas are required to provide a protective transition zone between
ecologically sensitive and Provincially significant habitats and negative external influences
(Ontario 1997). The size of such protection zones are left to the determination of particular
planning authorities through the application of good planning principles. The Ontario Wetland
policy identifies an Adjacent Area extending 120 m beyond Provincially Significant Wetlands
(or PSW complex elements) within which the needs of a sufficiently wide protective natural
vegetation buffer should be considered (Ontario 1994). In the case of the appropriate protection
zone surrounding the Provincially Significant NEA area within the South March Highlands SSA,
that direction is provided by the City of Ottawa OP (Ottawa 2003a).
An Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) is required for new development within a 30
metre distance of the boundary of an NEA or Urban Natural Feature to "
manage the …transition zone between urban development and natural features
…" (Ottawa 2003a). The EISwould determine the mitigation measures, including consideration of a no-development buffer,
required to provide the appropriate level of protection for the NEA’s significant values. This
NEA protection zone performs the same function identified for ‘Adjacent Lands’ in the OPPS
(Ontario 1997).
The Natural Heritage Reference Manual (Ontario 1999) recommends a 50 m ‘Adjacent
Lands’ zone abutting Significant Woodland and Significant Wildlife habitat " …
for consideringwhether development may have an impact on significant wildlife
[and woodland] habitat".Particularly in light of the uncommonly sensitive nature of the South March Highlands
landscape, therefore, establishment a comparable no-net-impact zone of 50 m in width is both
appropriate and ecologically justifiable along the NEA boundary in the SSA. This is particularly
so in light of South March Highlands soils being generally more vulnerable to disturbance and
less capable of supporting disturbance-tolerant natural vegetation than landscapes on the clay
and loam based lowlands which dominate eastern Ontario (Chapman and Putnam 1984).
Brunton Consulting Services
, Ottawa, Ontario Page 29Special Study Area NEA boundary
The Provincial Policy Statement and the Ottawa OP (Ontario 1997; Ottawa 2003a) would not
be contradicted by a particular development proposal on abutting lands, then, if it is first
demonstrated by an competent EIS study that no net negative impact would result for the
significant features and functions for which the NEA or Urban Natural Feature was identified.
5.3 Linkage to Carp River
Linkage is provided between the SSA Natural Environment Area and the Carp River in Lot 7
along a degraded drainage channel through areas of transformed agricultural land, upland thicket
and scrubby forest over partially buried granitic bedrock outcrop. This narrow and relatively
lightly vegetated corridor provides limited potential for upland habitat representation though it
may offer significant aquatic functional values (fisheries habitat, water quality protection, etc.) in
the Carp River. Accordingly, maintenance of the drainage channel within its natural course and
application of the standard City of Ottawa 30 m no-development water course and fish habitat
buffer should satisfy both the policy and the intent of stream set-back directions provided in the
Ottawa OP (Ottawa 2003a).
Brunton Consulting Services
, Ottawa, Ontario Page 30Special Study Area NEA boundary
6. C
ONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONSDespite existing and proposed negative impacts from development on neighbouring
properties, the proposed SSA Natural Environment Area constitutes a self-sustainable,
provincially significant natural landscape. It can continue indefinitely to provide an important
contribution to the ecological wealth of the larger South March Highlands and indeed, to the City
of Ottawa. The major considerations in achieving this ecologically important result are noted
below.
6.1 Ecological representation provided by the NEA
The proposed NEA boundary reflects the objective analysis of the known ecological features,
values and processes of the SSA. In recognition of the implications of present and future land
uses on the long-term sustainability of natural landscape values in the NEA, the recommended
protection area is substantially smaller in extent than the landscape presently definable as being
Provincially Significant (Ontario 1997; 1999). The proposed NEA boundary, however, still
contains the majority of SSA natural values and largely supports similar protection area
conclusions of Brunton (1992a), Brunton (1992b), CH2MHILL (2001) and Ottawa-Carleton
(1999).
6.2 Protection Zone requirements for the NEA
Adjacent Lands are identified by the OPPS (Ontario 1997) as providing a transitional zone
between significant natural landscapes (Provincially Significant Wetlands, Woodlands, Wildlife
Habitat) and development. The Ontario Natural Heritage Manual recommends a 50 m wide
Adjacent Lands zone around landscapes like those of the SMH NEA (Provincially Significant
Woodlands and Wildlife Habitat), while a comparable 30 m wide zone is identified as requiring
an EIS within the City of Ottawa (Ottawa 2003a). Given the additional level of ecological
sensitivity of this granitic-based landscape, however, the establishment of a 50 m Adjacent Area
Brunton Consulting Services
, Ottawa, Ontario Page 31Special Study Area NEA boundary
zone surrounding the SMH NEA lands is both ecologically appropriate and defensible, and is
recommended here.
6.3 Protection of other SSA natural features and values
Some locally or regionally significant natural features (e.g. the White Pine grove in the
Richardson Forest) are not at a sufficient scale of ecological importance to be included within
the NEA proposed here. Protection and preservation of such areas should be accommodated,
however, at the site plan level of subdivision design.
7. R
EFERENCESBakowsky, W. D. 1996.
Natural heritage resources in Ontario: vegetation communities ofsouthern Ontario
. Natural Heritage Information Centre, Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources,Peterborough.
Brunton, D. F. 1992a
. Natural Environment Inventory of the Kanata Lakes Study Area, Kanata,Ontario.
[Report for Genstar Corp., Ottawa/ City of Kanata, Kanata], Daniel Brunton ConsultingServices, Ottawa.
Brunton, D. F. 1992b
. South March Highlands Study Area: Natural Environment Assessment.[Report for Genstar Corporation/ City of Kanata, Kanata], Daniel Brunton Consulting Services,
Ottawa.
Brunton, D. F. 1995
. Life Science Areas of Natural and Scientific Interest in Site District 6E-12:A Review and Assessment of Significant Natural Areas.
[Unpublished draft report] OntarioMinistry of Natural Resources, Kemptville.
Brunton Consulting Services
, Ottawa, Ontario Page 32Special Study Area NEA boundary
Brunton, D.F. 1997
. Summary Natural Area reports for Natural Areas west of the Rideau River(500 series
). Planning and Development Approvals Department Report 28-08d, Region ofOttawa-Carleton, Ottawa.
Brunton, D. F. 1998.
Distributionally significant vascular plants of the Region of Ottawa-Carleton
. Planning and Development Approvals Department Report #28-09, Region of Ottawa-Carleton, Ottawa.
Brunton, D. F. 2000
. Natural environment implications of the Terry Fox Drive alignment in theSouth March Highlands, Kanata, City of
Ottawa [Unpublished report for Planning andDevelopment Approvals Branch, Region of Ottawa-Carleton], Daniel Brunton Consulting
Services, Ottawa.
Chapman, L. J. and D. F. Putnam. 1984
. The Physiography of Southern Ontario (ThirdEdition). Ontario Geological Survey Special Volume 2, Toronto.
CH2MHILL. 2001
. Kanata Lakes Natural Environment Area Implementation Plan[Unpublished draft report for City of Ottawa]. CH2MHill, Ottawa.
Cummings Cockburn Ltd. 2002
. Kanata Lakes North Serviceability Study [Unpublished reportfor KNL Developments Inc.], Cummings Cockburn Ltd., Ottawa.
Dillon Consulting. 1999.
Shirley’s Brook and Watts Creek Subwatershed Study. [Unpublishedreport for Region of Ottawa-Carleton], Dillon Consulting Ltd., Gloucester.
Dillon Consulting. 2002
. Terry Fox Drive Environmental Assessment, Eagleson Road to MarchRoad (Two volumes)
[Unpublished report for the Region of Ottawa-Carleton and City ofKanata], Dillon Consulting Ltd., Ottawa.
Brunton Consulting Services
, Ottawa, Ontario Page 33Special Study Area NEA boundary
Dillon Consulting. 2003
. Terry Fox Drive Environmental Assessment Addendum andFunctional Design Brief Update: Richardson Side Road to Realigned Goulbourn Forced Road
(First Draft)
[Unpublished report for the City of Ottawa], Dillon Consulting Ltd., Ottawa.Geomatics International Inc. 1995
. Natural Environment Systems Strategy for the RegionalMunicipality of Ottawa-Carleton: Stage 1, Regional information base and ecological profile.
Planning and Property Department Report 28-02, Region of Ottawa-Carleton, Ottawa.
Harris, L. D. 1984
. The Fragmented Forest: Island Biogeography Theory and the Preservationof Biotic Diversity.
University of Chicago Press, Chicago.[
Muncaster, B.]. 2002a. Kanata Lakes NEA boundary definition, Shirleys Brook and treecuttingmitigation
(Unpublished report for the City of Ottawa), ESG International Inc., Ottawa.Muncaster, B. 2002b
. Lots 8 and 9, Conc. I, Kanata - comments on natural environmentfeatures,
8 November 2002, in lit. to E. Balys & Associates Inc., ESG International Inc., Ottawa.Muncaster, B. 2002c
. Richardson Lands, Kanata - Initial identification of NEA lands, 31October 2002, in lit. to S. Cunliffe, City of Ottawa, Ottawa.
