1 - Purpose of this presentation is to provide an overview of - - PDF document

1

2

• Purpose of this presentation is to provide an overview of monitoring activities

in Rattray Marsh and the lower reaches of Sheridan Creek

• Will focus on data collected through CVC’s watershed-scale IWMP, including

type of data we collect, results and trends

• Information to be presented is not meant to be all encompassing – CVC

collects a wide variety of data in and around the marsh through a number of programs, partnerships and other initiatives

3 Similar to the annual physicals we take at the doctors’ office. We may feel and look good, but if we get checked regularly, we hope to diagnose an issue early

• n and treat it before its too late.

CVC now has over 10 years of data at several sites across the watershed. This gives us a powerful dataset to start to analyze, integrate and make conclusions and potentially recommendations at a landscape scale as well potentially at a site level.

Blue – instream Darker green – land-based Hatched – complementary things we monitor to help explain what we’re seeing in the other attributes. 11/21/2014 4

5 This represents current land use, however we must not forget historical changes over the last two centuries also: before european settlement, dominated by forest and wetlands, then clearing for agriculture and dams. Since 1950s, CRW has seen extensive restoration efforts by LO, Municipalities and other agencies to reverse this forest decline. Note: Lower Watershed – expectation of some degradation in our results due to urban land use

6 Before getting into the results, note that Rattray Marsh is part of a Centre for Biodiversity Includes the Conservation area, but also extends to include Turtle Creek as well as…

• CVC is in the process of developing a Credit River Watershed Natural Heritage

System (currently draft and undergoing stakeholder consultation). The system is made up of important mapped natural features and areas that CVC is committed to working to protect, enhance and restore.

• A key component of the natural heritage system is Centres for Biodiversity.
• CoBs are landscapes that contain the best representative aggregations of

natural features such as woodlands, wetlands, aquatic habitat or open country habitat associated with the Credit River watershed’s major physiographic regions

• The Rattray Marsh-Turtle Creek Centre for Biodiversity represents the top 1% in

terms of area of a single habitat patch in Southern half of the watershed

• Contains records for approximately 377 floral species
• Recorded use by approximately 319 faunal species including 29 species at risk

(21 birds, three reptiles, three mammals, one plant and one insect)

7

• Have been monitoring water quality in Sheridan Creek as it enters Rattray

Marsh since 1976 through a partnership with the Ontario Ministry of the Environment

• Collect monthly samples, year round – representative of conditions across all

seasons.

• WQI – gives overall rating of general water quality for nutrients and metals;

generates a number between 0 and 100 (0=poor; 100=excellent)

• Sheridan Cr ranks as “Marginal” (or “Poor” according to 2013 results). Similar

to other urban tributaries

• Parameters that do not meet water quality guidelines include: phosphorus;

metals such as aluminum, copper and zinc; and chloride – commonly associated with urban runoff.

8

• Chlorides – commonly associated with urban watersheds due to winter road

salt application

• In Sheridan Creek, chlorides concentrations are well above the water quality

guideline

• have been increasing since the start of monitoring
• Higher in winter but also elevated in the summer groundwater contributions

accumulation of chlorides from road salt

• Efforts to reduce chlorides – City of Mississauga begun using treated salt

rather than sand-salt mixture (reduces chlorides by 50%) – expect to see this reflected through a reduction in chloride conc in stream

• GO station stuff
• New Real-time water quality station installed fall 2013.

9 = aquatic insects, worms, snails and other related organisms that live on a stream bottom

• Commonly used as indicators of water and habitat quality – species have

varying tolerances to pollution

• In Sheridan Creek, benthic community is comprised of mainly pollution-

tolerant organisms such as sow bugs, scuds and net-spinning caddisflies

• Results are similar to other urban tributaries
• Some monitoring in marsh – different community to what we find in-stream –

expect habitat conditions to improve with restoration, therefore improvement in benthic community

10

• Electrofishing in Sheridan Creek for more than 10 years
• 12 species of fish captured. Common species include: Creek Chub, Fathead

Minnow and Longnose Dace

• White Sucker, not caught in high numbers in CVC’s monitoring efforts, is

abundant in this area during its spring spawning period

• Many of the fish species in Sheridan Creek are not typical of urban streams,

e.g. Longnose Dace only typical of urban streams with high DO and clean riffles/gravels, Emerald Shiner and Lake Chub. Golden Shiner is uncommon across the watershed.