[
Muncaster, B.] 2003. Environmental Impact Statement: Kanata Lakes North, Kanata Ward,City of Ottawa
(unpublished report for KNL Developments Inc.), Muncaster EnvironmentalPlanning, Ottawa.
Oldham, M. J. 1999
. Natural heritage resources of Ontario: Rare vascular plants (Thirdedition).
Natural Heritage Information Centre, Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources,Peterborough.
Oldham, M.J., W.D. Bakowsky and D.A. Sutherland. 1995
. Floristic quality assessmentsystem for southern Ontario
. Natural Heritage Information Centre, Peterborough.
Brunton Consulting Services
, Ottawa, Ontario Page 34Special Study Area NEA boundary
Ontario. 1994
. Ontario wetland evaluation system, Southern Manual (3rd Edition - revised).Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources, Toronto.
Ontario. 1997
. Provincial Policy Statement (Revised February 1, 1979). Queens Printer forOntario, Toronto.
Ontario. 1999
. Natural Heritage Reference Manual (revised). Ontario Ministry of NaturalResources, Toronto.
Ottawa. 2003a
. City of Ottawa Official Plan. Publication 1-28, City of Ottawa, Ottawa.Ottawa. 2003b
. Infrastructure Management Plan for the City of Ottawa Official Plan, City ofOttawa, Ottawa.
Ottawa-Carleton. 1997
. Candidate natural area evaluation. Planning and DevelopmentApprovals Branch Report 28-08, Region of Ottawa-Carleton, Ottawa.
Ottawa-Carleton. 1999.
Official Plan, Regional Municipality of Ottawa-Carleton;consolidation - April 1999
. Report 6-58, Region of Ottawa-Carleton, Ottawa.Riley, J. L. & P. Mohr. 1994
. The natural heritage of southern Ontario's natural landscapes.Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources, Aurora.
Robinson Consultants Inc. 2003
. Carp River Watershed/ Subwatershed Study Report (Draft).(Unpublished report for the City of Ottawa), Robinson Consultants, Ottawa.
White, D. J. , E. Haber & C. J. Keddy. 1993
. Invasive plants of natural habitats in Canada.Canadian Wildlife Service, Environment Canada, Ottawa.
Brunton Consulting Services
, Ottawa, Ontario Page 35Special Study Area NEA boundary
Appendix 1:
Natural environment implications of the Terry
Fox Drive alignment in the South March
Highlands, Kanata, Region of Ottawa-Carleton
(Brunton 2000)
Brunton Consulting Services
, Ottawa, Ontario Page 1Special Study Area NEA boundary
Natural environment implications of the Terry Fox Drive alignment
in the South March Highlands, City of Kanata, Region of Ottawa-
Carleton, Ontario
Daniel F. Brunton
September 2000
prepared for:
Planning and Development Services Branch,
Region of Ottawa-Carleton
Brunton Consulting Services
, Ottawa, Ontario Page 2Special Study Area NEA boundary
I
NTRODUCTIONA review and assessment of the natural environment implications of the proposed Terry Fox
Drive alignment between Richardson Side Road and Morgan's Grant subdivision in Kanata, Region of
Ottawa-Carleton, has been undertaken in light of the recommendations of Region of Ottawa-Carleton
Planning and Development Approvals Department (Tunnacliffe
in lit., 17 April 2000).This area ispresently designated as Natural Environment Area (B) in the Regional Official Plan (Region of Ottawa-
Carleton 1999) and, within Natural Environment System Strategy (NESS) Natural Area 539, contains a
wide variety of Regionally uncommon to rare natural environment features and values (Brunton 1997).
Selection of route 4-1 as the preferred route raises issues regarding environmental boundaries between
the route 4-1 and the existing urban boundary (First Line Road allowance).
The primary focus of this assessment, therefore, concerns the ecological implications for the
±115 ha area of NEA land
between the option 4-1 and 4-2 alignments which would be affected by theselection of alignment option 4-1 (hereafter, the 4-1/ 4-2 study area) (Figure 1). The present
investigation considers the following questions:
1) would the assessment of significance and recommended Natural Environment Areas be likely to
change significantly given the Terry Fox Drive Extension Alignment 4-1 ?
2) what factors or ecological functions within the significant areas, if any, are likely to take on
added importance given the Terry Fox Drive extension ?
To answer these questions, existing documentation was reviewed, particularly the 1992 natural
environment inventories of the South March Highlands and Kanata Lakes areas (Brunton 1992a;
1992b), and new field investigations were undertaken.
Brunton Consulting Services
, Ottawa, Ontario Page 3Special Study Area NEA boundary
Figure 1: The 4-1/ 4-2 study area (hatched area)
(route 4-1 (approx.) = dotted line)W
ORK PLANSubsequent to access approvals arranged by Region of Ottawa-Carleton personnel, field
investigations were undertaken throughout the 4-1/ 4-2 study area, with all affected boundaries being
examined directly, all major habitats visited, and potential natural corridors to other NEA areas
investigated. The area south of Richardson Side Road between the edge of the Hazeldean Escarpment
and First Line Road (i.e. by the communications tower) which had not previously been evaluated, was
also inventoried. Notes were recorded and voucher specimens made of known or potentially significant
native plant species. Faunal studies, particularly breeding bird and herptiles (amphibians and reptiles)
were also conducted in the 4-1/ 4-2 study area in the spring/ early summer to fill out the biological
information base on the area.
Brunton Consulting Services
, Ottawa, Ontario Page 4Special Study Area NEA boundary
Field examinations were conducted in spring, early summer and late summer (18 April, 29 May,
27 June, 4 July and 16 August 2000) in order to develop a fuller appreciation of seasonal variation
within the study area landscape. Several of these field investigations were undertaken in the company of
David Miller, Regional Planner, Planning and Development Approvals Branch, Region of Ottawa-
Carleton. Elements of the investigation included:
1.
the range of significant natural features and assets existing in the 4-1/ 4-2 study area, including:. an on-site proofing of existing documentation of representation vegetation, habitats and
species;
. the identification/ confirmation of study area habitats and features supporting local/
regional ecological functions;
2.
the boundaries of the area(s) required to enclose and protect sustainable representation of the natural assets of the4-1/ 4-2 study area, focusing on 1992 proposed NEA boundaries, including:
. the size and location of significant features and populations (individual species, breeding/
hibernation/ and/or feeding sites, etc.);
. size and extent of core representative natural area (including representative and
Regionally exceptional vegetation);
. size and extent of natural corridors and connections to ecologically contributing satellite
areas;
. on-site wetland resources and functional watercourse connections with adjacent drainage
systems;
3.
identification of linkage opportunities:. existing/ potential linkages between the proposed 4-1/ 4-2 study area protected area(s)
and neighbouring significant natural landscapes in the South March Highlands (Trillium
Woods, Natural Environment Area (B)).
4.
identification of assumptions and conditions concerning site restoration and impact mitigation along the Terry FoxDrive corridor:
. approaches in associated lands during and after construction.
From these inventory efforts and the review of existing documentation, ecological clarifications (as
noted below) were documented to assist in the resolution of outstanding planning issues.
Brunton Consulting Services
, Ottawa, Ontario Page 5
Ecological implications of the Terry Fox Drive alignment
Appendix 1: fauna Page 6S
TUDY AREA CONTEXTThe natural environment resources of the 4-1/ 4-2 study area are summarized in Tunnacliffe
inlit.
(17 April 2000) and discussed in greater detail within the natural environment inventories of theHighlands (Brunton 1992a; 1992b). The study area is situated at the southern end of the Precambrian
Shield bedrock outcrop known as the Carp Ridge, which extends from Kanata northwestward to the
Ottawa River in the Galetta area. This wetland-rich landform is unique in the Region of Ottawa-
Carleton, constituting a 'island' of rugged, heavily-glaciated, rocky, Gatineau Hills-like habitat on the
otherwise ±level, sedimentary lowlands. The end result is a landscape with severely limited agricultural
potential and substantial challenges to residential/ commercial development. It has remained largely
undeveloped, constituting one of the largest areas of continuous natural landscape in the City. The more
or less original natural state coupled with a uniquely complex geology has resulted in the southern
portion of the Carp Ridge (the South March Highlands) supporting a diverse and significant natural
biodiversity including Provincially and Regionally significant features and habitats (Brunton 1992a;
1992b; 1997).
Straddling the western rural/ urban boundary, the 4-1/ 4-2 study area constitutes a small portion
of a larger NEA (B) landscape surrounded by Business Park (south and east), Agricultural Resource
(west), General Urban (east) and NEA (A) (northeast) lands (Region of Ottawa-Carleton 1999).
Virtually all of the drainage in the 4-1/ 4-2 study area is westward down the Hazeldean
Escarpment slope and into the Carp River. Only the northeastern corner of the 4-1/ 4-2 study area drains
eastward, flowing into the South Branch of Shirleys Brook. Numerous small and/ or intermittent
drainage channels occur in the many depressions and ravines occurring in this rugged landscape. The
Watts Creek watershed commence immediately east of the First Line Road ROW in the southern half of
the area and there may be some cross-over in either direction. Aquatic systems except in the severely
disturbed drains immediately south of the railway corridor at the northern end of the study area seem to
be in good condition. There was little evidence of over-nutrification or serious non-native plant
infestations in these wetlands.
E
COLOGICAL RESOURCESAs noted in Tunnacliffe
in lit.(17 April 2000), most of the highland portion of the 4-1/ 4-2 studyarea is forested, although a substantial area of agricultural land (pasture) occurs in the southern portion.
On-site investigations confirm that the habitats and the extend of agricultural incursion remain
substantially as previously documented, although the area of deciduous swamp forest half way along
and west of the First Line Road is more extensive than was described previously. Figure 2 (below)
Brunton Consulting Services
, Ottawa, Ontario Page 6
Ecological implications of the Terry Fox Drive alignment
Appendix 1: fauna Page 7provides an up-dated version of a portion of the vegetation mapping included as Figure 9 in Brunton
(1992b) and Figure 8 (Brunton 1992a).The only conspicuous change along this eastern edge of the 4-1/
4-2 study area is the up-grading of power lines and poles (post- ice storm ?), with an accompanying
clearing of the ROW. Water levels substantially lower than 1992 levels were noted in the small Shield
wetlands in the area. This is believed to be indicative of the low-water conditions apparent in such
wetlands across the Region of Ottawa-Carleton in the late 1990s.
Vegetation
As noted above, field investigations during the present study confirmed the distribution and
composition of the 4-1/ 4-2 study area to be as described in the earlier South March Highlands natural
environment inventory (Brunton 1992b). In terms of the vegetation classification now employed in
southern Ontario by the Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources (Lee et al. 1998), seven major habitats
can be described here. They, with their appropriate vegetation codes noted (in brackets), are as follows:
Habitat 1:
Sugar Maple Deciduous Forest (FOD6) - ca. 45% of study area (Vegetation Types 7 and 8 ofBrunton 1992b);
- Sugar Maple dominated upland forest, particularly mature in the northern half of the study area; small
patches of Hardwood-Hemlock Mixed Forest (FOM3) occur throughout (probably reduced by selective
ogging) with inliers of swamp forest and bedrock outcrop (see below);
- most extensive vegetation type in the study area with diverse spring floristic development; relatively
undisturbed understory with few non-native plant species; good representation of breeding bird species
typical of extensive, ±mature deciduous forest (see Appendix 1);
Habitat 1:
Sugar Maple Deciduous Forest (FOD6) - ca. 45% of study area (Vegetation Types 7 and 8of Brunton 1992b);
- Sugar Maple dominated upland forest, particularly mature in the northern half of the study area; small
patches of Hardwood-Hemlock Mixed Forest (FOM3) occur throughout (probably reduced by selective
logging) with inliers of swamp forest and bedrock outcrop (see below);
- most extensive vegetation type in the study area with diverse spring floristic development; relatively
undisturbed understory with few non-native plant species; good representation of breeding bird species
typical of extensive, ±mature deciduous forest (see Appendix 1);
Habitat 2:
Hardwood-Hemlock (FOM3) and Poplar-White Pine Mixed Forest (FOM5) - ca. 15% ofstudy area (Vegetation Type 9 of Brunton 1992b);
Brunton Consulting Services
, Ottawa, Ontario Page 7
Ecological implications of the Terry Fox Drive alignment
Appendix 1: fauna Page 8- young deciduous (Red Maple, Sugar Maple, Trembling Aspen, White Ash) upland forest species in
complex mixture with Eastern Hemlock, White Pine and White Cedar; pure coniferous forest, swamp
forest and rock inliers occur (see below); predominantly in southern half of the study area and also south
of Richardson Side Road; relatively undisturbed understory with few non-native plant species; typical
representation of upland mixed and coniferous forest breeding birds noted (see Appendix 1);
Figure 2: vegetation types
Brunton Consulting Services
, Ottawa, Ontario Page 8
Ecological implications of the Terry Fox Drive alignment
Appendix 1: fauna Page 9Habitat 3:
Pine Coniferous Forest (FOC1) - ca. 5% of study area (Vegetation Type 10 of Brunton1992b);
- young to mature White Pine dominated forest, commonly grading into FOM5 mixed forest on drier,
rockier sites and FOM3 forest in mesic situations; concentrated in the southern half of the study area
(including mature grove known as 'Cathedral Grove'); typical representation of upland mixed and
coniferous forest breeding bird noted (see Appendix 1);
Habitat 4:
Deciduous Swamp Forest (SWD) - ca. 10% of study area (Vegetation Types 4 and 5 ofBrunton 1992b);
- young to mature Red Maple (SWD6) or Black Ash, Green Ash (SWD5) dominated wetlands with
White Elm, Yellow Birch, Balsam Fir, over organic deposits (SWD6) in bedrock depressions and
drainage channels across the study area; both standing water and ephemeral wetland areas present;
supports representative and uncommon breeding bird and herptile species (Appendix 1);
Habitat 5:
Thicket Swamp (SWT2) - <5% of study area (Vegetation Type 2 of Brunton 1992b);- small section of large willow-Red-osier Dogwood (SWT2-2, SWT2-5) thicket over mineral soil at
northeastern corner of study area; small areas of Mineral Meadow Marsh (MAM) east of the First line
ROW; low floristic and faunal diversity noted (Appendix 1);
Habitat 6:
Open Rock Barren (RBO) - ca. 20% of study area (Vegetation Type 'R' of Brunton 1992b);- dry, hot, open areas of gneissic bedrock with sparse associated vegetation along escarpment edge and
within forested uplands, with woodland and scrub 'islands' in areas of thin soil; supports Regionally
significant native vegetation but low faunal diversity (Appendix 1);
Habitat 7:
Meadow & scrub (CUM, CUT) - ca. 10% of study area (Vegetation Types 'S' and 'M' ofBrunton 1992b);
- small areas of regenerating farmland along lower portions of escarpment, with largest example in
southern portion of the study area; high faunal diversity, with representative breeding birds of fields and
woodland edges (Appendix 1) but severely limited natural floristic diversity.
Flora
As noted above, the vascular flora of the various 4-1/ 4-2 study area habitats was found to be a
continuation of the flora recorded in comparable habitats across the South March Highlands (Brunton
1992a; 1992b). The extent of unfragmented habitat and relative isolation of the site has encouraged
unusually large populations of some mature deciduous forest plant species such as Wild Leek (
Alliumtricoccum
). One additionally Regionally significant species was found in the study area during the
Brunton Consulting Services
, Ottawa, Ontario Page 9
Ecological implications of the Terry Fox Drive alignment
Appendix 1: fauna Page 10present investigation, that being a large population of Short-headed Sedge (
Carex brevior) (seeSignificant features, below).
Fauna
The breeding bird, mammal and herptile (amphibian and reptile) observations made during the
present field investigations are noted in Appendix 1. Species considered significant in the Region of
Ottawa-Carleton (cf. the preliminary lists of Brownell & Larson 1997) are also listed below.
Birds
: the diversity of breeding bird species includes a number which are typical of extensively forestedareas and thus are otherwise rare in the fragmented habitat which constitute much of the forested
portions of the Region of Ottawa-Carleton. These include Scarlet Tanager, Yellow-bellied Sapsucker,
Pileated Woodpecker and Wood Thrush. Several Regionally significant species were also noted:
Red-shouldered Hawk Black-throated Blue Warbler
Winter Wren Black-throated Green Warbler
Golden-winged Warbler Pine Warbler
All of these except the Golden-winged Warbler are typical of more mature, extensive upland or swamp
forest areas (Winter Wren in the latter); they were found sparingly in such habitat at the northern end of
the 4-1/ 4-2 study area. A singing male Golden-winged Warbler was heard and observed along the
margin of the extensive Thicket Swamp habitat at the north end of the study area on 29 May 2000. This
predominantly southern species has rarely been recorded breeding within the Region of Ottawa-
Carleton, previous breeding-season reports also being from the Carp Ridge area.
Amphibians & reptiles:
few herptiles were observed in the 4-1/ 4-2 study area, perhaps at least in partdue to the drought which apparently has negatively affected wetland species during the last three or four
years in the Region of Ottawa-Carleton. No salamander species were observed although potential
breeding pools were searched in mature hardwood forest habitat. Only in July were frogs noted with
frequency, these being the common Green Frog and Wood Frog.
Blanding's Turtles, considered Regionally Significant in the Region of Ottawa-Carleton in the
preliminary list of Brownell & Blaney (1997), were observed basking on a log in a small pond along the
First Line Road allowance in the Carp River watershed by the height-of-land with the Watts Creek
watershed. This ± 40 m long pond exhibited an unusual diversity of turtles, with Painted, Snapping and
Blanding's Turtles all being observed there on different occasions.