11 CVC uses an Index of Biotic Integrity (IBI) score to assess the health of the fish

• community. The IBI is based on a sensitivity ranking of individual species

combined with total weight, or biomass density (per square-metre of stream reach). The fish community in Sheridan Creek at Rattray Marsh ranks “Poor” and the IBI has remained stable at Sheridan Creek over the years. The poor ranking is similar to the results at other stations sampled in the Lower watershed. The presence of certain unique species in Sheridan Creek is encouraging.

• restoration efforts to control invasive carp and increase marsh depth will

benefit the resident fish community by allowing regrowth of native wetland vegetation (including submergent plants) and repopulation of native fish species.

12

• includes vegetation and amphibian monitoring
• Since 2004, four frog species have been detected at the wetland monitoring

plot: American Toad, Green Frog, and Northern Leopard Frog and Wood Frog (one detection each)

• Annual results indicate low species richness (no frogs detected in 2013 or

2014) – this is consistent with other wetland plots in the Lower watershed

• Presence of Wood Frog is encouraging - indicative of good forest habitat and

suggests Rattray Marsh has the potential to provide habitat for more sensitive species.

• Veg community dominated by weedy or non-native species. However, no new

invading species have moved into the plot in the past eight years.

• Other wetland plots in the Lower watershed have similar findings
• Positive: Water Smartweed is found at the plot and is a Species of

Conservation Interest.

13 Several initiatives in/around Rattray Marsh

• Restoration efforts (sed removal, invasive species removal, etc)
• Salt management initiatives – e.g. City of Mississauga switching from

traditional sand-salt mixture to treated salt (MgCl) – reduces chloride loads by 50% IWMP is a long term program that will continue to monitor Sheridan Creek & Rattray Marsh.

14

15

16

19 Coring to determine peat layer

• Sediment testing at …samples taken at two deps

20

• Access alternatives were evaluated. It was determined the least impact to the

marsh and conservation area was utilizing an existing access road and construction of temporary access into the marsh to employ conventional dredging techniques for removal of material

• First iteration of site plans broke project up into 7 distinct cells so the project

could be completed as time and resources allowed Four Alternatives including Do Nothing Preferred Alternative selected by Rattray Marsh Steering Committee Alternative One: Removal of Mineral soils, Management of Invasive Outlet structure to control Carp Alternative Two: Dyke/Levy System to restrict movement of carp from creek and lake Preferred Alternative: Phased removal of mineral soil 11/21/2014 21

First Three Cells. 11/21/2014 22

23

24 Constructed to a width of 9m and height of approximately 1m above grade 1900 tones of stone, 130k project contribution

25

• Prior to beginning any of the sediment removal CVC installs wildlife exclusion

fencing around the preimiter of the project boundary.

26 CVC times installation of exclusion fencing with the drawdown of the marsh leaving areas of groundwater discharge open and installs exits doors at strategic locations to allow fish and wildlife out of the project area before marsh is drawn down to mud flat as lake levels recede for the winter.

• Active and passive removal of fish and wildlife is also conducted.

27

28 Trapped and tagged 5 and tracked 5 snapping turtles for two seasons to determine preferred over wintering areas for turtles to minimize and potential impacts.

29

• Sediment removal occurs in the winter months when the marsh is frozen and

in low water condition.

• Frozen conditions helps to support the heavy equipment that is required to

conduct the work.

• Contractors also utilize the ice and steel plates to construct temporary access

roads into the marsh.

• Working in the winter also minimizes impacts to sensitive fish and wildlife that

use the marsh during the warm weather months.