Brunton Consulting Services
, Ottawa, Ontario Page 10
Ecological implications of the Terry Fox Drive alignment
Appendix 1: fauna Page 11Mammals
: Relatively few mammal species were observed during the natural environment assessmentof the 4-1/ 4-2 study area. None are considered to be Regionally Significant (cf. preliminary list of
Brownell & Larson 1997). White-tailed Deer are common here, as they have been throughout the
western portion of the Region of Ottawa-Carleton since the early to mid 1990s (Broadfoot and Voigt
2000).
E
COLOGICAL FUNCTIONSThe contribution of the 4-1/ 4-2 study area to the ecological integrity of the larger NEA area within
which it is contained is an important elements of its overall significance and conservation value. The
following include the ecological attributes reviewed in assessing candidate NESS areas in this area of
the Region of Ottawa-Carleton 1997; Brunton 1997).
Representation and condition: being virtually continuous natural woodland, particularly one with a
diversity of upland and wetland habitats with little non-native intrusion, the study area contains an
extensive complex of common and rare habitats demonstrating a high degree of ecological integrity.
Over 80% of the study area supports Regionally rare vegetation types (Geomatics International 1993)
and represents a continuation of similar vegetation types in the NEA (B) area to the north and the NEA
(A) area to the east. As noted above, a number of the nesting bird species noted within the 4-1/ 4-2 study
area are successful breeders only in extensive woodlands. Fragmentation is rare here, with the First Line
Road ROW providing the only physical interruption crossing the length of the site. Agricultural
development intrudes from the west in some sections.
Natural biodiversity: the 4-1/ 4-2 study area is known to support a rich diversity of native plant and
animal species typical of superior examples of the habitats represented here (Brunton 1992b; 1997).
None of the habitats and only a few particular species, however, are unique to this area of the South
March Highlands (see Special features, below)
Hydrological values: The First Line Road ROW virtually forms the height of land between the Watts
Creek and Carp River watersheds, with drainage westward to the river being through a myriad of
ephemeral ponds, deciduous swamps and tiny drains. The northern half of the 4-1/ 4-2 study area with
deeper soils and more extensive water-filled depressions contributes most of the water retention and
regulatory function of the area.
Special features: a substantial number of Regionally significant plant and animal species are
documented from the habitats noted in the 4-1/ 4-2 study area, the mature upland deciduous forest
habitat in the northern half of the study area contributing the greatest number of these (Brunton 1992b).
Brunton Consulting Services
, Ottawa, Ontario Page 11
Ecological implications of the Terry Fox Drive alignment
Appendix 1: fauna Page 12Few of these are unique to the 4-1/ 4-2 study area in the South March Highlands. The largest Region of
Ottawa-Carleton population of the Regionally Rare Short-headed Sedge (
Carex brevior) found duringthe present inventory on the bedrock outcrops south of the Richardson Side Road, however, is one such
locally unique feature. Another was an apparently territorial and possibly breeding Regionally Rare
Golden-winged Warbler noted at the edge of the large thicket swamp at the north end of the study area.
Amongst the otherwise typical herptile species, a Regionally uncommon Blandings Turtle was noted in
a small woodland pond along the First Line Road adjacent to the Watts Creek watershed. This species
has also been observed both east and north of the study area in the South March Highlands (Brunton
1992a; 1992b).
Linkages: The western half of the study area forms a direct and continuous link with identical significant
habitat to the north. The southern half of the study area, however, protrudes into developed or slated-fordevelopment
lands and will be impacted on the west, south and east by agricultural and urban
development.
N
ATURAL ENVIRONMENT SIGNIFICANCE WITHIN THE SOUTH MARCH HIGHLANDSThe extensive escarpment and upland forest landscape in the northern half of the 4-1/ 4-2 study area
identified as areas 3 and 4 in Tunnacliffe
in lit.(17 April 2000) has been documented as being ofRegional and Provincial ecological significance (Brunton 1992b). That assessment was supported by
observations made during the present investigation. As noted above, few of the natural environment
assets of the 4-1/ 4-2 study area are unique to the area. The rich natural biodiversity of the area, and of
adjacent natural lands to the east and north, is directly related to the relatively high state of ecological
integrity in this area. That, in turn, is directly related to the contribution each portion of the Highlands
makes to each other - particularly to adjacent lands.
Identification and designation of areas of significant vegetation as being of conservation or
preservation priority is of only of academic interest if conditions are not in place to ensure that such
areas/ features/ values are naturally sustainable over the long term. The self-sustainability of an area is
dependent on characteristics such as natural diversity, hydrological condition and ecological integrity. A
major consideration regarding the sustainability of significant natural environment values within the 4-
1/ 4-2 study area, then, is the potential impact of development options on the linkage of this area with
other significant natural landscapes to the north and east. The effective ecological communication
between such areas is necessary for the movement of plant and animal species between them.
The 4-1/ 4-2 study area provides considerable ecological significance within the NEA (B) of which
it is a part (Brunton 1997), and the South March Highlands as a whole (Brunton 1992). Virtually all of
Brunton Consulting Services
, Ottawa, Ontario Page 12
Ecological implications of the Terry Fox Drive alignment
Appendix 1: fauna Page 13these floristic, faunal, habitat and ecological function values are replicated elsewhere in South March
Highlands NEA lands. While reduction of the size of the NEA in the 4-1/ 4-2 study area would reduce
the quantity of protected ecological assets, its ecological diversity would remain essentially unchanged.
Boundaries of representative area:
As noted above, few natural environment assets in the study area are unique. While a substantial
block of this area would have to be maintained intact if significant species, populations and functions
are to prevail, not all of the 4-1/ 4-2 study area is essential in that regard. Protection of the more
extensive escarpment edge and mature Sugar Maple dominated upland of the northern half will contain
the majority of significant values and contributions of the study area. This reduced area would align
along it's southern border with the NEA (A) land to the east (Figure 3). With the development of the
General Urban lands to the east of the First Line Road allowance the ecological integrity of the southern
half of the 4-1/ 4-2 study area will be impacted - possibly severely - by fragmentation and edge effect.
As noted above, however, the vegetation types and biodiversity assets of the southern half contribute
less to the conservation value of the larger NEA area than those of the northern portion. The ecological
assets of the southern half also largely represented in the southeastern section of the NEA (B) area
immediately west of the Second Line Road.
M
ITIGATION OF LOSS OF NEA SIGNIFICANCEAlthough ecological diversity will not be appreciably lessened by an NEA size reduction,
mitigation will be required if compensation for the resulting reduction in overall ecological value is to
be effective. The preferred route for mitigating the loss of such land would be the addition of
comparable quality natural lands elsewhere to the NEA. With additional natural lands unavailable to the
south or west, such compensation appears to be possible only to the east towards the 'Trillium Woods'
NEA(A) area along Goulbourn Forced Road. Since adjacent development will eventually isolate this
important site, the addition of protected land here would also secure an important ecological linkage
between the two NEAs.
Mitigation of a reduction in NEA area within the 4-1/ 4-2 study area could include:
1) up-grading the retained portion from NEA(B) to NEA(A) in keeping with the adjacent zoning
to the east and to better reflect its ecological significance;
Brunton Consulting Services
, Ottawa, Ontario Page 13
Ecological implications of the Terry Fox Drive alignment
Appendix 1: fauna Page 142) replacing lost NEA features and securing future ecological linkage functions between the
'Trillium Woods' NEA(A) and remaining NEA lands to the west through the addition of NEA
lands between them (i.e. north of the Trillium Woods east of the Second Line Road ROW and/
or west of the Trillium Woods south of the new Terry Fox Drive ROW);
3) closing Goulbourn Forced Road to vehicle traffic through the Trillium Woods NEA(A) and
encouraging natural revegetation of the roadbed;
4) relocating the transmission line from the First Line Road ROW to the Terry Fox Drive ROW
and permitting natural revegetation along the First Line Road ROW;
5) providing protection for Regionally significant floristic values found in Bedrock Barrens
habitat south and west of the communications tower south of Richardson Side Road.
T
ERRY FOX DRIVE MITIGATION CONSIDERATIONSConstruction of Terry Fox Drive along route 4-1 will involve a crossing of the Hazeldean
Escarpment. This will require substantial construction activity involving such activities are rock blasting
and earthfill. While the upland nature of much of this proposed roadway corridor reduces the threat to
drainage systems, the finished roadway would constitute:
1) a significant impediment to wildlife movement along the Hazeldean Escarpment, raising public
safety as well as wildlife mortality issues, and
2) increased fragmentation of the habitat.
Wildlife corridor impacts can be reduced by bridging rather than filling some steep/ deep sections
of the roadway at the escarpment crossing, permitting at least small mammals and herptiles to cross in
safety beneath the roadway. The fragmentation issue can be mitigated by maintaining the narrowest
possible roadway ROW (excluding paved shoulders or a wide central median, for example) and by
encouraging natural revegetation of roadway margins. Pre-construction salvage of on-site, native trees
and shrubs for later transplantation along the corridor can also reduce the advance of non-native weeds
which may degrade native biodiversity in adjacent forested areas.
Brunton Consulting Services
, Ottawa, Ontario Page 14
Ecological implications of the Terry Fox Drive alignment
Appendix 1: fauna Page 15Figure 3: proposed NEA reconfiguration
References
Broadfoot, J.D. and D.R. Voigt. 2000.
The status of deer herds in the western Greenbelt of theNational Capital and recommendations for their management
. [Unpublished report] National CapitalCommission, Ottawa.
Brownell, V. and C.S. Blaney. 1995.
An evaluation framework for natural areas in the RegionalMunicipality of Ottawa-Carleton, volume 2: Technical appendices
. Planning and Property ServicesDepartment Report 28-07, Regional Municipality of Ottawa-Carleton, Ottawa.
Brunton Consulting Services
, Ottawa, Ontario Page 15
Ecological implications of the Terry Fox Drive alignment
Appendix 1: fauna Page 16Brunton, D. F. 1992a.
Natural Environment Inventory of the Kanata Lakes Study Area, Kanata,Ontario
. [Report for Genstar Corp., Ottawa/ City of Kanata, Kanata], Daniel Brunton ConsultingServices, Ottawa.
Brunton, D. F. 1992b.
South March Highlands Study Area: Natural Environment Assessment. [Reportfor City of Kanata, Kanata], Daniel Brunton Consulting Services, Ottawa.
Brunton, D.F. 1997.
Summary Natural Area reports for Natural Areas west of the Rideau River (500series
). Planning and Development Approvals Department Report 28-08d, Regional Municipality ofOttawa-Carleton, Ottawa.
Brunton, D. F. 2000
. Natural environment implications of the Terry Fox Drive alignment in the SouthMarch Highlands, Kanata
. [draft] [Unpublished report for Planning and Development ApprovalsBranch, Region of Ottawa-Carleton], Daniel Brunton Consulting Services, Ottawa.
Cadman, M.D., P. F. Eagles and F. M. Helleiner (Compilers). 1987.
Atlas of the Breeding Birds ofOntario
. University of Waterloo Press, Waterloo.Geomatics International Inc. 1995.
Natural Environment Systems Strategy for the RegionalMunicipality of Ottawa-Carleton: Stage 1, Regional information base and ecological profile. Planning
and Property Department Report 28-02, Regional Municipality of Ottawa-Carleton, Ottawa.
Lee, H., W. Bakowsky, J. Riley, J. Bowes, M. Puddister, P. Uhlig and S. McMurry. 1998.
Ecological land classification for southern Ontario: first approximation and its application
. SCSS FieldGuide FG-02, Ontario Ministry of Natural Resource, North Bay.
Ontario Field Ornitholgists. 1997.
Field checklist of Ontario birds. Federation of Ontario Naturalists,Toronto.
Region of Ottawa-Carleton. 1997.
Candidate natural area evaluation. Planning and DevelopmentApprovals Branch Report 28-08, Regional Municipality of Ottawa-Carleton, Ottawa.
Region of Ottawa-Carleton. 1999.
Official Plan, Regional Municipality of Ottawa-Carleton;consolidation - April 1999.
Report 6-58, Regional Municipality of Ottawa-Carleton, Ottawa.Tunnacliffe, N.,
in lit. 17 April 2000. Terry Fox Drive environmental assessment study - planning anddevelopment implications (File 48-95-0104)
; report to Transportation Committee, Region of Ottawa-Carleton, Ottawa.
Brunton Consulting Services
, Ottawa, Ontario Page 16
Ecological implications of the Terry Fox Drive alignment
Appendix 1: fauna Page 17
Appendix 1 (Brunton 2000): Fauna observed in the 4-1/ 4-2 study
area
1)
BREEDING BIRDSThe following lists the breeding status of bird species observed between 18 April and 4 July 2000 in
the 4-1/ 4-2 study area. Breeding status was determined by the use of Ontario Breeding Bird Atlas
criteria (Cadman et al., 1987) as follows:
Possible breeding
: • species observed in its breeding season in suitable nesting habitat.• single male(s) present or call heard in suitable nesting habitat in breeding
season.
Probable breeding
: • pair observed in suitable nesting habitat in breeding season.• territorial behaviour observed on at least two days, a week or more apart, at
the same site.
• courtship display, including copulation or courtship feeding.
• visiting probable nest site.
• agitated behaviour of an adult.
• nest building or excavation of a nest hole.
Confirmed breeding
: • distraction display or injury feigning.• used nest or egg shells found.
• recently fledged or downy young found.
• adults carrying faecal sacs or food for young.
• adults leaving or entering apparently occupied nests.
• nest with young or eggs found.
The listing order and nomenclature follows standard Ontario checklist format (Ontario Field
Ornithologists 1997). Significant breeding species in the former Region of Ottawa-Carleton are
determined from the preliminary list in Brownell & Larson (1997). The names of these species are noted
in
bold and CAPITALS. If such species were noted in the study area but not as breeding species (e.g.flying over and not utilizing any study area habitat), however, their name is not bolded and no further
discussion of their status occurs.
Brunton Consulting Services
, Ottawa, Ontario Page 17
Ecological implications of the Terry Fox Drive alignment
Appendix 1: fauna Page 18Status codes employed for bird species observed during the 4-1/ 4-2 study area are as follows:
M migrant
* possible breeding species
. probable breeding species
. confirmed breeding species
X flying over
Species Young/
submature
upland
forest
Mature
upland
forest
Upland
scrub &
meadow
Swamp
forest
Thicket
swamp
No habitat
use
(flying over)
Great Blue Heron X
T
URKEY VULTURE XC
ANADA GOOSE XWood Duck *
American Black Duck X
Mallard X
R
ED-SHOULDEREDHAWK
*
Red-tailed Hawk
. *American Kestrel *
Ruffed Grouse
.Killdeer
American Woodcock *
Ring-billed Gull X
Rock Dove X
Mourning Dove
.Black-billed Cuckoo *
Ruby-throated
Hummingbird
*
Belted Kingfisher X
Yellow-bellied
Sapsucker
. .
Brunton Consulting Services
, Ottawa, Ontario Page 18
Ecological implications of the Terry Fox Drive alignment
Appendix 1: fauna Page 19Species Young/
submature
upland
forest
Mature
upland
forest
Upland
scrub &
meadow
Swamp
forest
Thicket
swamp
No habitat
use
(flying over)
Downy Woodpecker
. .Hairy Woodpecker *
Northern Flicker
. .Pileated Woodpecker
.Eastern Wood Pewee
. .Alder Flycatcher
.Least Flycatcher
. . .Eastern Phoebe *
Great Crested Flycatcher
. *Eastern Kingbird *
Tree Swallow
. .Barn Swallow *
Blue Jay
. * *American Crow
. *C
OMMON RAVEN XBlack-capped Chickadee
. . . .White-breasted Nuthatch *
.House Wren
.W
INTER WREN .Veery
.Wood Thrush
.American Robin
. . . .Gray Catbird
. .Brown Thrasher
.Cedar Waxwing
. .European Starling
. .Red-eyed Vireo
. .
Brunton Consulting Services,
Ottawa, Ontario Page 20
Ecological implications of the Terry Fox Drive alignment
Appendix 1: faunaSpecies Young/
submature
Mature
upland
Upland
scrub &
Swamp
forest
Thicket
swamp
No habitat
use
upland
forest
forest meadow (flying over)
G
OLDEN-WINGEDW
ARBLER.
Nashville Warbler
.Yellow Warbler
. .Chestnut-sided Warbler
. *Magnolia Warbler M
B
LACK-THROATED BLUEW
ARBLER*
B
LACK-THROATEDG
REEN WARBLER.
P
INE WARBLER .Blackpoll Warbler M M M
Black & White Warbler * *
American Redstart
. .Ovenbird
. .Northern Waterthrush
.Mourning Warbler *
Common Yellowthroat
. .Scarlet Tanager
.Rose-breasted Grosbeak
. .Chipping Sparrow
.Song Sparrow
. . .Swamp Sparrow
.White-throated Sparrow
.Bobolink *
Red-winged Blackbird *
. .Common Grackle *
.Brown-headed Cowbird
. . .
Brunton Consulting Services
, Ottawa, Ontario Page 20Special Study Area NEA boundary
Baltimore Oriole
Purple Finch *
American Goldfinch
. .E
VENING GROSBEAK *2)
AMPHIBIANS & REPTILESFew amphibian and reptile species were observed in the 4-1/ 4-2 study area. Observations
are listed below, with the names of significance species (cf. preliminary list of Brownell &
Larson 1997) denoted with
bold and CAPITALS.salamanders
none observed despite searching in April and May (for Blue-spottedSalamander, Red-backed Salamander in particular); suitable breeding
pool habitat in mature hardwood forest at the north end of the 4-1/ 4-2
study area searched 29 May.