• Phase I project stats

Approx 13 days on site Approx 9 Days trucking 154 trucks + 31 trailers for a total of 185 loads taken out. 27 trucks with 6 having trailers was most sediment removed in one day 11/21/2014 30

Trucking and peat 11/21/2014 31

32

11/21/2014 33

• Aquatic plants sourced from Native nursery
• Top right shows one season growth – filled in completely 1 square metre
• TOP – submergent; Bottom - sedges

11/21/2014 34

• Aquatic plants sourced from Native nursery
• Top right shows one season growth – filled in completely 1 square metre
• TOP – submergent; Bottom - sedges

With the assistance of Canadian Wildlife Service -Pre restoration Monitoring – 2010 Durham Region Coastal Wetland Monitoring Protocol 2013 – Great lakes Coastal Wetland Monitoring Plan 2014 – Post construction monitoring plan **2010** Durham Region Coastal Wetland Monitoring Protocol 11/21/2014 35

Carp Vandallistm

• Monitoring data – visibility

11/21/2014 36

37 EA also recommended carp control as part of the restoration plan CVC

38 EA also recommended carp control as part of the restoration plan CVC

11/21/2014 39

11/21/2014 40

• Shale/Sediment bar continues to form at the mouth of Sheridan Creek, a

portion of this bar was orginally slated to be dredged

• Revisited this with Geomorphologist and determined that it would

continue to function as an area of deposition and any gains obtained from dredgeing would be short lived.

• Some of the material deposited here moves out to the lake during high

flows.

• Also identified in the EA as a desirable area for shorebirds
• Helping to naturally isolate the southern basin of the marsh during low

water levels.

• Phragmites has continued to expand into the southern basin and water level

making chemical treatments difficult

• Modified site plans to omit areas of continued deposition, preserve stands of

cattails not infested prhramites,

• Increase depth to dredging to 1-1.5m in highest phragmites density (Cell A)
• Approx 6000m3i in total

11/21/2014 41

11/21/2014 42

11/21/2014 43

44

11/21/2014 45

Today I’m going to give an update to folks on our EAB activities since our last public meeting on this topic last spring, and for new listeners a bit of a quick overview as well of EAB and our plan for tackling it here at Rattray Marsh

11/21/2014 46

47

• Now. …The Emerald ash borer (Agrilus planipennis Fairmaire) is a small, shiny,

emerald green beetle that attacks and kills healthy ash trees. It came from Asia in 2002 to North America, found in our area in about 2008. It is considered an invasive species as it attacks and kills native ash trees in as little as 2 growing seasons. Its rapid spread has largely been linked with people moving infested ash products

The Canadian Food Inspection Agency (CFIA) is responsible for preventing pests of quarantine significance from entering or spreading within Canada Current Regulations prohibit movement of any ash tree article from

a regulated area or property without the consent of the

• CFIA. Ash tree articles being
• ash nursery stock
• ash logs and branches
• ash lumber
• ash wood or bark
• ash wood chips or bark chips
• firewood from all tree species

Non-ash firewood can only be moved out of a regulated area by facilities registered under the Emerald Ash Borer Approved Facility Compliance Program

(EABAFCP). 11/21/2014 48

49 Quick overview of the currently regulated area. Specific materials cannot be moved out of this zone, but Movement is permissible within the regulated area although not encouraged

50 EAB goes through various life stages.

• Adult: Shiny, emerald green, average of 8mm long (1/2”)
• Emerge from D- shaped exit hole chewing through the bark in spring from

May to late July, with peak time in mid-late June

• Feed on ash leaves for several weeks, mature and mate. EAB can fly from 1

to 10 km in search of new ash hosts

• Egg: lain under bark scales and crevices in July and Aug, 1 mm long cream

coloured turning to brown, Larvae hatch and burrow down to the inner bark (phloem) to feed

• Larva (4x the adult size): Feeds on the inner bark, most destructive life stage,

it disrupts the water and nutrient flow within the tree, eventually killing it.

• It creates an S – shaped feeding gallery under the bark.
• In September, feeding slows down and the larvae borrows up into the bark

and over winters in the pre – pupae larvae

Larvae molt into pupae where they subsequently transform into adults. The larval Pupae are present in the host trees from late April until mid-June. 11/21/2014 50

The most tree damage is caused by the EAB larvae It destroys the layer under the bark (the cambium) that is responsible for transporting nutrients and water throughout the tree

Signs of EAB infestation usually only become apparent once a tree has been heavily infested. These signs include the

• loss of green colour in the uppermost leaves (chlorosis) and
• thinning and dieback of the crown
• as well as epicormic shoots
• As the insect progresses dieback of the ash trees is gradual initially; but, from
• ne year to the next the dieback can suddenly becomes overwhelming; with

99.9% of ash dying.