American Toad rare - one noted at wetland edge.
Bullfrog rare - two observed in Blanding's Turtle pond (see below).
Gray Tree Frog heard uncommonly in upland deciduous forest habitat, particularly
mature forest habitat.
Green Frog common in woodland pools along the First line Road allowance in May;
uncommon by mid summer.
Wood Frog recently hatched young observed in pools in mature hardwood forest
habitat in the northern portion of the 4-1/ 4-2 study area.
Leopard Frog rarely observed along wetland edges in later summer.
B
LANDINGS TURTLE 2 large (7+ inches) animals sunning on a log in a woodland pool at 31G/5 262195 along the First line Road allowance on 29 May; not
observed subsequently.
Painted Turtle observed rare in woodland pools along the First line Road allowance.
Snapping Turtle one large individual observed 4 July in the Blanding's Turtle pool
(above).
Brunton Consulting Services
, Ottawa, Ontario Page 21Special Study Area NEA boundary
3)
MAMMALSThe relatively few mammals species noted during vegetation, floristic and breeding bird
studies are listed below.
Snowshoe Hare droppings noted regularly throughout woodlands.
Meadow Vole tunnels observed in open meadows.
Eastern Chipmunk common in woodlands.
Woodchuck burrows encountered in open areas and along woodland edges.
Beaver active dams maintained along several drainage channels.
Red Squirrel uncommon in woodlands, particularly in association with coniferous
forest.
White-tailed Deer common throughout; evidence of winter concentrations along bare rock
areas near coniferous cover is conspicuous immediately north of
Richardson Side Road; tracks, trails, pellet groups and browse are
evident throughout.
Striped Skunk tracks noted along wetland edges.
Porcupine animals or evidence of feeding noted rarely.
Raccoon tracks noted along wetland edges; recently born young observed south
of Richardson Side Road.
Red Fox tracks observed near Richardson Side Road.
Coyote droppings noted south of Richardson Side Road; reported to be common
in and about the study area (
fide L. Richardson).
Brunton Consulting Services
, Ottawa, Ontario Page 22Special Study Area NEA boundary
Appendix 2:
Native vascular plants of the
Special Study Area
Brunton Consulting Services
, Ottawa, Ontario Page 1Special Study Area NEA boundary
Special StudyArea vascular flora
Data for the following list of native vascular plants were primarily derived from existing
documentation (Brunton 1992a; Brunton 1992b) as well as from field observations on 4 June
2004 and 9 June 2004 and from miscellaneous 1992 - 2003 collections documented in the
herbarium of D. F. Brunton.
The species are listed alphabetically by genus. Regional status (abundance or rarity in the
City of Ottawa) is taken from the draft annotated list of the vascular flora of Ottawa (Brunton,
inlit
.). The Co-efficient of Conservation rating for each species is taken from Oldham et al. (1995).Species Sites/ status in Ottawa
Co-efficient ofConservation
Abies balsamea
(L.) Mill. Common 5Acer rubrum
L. Common 4Acer saccharinum
L. Common 5Acer saccharum
Marsh. Common 4Achillea millefolium
L. Common 0Actaea pachypoda
Ell. Common 5Actaea rubra
(Ait.) Willd. Common 5Adiantum pedatum
L. Uncommon 7Ageratina altissima
(L.) King & Robins.(
Eupatorium rugosum Houtt.)Common 5
Agrimonia gryposepala
Wallr. Common 2Agrostis scabra
Willd. Uncommon 6Agrostis stolonifera
L.(
A. alba L.; A. palustris Huds.)Common 0
Alisma triviale
Pursh Common 3Allium tricoccum
Ait. Uncommon 7Alnus incana
(L.) Moench ssp. rugosa (Duroi) Clausen(
A. rugosa (Du Roi) Spreng.)Common 6
Ambrosia artemisiifolia
L. Common 0Amelanchier arborea
(Michx. f.) Fern. ssp. laevis(Wieg.) McKay
(
A. laevis Wieg.)Common 5
Amphicarpaea bracteata
(L.) Fern. Common 4Anaphalis margaritacea
(L.) Benth. & Hook. Common 3
Brunton Consulting Services
, Ottawa, Ontario Page 2Special Study Area NEA boundary
Species Sites/ status in Ottawa
Co-efficient ofConservation
Anemone acutiloba
(DC) Lawson(
Hepatica acutiloba DC)Common 6
Anemone canadensis
L. Common 3Anemone virginiana
L. (s.l.)(incl.
A. riparia auct., non Fern.; A. virginica L. var. cylindroideaBoivin) )
Common 4
Antennaria howellii
E. Greene ssp. canadensis(E.Greene) Bayer
(
A. canadensis E. Greene)Uncommon 2
Apocynum androsaemifolium
L. Common 3Aquilegia canadensis
L. Common 5Aralia nudicaulis
L. Common 4Arisaema triphyllum
(L.) Schott Common 5Asarum canadense
L. Common 6Asclepias incarnata
L. Common 6Asclepias syriaca
L. Common 0Aster cordifolius
L.(
Symphyotrichum cordifolium (L.) Nesom.)Common 5
Aster lanceolatus
Willd. (s.str.)(
A. simplex Willd.; Symphyotrichum lanceolatum (Willd.) Nesom.)Common 3
Aster macrophyllus
L.(
Eurybia macrophylla (L.) Cass.)Common 5
Aster novae-angliae
L..(
Virgulus novae-angliae (L.) Rev. & Keen)Common 2
Athyrium filix-femina
(L.) Roth var. angustum (Willd.)Lawson
Common 4
Betula alleghaniensis
Britt. Common 6Betula papyrifera
Marsh. Common 2Bidens cernuus
L. Common 2Bidens frondosus
L. Common 3Boehmeria cylindrica
(L.) Sw. Uncommon 4Botrychium virginianum
(L.) Sw. Common 5Brachyelytrum erectum
(Schreb. ex Sprengel) Beauv.var.
glabratum (Vasey ex. Millsp.) Koyama & KowanoUncommon [16] 7
Caltha palustris
L. Common 8Campanula rotundifolia
L. Common 7Cardamine diphylla
(Michx.) Wood(
Dentaria diphylla Michx.)Uncommon 7
Brunton Consulting Services
, Ottawa, Ontario Page 3Special Study Area NEA boundary
Species Sites/ status in Ottawa
Co-efficient ofConservation
Carex albursina
Sheld. Uncommon [15] 7Carex arctata
Boott Common 5Carex bebbii (
Bailey) Fern. Common 3Carex blanda
Dew. Common 3Carex bromoides
Willd. Common 7Carex cephaloidea
(Dew.) Dew. Uncommon [13] 6Carex communis
Bailey Common 6Carex crinita
Lam. Common 6Carex deweyana
Schw. Common 6Carex gracillima
Schw. Common 4Carex granularis
Willd. Common 3Carex hirtifolia
Mack. Uncommon [15] 5Carex intumescens
Rudge Common 6Carex peckii
Howe Common 6Carex pedunculata
Willd. Common 5Carex plantaginea
Lam. Uncommon 7Carex radiata
(Wahl.) Small(
C. rosea, auct., non Willd.)Common 4
Carex rosea
Schkuhr ex Willd.(
C. convoluta Mack.)Common 5
Carex scoparia
Willd. RS (7*): Carp Ridge*; South MarchHighlands; Whelan Park; Mer Bleue CA,
South Gloucester; Mud Pond; Town Centre
Woods*.
5
Carex sparganioides
Willd. Uncommon [11] 5Carex sprengelii
Dew. ex Sprengel Common 6Carex tenera
Dew. Common 4Carex tuckermanii
Boott ex Dew. Common 7Carex vulpinoidea
Michx. Common 3Carpinus caroliniana
Walt. Common (local) 6Carya cordiformis
(Wang) K. Koch Common (local) 6Caulophyllum giganteum
(Farw.) Loc. & Black.(
C. thalictroides var. giganteum Farw.)Common 6
Brunton Consulting Services
, Ottawa, Ontario Page 4Special Study Area NEA boundary
Species Sites/ status in Ottawa
Co-efficient ofConservation
Celastrus scandens
L. Common 3Chelone glabra
L. Uncommon 7Chenopodium simplex
(Torr.) Raf.( =
C. gigantospermum Aellen; C. hybridum auct., non L.)Common 0
Cicuta bulbifera
L. Common 5Circaea lutetiana
L. ssp. canadensis (L.) Asch. &Magnus
Common 3
Claytonia caroliniana
Michx. Common 7Clematis virginiana
L. Common 5Clintonia borealis
(Ait.) Raf. Common 7Conyza canadensis
(L.) Cronq. Common 0Cornus alternifolia
L.f. Common 6Cornus sericea
L.(
C. stolonifera Michx.)Common 2
Corydalis sempervirens
(L.) Pers. Common 7Corylus cornuta
Marsh. Common 5Crataegus chrysocarpa
Ashe (s.str.)(incl.
C. aboriginum Sarg)Common 4
Cystopteris bulbifera
(L.) Bernh. Common 5Cystopteris tenuis
(Michx.) Desv.(
C. fragilis (L.) Bernh. var. mackayii Lawson)Common 6
Danthonia spicata
(L.) Beauv. ex R. & S. Common 5Dicentra canadensis
(Goldie) Walp. Common 7Dicentra cucullaria
(L.) Bernh. Common 6Diphasiastrum digitatum
(A. Br.) Holub(
Lycopodium digitatum A. Br.; L. flabelliforme (Fern.) Blanch.)Common 5
Dirca palustris
L. Common (local) 7Dryopteris carthusiana
(Vill.) Fuchs(
D. spinulosa (Muell.) Watt)Common 5
Dryopteris cristata
(L.) A. Gray Uncommon 7Dryopteris intermedia
(Muhl.) A. Gray Common 5Dryopteris marginalis
(L.) A. Gray Common 5Echinochloa wiegandii
(Fassett) McNeill & Dore(
E. pungens (Poir.) Fass. var. wiegandii Fass.)Common 4
Eleocharis acicularis
(L.) R.& S. Common 5
Brunton Consulting Services
, Ottawa, Ontario Page 5Special Study Area NEA boundary
Species Sites/ status in Ottawa
Co-efficient ofConservation
Eleocharis obtusa
(Willd.) Schultes Common 5Eleocharis palustris
(L.) R.& S.(incl.
E. smallii Britt.)Common 6
Elodea canadensis
Michx. Common 4Elymus hystrix
L.(
Hystrix patula Moench)Uncommon 5
Epifagus virginiana
(L.) Bart. Common 6Epilobium angustifolium
L. Common 3Epilobium ciliatum
Raf. (s.str.)(
E. adenocaulon Haussk.; E. glandulosum, auct.)Common 3
Equisetum arvense
L. Common 0Equisetum hyemale
L. Common 2Equisetum sylvaticum
L. Common 7Erechtites hieracifolia
(L.) Raf. Uncommon 2Erigeron annuus
(L.) Pers. Common 0Erigeron philadelphicus
L. Common 1Erigeron strigosus
Muhl. Common 0Erythronium americanum
Ker. Common 5Eupatorium maculatum
L. Common 3Eupatorium perfoliatum
L. Common 2Euthamia graminifolia
(L.) Nutt.(
Solidago graminifolia (L.) Salisb.)Common 2
Fagus grandifolia
Ehrh. Common 6Fallopia cilinodis
(Michx.) Holub(
Polygonum cilinode Michx.)Common 2
Fragaria virginiana
Duchesne Common 2Fraxinus americana
L. Common 4Fraxinus nigra
Marsh. Common 7Fraxinus pennsylvanica
Marsh. Common 3Galium aparine
L. Uncommon [11] 4Galium circaezans
Michx.(incl.
G. lanceolatum Torr.)Uncommon [17] 7
Galium palustre
L. Common 5Galium triflorum
Michx. Common 4
Brunton Consulting Services
, Ottawa, Ontario Page 6Special Study Area NEA boundary
Species Sites/ status in Ottawa
Co-efficient ofConservation
Gaultheria procumbens
L. Common 6Geranium bicknellii
Britt. Uncommon [12] 5Geum aleppicum
Jacq. Common 2Geum canadense
Jacq. Common 3Glyceria striata
(Lam.) A. Hitchc. Common 3Gymnocarpium dryopteris
(L.) Newm. Common 7Hackelia virginiana
(L.) Johnst. Uncommon [20] 5Huperzia lucidula
(Michx.) Trev.(
Lycopodium lucidulum Michx.)Common 7
Hydrophyllum virginianum
L. Common 6Ilex verticillata
(L.) A. Gray Common 5Impatiens capensis
Meerb. Common 4Iris versicolor
L. Common 5Juglans cinerea
L. Common 6Juncus bufonius
L. Common 1Juncus effusus
L. (s.str.) Common 4Juncus tenuis
Willd. Common 0Juniperus communis
L. Common 4Laportea canadensis
(L.) Wedd. Common 6Leersia oryzoides
(L.) Sw. Common 3Lemna minor
L. Common 2Lobelia inflata
L. Common 3Lonicera canadensis
Bart. ex Marsh. Common 6Lonicera dioica
L. Uncommon 5Luzula acuminata
Raf. RS (5+): South March Highlands (3+populations); Loggers Way Woods; Carp
Hills; French Hill Creek
.6
Lycopodium clavatum
L. Common 6Lycopodium dendroideum
Michx. Common 7Lycopus americanus
Muhl. Common 4Brunton Consulting Services
, Ottawa, Ontario Page 7Special Study Area NEA boundary
Species Sites/ status in Ottawa
Co-efficient ofConservation
Lycopus uniflorus
Michx. Common 5Lysimachia terrestris
(L.) BSP. Common 6Maianthemum canadense
Desf. (s.str.) Common 5Maianthemum racemosum
(L.) Link(
Smilacina racemosa (L.) Desf.)Common 4
Matteuccia struthiopteris
(L.) Todaro Common 5Medeola virginiana
L. Common (local) 7Mimulus ringens
L. Common 6Mitella diphylla
L. Common 5Moehringia lateriflora
(L.) Fenzl(
Arenaria lateriflora L.)RS
(10+): Shirleys Bay (Watts Creek);Crystal Bay (Beatty Point); Britannia CA;
Champlain Bridge ESA; 3 km NE of
Sarsfield; Stony Swamp CA; Greens Creek
CA (several); Long Swamp; Carlsbad Springs
SW; South Gloucester.
7
Monotropa uniflora
L. Common 6Muhlenbergia mexicana
(L.) Trin. Common 1Oenothera biennis
L. Common ? [taxonomic problem] 0Onoclea sensibilis
L. Common 4Oryzopsis asperifolia
Michx. Common 6Oryzopsis racemosa
(Sm.) Ricker ex Hitchc. Uncommon [17] 7Osmorhiza claytonii
(Michx.) Clarke Common 5Osmunda cinnamomea
L. Common 7Osmunda regalis
L. Common 7Ostrya virginiana
(Mill.) K. Koch Common 4Oxalis stricta
L.(
O. europea Jord.; O. fontana Bunge)Common 0
Panicum acuminatum
Sw. Ell. var. fasciculatum (Torr.)Lelong
(
P. lanuginosum Ell. var. fasciculatum Fern.)Common 2
Panicum capillare
L. Common 0Panicum linearifolium
Scribn. Common (local) 8Panicum philadelphicum
Bernh. ex Trin. Uncommon (locally abundant) 8Parthenocissus vitacea
(Knerr) Hitchc. Common 3
Brunton Consulting Services
, Ottawa, Ontario Page 8Special Study Area NEA boundary
Species Sites/ status in Ottawa
Co-efficient ofConservation
Persicaria hydropiper
(L.) Opiz(
Polygonum hydropiper L.)Common 4
Persicaria pensylvanica
(L.) J. K. Small(
Polygonum pensylvanicum L.)Common 3
Phegopteris connectilis
(Michx.) Watt Common (local) 8Phryma leptostachya
L. Uncommon 6Picea glauca
(Moench) Voss Common 6Pinus strobus
L. Common 4Plantago rugelii
Ducne. Common 1Poa saltuensis
Fern. & Wieg. RS (6): South March Highlands; BuchansBay W; Stony Swamp CA; Carlsbad Springs
SW; South Gloucester; DND Woods.
7
Polygonatum pubescens
(Willd.) Pursh Common 5Polypodium virginianum
L. Common 6Polystichum acrostichoides
(Michx.) Schott Uncommon 5Populus balsamifera
L. Common 4Populus grandidentata
Michx. Common 5Populus tremuloides
Michx. Common 2Prenanthes altissima
L. Common 5Prunus serotina
Ehrh. Common 3Prunus virginiana
L. Common 2Pteridium aquilinum
(L.) Kuhn var. latiusculum (Desv.)Underw.
Common 2
Pyrola elliptica
Nutt. Common 5Quercus macrocarpa
Michx. Common 5Quercus rubra
L. Common 6Ranunculus abortivus
L. Common 2Ranunculus recurvatus
Poir. Uncommon 4Rhus hirta
(L.) Sudworth(
R. typhina L.)Common 1
Ribes cynosbati
L. Common 4Ribes glandulosum
Grauer Common 6Rorippa palustris
(L.) Bess. ssp. fernaldiana (Butt. &Abbe) Jonsell
Common 3
Brunton Consulting Services
, Ottawa, Ontario Page 9Special Study Area NEA boundary
Species Sites/ status in Ottawa
Co-efficient ofConservation
Rubus allegheniensis
Porter Common 2Rubus odoratus
L. Common 3Rubus pubescens
Raf. Common 4Rubus strigosus
Michx.(
R. idaeus L. var. strigosus (Michx.) Max.)Common 0
Rudbeckia hirta
L. Common 0Sagittaria latifolia
Willd. Common 4Salix bebbiana
Sarg. Common 4Salix lucida
Muhl. Common 5Salix petiolaris
Sm. Common 3Sambucus racemosa
L. ssp. pubens (Michx.) House(
S. pubens Michx.)Common 5
Sanguinaria canadensis
L. Common 5Sanicula marilandica
L. Common 5Saxifraga virginiensis
Michx. Common 6Schizachne purpurascens
(Torr.) Swallen Common 6Scirpus atrovirens
Willd. Common 3Scirpus cyperinus
(L.) Kunth(
S. atrocinctus Fern.)Common 4
Scirpus microcarpus
Presl.(
S. rubrotinctus Fern.)Uncommon 4
Scutellaria galericulata
L. Common 6Scutellaria lateriflora
L. Common 5Senecio pauperculus
Muhl. Common 7Sisyrinchium montanum
Greene Common 4Sium suave
Walt. Common 4Solanum ptycanthum
Dunal(
S. americanum, auct.)Common 3
Solidago altissima
L.(
S. canadensis L. var. scabra (Muhl.) T. & G.)Common 1
Solidago caesia
L. Uncommon 5Solidago canadensis
L. Common 1Solidago flexicaulis
L. Uncommon 6Solidago hispida
Muhl.(
S. bicolor L. var. concolor T. & G.)Uncommon 7
Brunton Consulting Services
, Ottawa, Ontario Page 10Special Study Area NEA boundary
Species Sites/ status in Ottawa
Co-efficient ofConservation
Solidago juncea
Ait. Common 3Solidago nemoralis
Ait. Common 2Solidago rugosa
Mill. Common 4Sparganium emersum
Rehm.(
S. chlorocarpum Rydb.)Common 5
Spiraea alba
Du Roi (s.str.) Common 3Stellaria longifolia
Muhl. RS (4): Mer Bleue CA; Albion Weltand;South Gloucester, South March Highlands.
2
Symphoricarpos albus
(L.) Blake Uncommon (locally abundant) 7Taxus canadensis
Marsh. Common 7Thalictrum dioicum
L. Common 5Thelypteris palustris
(Salisb.) Schott Common 5Tiarella cordifolia
L. Common 6Tilia americana
L. Common 4Toxicodendron rydbergii
(Rydb.) Greene(
Rhus radicans L. var. rydbergii (Sm.) McNeill)Common 0
Trientalis borealis
Raf. Common 6Trillium erectum
L. Common 6Trillium grandiflorum
(Michx.) Salisb. Common 5Triosteum aurantiacum
Bickn. (s.str.)(
T. perfoliatum L. var. aurantiacum (Bickn.) Wieg.)Uncommon 7
Tsuga canadensis
L. Common 7Typha latifolia
L. Common 3Ulmus americana
L. Common 3Urtica dioica
L. ssp. gracilis (Ait.) Selander Common 2Uvularia grandiflora
Sm. Common (local) 6Vaccinium angustifolium
Ait. Common 6Vaccinium myrtilloides
Michx. Common 7Verbena hastata
L. Common 4Verbena urticifolia
L. Uncommon [13] 4Veronica peregrina
L. ssp. xalapensis (Kunth) Penn. Uncommon [15] 7Viburnum nudum
L. var. cassinoides (L.) Torr. & Gray(
V. cassinoides L.)Uncommon 7
Brunton Consulting Services
, Ottawa, Ontario Page 11Special Study Area NEA boundary
Species Sites/ status in Ottawa
Co-efficient ofConservation
Viola canadensis
L. Common (local) 6Viola macloskeyi
Lloyd ssp. pallens (Banks) Baker Common 6Viola pubescens
Ait.(incl.
V. eriocarpa Schwein.)Common 5
Viola sororia
Willd. (s.str.)( =
V. septentionalis, auct.)Common 4
Waldsteinia fragarioides
(Michx.) Tratt. Common 5Woodsia ilvensis
(L.) R. Br. RS (2+): Stony Swamp CA (2 populations);South March Highlands (3+ populations).
8
CC Aggregate: 1197
Total Species Regionally Significant
(incl. Uncommon)
High CC (>6) Average
Co. of Cons.
EI rating
268 18 39 4.46 High
Brunton Consulting Services
, Ottawa, Ontario Page 12Special Study Area NEA boundary
Appendix 3:
NEA boundary definition field notes
(4 June 2004)
Brunton Consulting Services
, Ottawa, Ontario Page 1Special Study Area NEA boundary
NEA boundary definition field notes (4 June 2004)
(field survey: D. Brunton, S. Murphy)
- commencing immediately west of First Line ROW at southeast edge of ‘Compensation Lands’
(CL) at northeast corner of Richardson’s pasture;
- boundary at corner of First Line ROW at southeast edge of CL = MK 77 [
45o 19.362' N 75o56.366' W
[NAD 84]];following fence-line southwestward along edge of forest [upslope of CL marking tape] to ensure
continuous natural habitat captured;
Richardson pasture at south side of Compensation Lands (4 June 2004)
- no-net-loss of significant features/ functions buffer extends outwards from edge of continuous
forest;
not a geotechnical buffer (e.g. unstable slopes) but an ecological buffer (transition zone);- development or activities within buffer acceptable if not compromising significant features/
functions of NEA;
- 50 m buffer appropriate for boundary section adjacent PSW, reflecting extra level of ecological
sensitivity of South March Highlands landscapes;
- 50 m ‘adjacent lands" area recommended by OPPS for adjacent lands by PS woodlands and
wildlife habitat; 50 m no-net-impact adjacent lands zone minimum required to satisfy ecological
and policy conservation requirements.
- exceptionally large Butternut (
Juglans cinerea) with 86 cm dbh at edge of outcrop in pasture at45
o 19.291' N 75o 56.402' W [NAD 84];
Brunton Consulting Services
, Ottawa, Ontario Page 2Special Study Area NEA boundary
Exceptionally large Butternut tree at north end of Richardson’s pasture (4 June 2004)
- NEA border at Richardson cattle coral: MK 78 [
45o 19.332' N 75o 56.422' W [NAD 84]]; follows edgeof woods by PSW cliff; marked border dips towards wetland edge (excluding severely disturbed,
discontinuous habitat damaged by intensive grazing; non-native veg predominates)
- to large White Pines [
45o 19.275' N 75o 56.524' W [NAD 84]]; habitat to south transformed fromnatural condition by severe grazing;
- to informal farm debris dump [
45o 19.265' N 75o 56.549' W [NAD 84]]; lines dips through old carttrack under scattered White Cedar and over earth-fill to end of edge by north track across front
of PSW (across outlet);
- by track at ca. Mid-point across PSW (under Silver Maple) [
45o 19.239' N 75o 56.687' W [NAD 84]];track through wetland and forms western edge of continuous Silver Maple swamp forest;
superior example of Silver Maple swamp forest, though with an abundance of Canary-grass
(
Phalaris arundinacea) below canopy - still predominantly natural;
Brunton Consulting Services
, Ottawa, Ontario Page 3Special Study Area NEA boundary
west edge of Compensation Lands swamp forest (4 June 2004)
- northwest corner of CL [
45o 19.327' N 75o 56.787' W [NAD 84]]; at entrance to Northern Field(immediately north of PSW and CL);
- line crosses disturbed wetland at corner but follows (northeastward along forest edge, following
natural (south) side of old track and excluding planted White Pine; closely follows CL flagging
here;
- back southeast of North Field [
45o 19.419' N 75o 56.699' W [NAD 84]] at edge of outcrop andcontinuous natural forest to east;
North Field overwhelmingly non-native, dominated by dense Kentucky Bluegrass (
Poapratensis
) with Cinquefoil (Potentilla argentea), Curled Dock (Rumex crispus) in thin soil overgranitic bedrock (outcropping); heavily pastured and almost totally transformed from a natural
condition;
- NEA boundary runs northward across back (east end) of North Field outcrop along edge of
continuous natural forest to Lot 8 southern fenceline;
- Mk 82 [lat & long omitted here ] - northeast corner of North Field at Lot 8 southern fenceline;
- follows Lot 8 southern fenceline southwestward omitted severely disturbed scrub and young
(planted White Pine) in grazed outcrop area;
Brunton Consulting Services
, Ottawa, Ontario Page 4Special Study Area NEA boundary
Brunton Consulting Services
, Ottawa, Ontario Page 5
Westward across transformed outcrop (pasture) north of Compensation Lands
- MK 84 [
45o 19.403' N 75o 56.843' W [NAD 84]] - northwest corner of North Field and intersectionwith electric fence field to north;
- NEA border follows north along fenceline above electric fence west of ‘Haunted House’ site;
natural habitat around degraded outcrop by Haunted House site forms narrow band adjacent to
electric fence in southern half of remaining NEA border segment to Terry Fox Road ROW;
- NEA boundary to continue along fence to Terry Fox Road ROW
including degraded HauntedHouse outcrop (outcrop maintains substantial native vegetation component which can be
foundation of restoration; removal would reduce extent of high priority Interior Forest
commencing immediately east of Haunted House outcrop.