• The nature of EAB damage causes roots to fail first and entire trees can

topple over

• Often Removal of dead trees cannot keep pace as new ash trees are killed;

This figure illustrates what has been documented in other areas where invasion has passed through. Death of ash is gradual, but then hits wall where the majority die within the space of several years 11/21/2014 53

So obviously as removal cannot often keep pace, we start ending up with a lot of dead and hazardous trees. This creates an element of risk to the public and nearby infrastructure Our forests will suffer

• Wildlife will lose habitat or have it drastically altered, invasive plant species

will become problematic and biodiversity will suffer

What are the dollar and cent costs associated with all this??

• Cost associated with dead tree removal
• Costs associated with replanting
• Costs associated with damage to infrastructure
• Costs for tree preservation programs
• Loss of woodlot revenues
• How to deal with the dead wood removed?

Stats for Caledon East from Caledon Urban forest study Tech report (71-75 million to replace or compensate for all trees….22% are susceptible to EAB)

A quick summary of CVC’s response plan is covered in 6 main elements. Assessment to identify where the ash are and to what extent (density) Monitoring to detect locally its presence and abundance Treatment of individual trees to preserve high value trees for aesthetic or ecological reasons Removal of trees to protect people and infrastructure Restoration programs to repair and recover areas where removal has occurred Communication and Outreach to make the public aware of the threat, tools and information to assist with management and awareness of how we at CVC are managing this threat 11/21/2014 56

That’s the overall plan, but what is the plan and what are we doing at Rattray marsh? 11/21/2014 57

58 Rattray Marsh is 95 Acres in size. 42 Acres of that are dominated by Ash trees. That’s roughly 45% of the property covered with Ash. Terrestrial areas of Rattray Marsh are comprised mostly of upland mixed wood forests, cottonwood/ash shingle beach bar, upland Oak forest at the null, but most vegetation communities are swamps dominated by Ash.

59 This map shows the various ash densities…dominant portion of the marsh is upwards of 60% ash, floodplain areas up to 80%. So we are dealing with a fairly significant issue here. Of all CVC properties this one has the highest percentage

• f ash

We are trying to save what ash we can. It is expensive both in material and labour, an average tree costs about $200, but you can add on a few hours of staff time per tree with that. We’ve therefore had to prioritize based on funding and are targeting trees of significant aesthetic and ecological value What we are injecting into the trees is a product called TreeAzin which was created by the Canadian Forest Service in partnership with BioForest Technologies. Its a systematic bioinsecticide derived from the NEEM tree in India Injections last 2 years and will be continued for a 10 year period in hopes that a biocontrol maybe fouund and/or allow other planted trees to begin maturing within the area 11/21/2014 60

11/21/2014 61

If you recall my earlier slide showing the as death curve, we are now at that turning point at rattray where trees are now declining rapidly. Little sign was visible last year, But this year epicormic branching is visible on many ash and thinning crowns are evident everywhere This photo show very well what we are facing. In this area 95% of those trees are ash. The green shrubs you see are all invasive honeysuckles shrubs We have over 2 km of trails that will require management of ash as well as many sections of the property boundaries, totaling almost 2400 trees 11/21/2014 62

63

• ur primary concern here is Public safety and removing those Ash trees within range of hitting

infrastructure or trails

• Due to the EAB infestation within Rattray Marsh, all ash trees that are not injected will die
• Operations for tree management work began in early September of this year
• We have both CVC staff and outside contractors carrying out the work
• Timing, equipment used and methods are designed to limit as much as possible the

disturbance to visitors, wildlife and the natural area

64 We have divided the Marsh into 5 work zone areas based on density and access routes

65

In 2014 we began on work zone 1; which represents one of the highest density ash locations This section contains 483 trees, 309 of these are estimated to be over 8 inches in diameter. Approx 40 % of Work Zone 1 Complete at this point Some thick groupings of invasive plants such as Buckthorn and Honeysuckle have been removed to create areas for replanting Arbourist / Contractor has and will have felled close to 90 trees along the boundary line of Work Zone 1 2014 tree felling expected to be finished on Thurs. Nov. 27

66 Relating to Work Zone 1 a Landing area was created to provide access for equipment. And create a location where Saw logs and other ash material can be assembled for later use. Any wood still there now will be gone by mid December

67

• Access is poor within work zones, operating adjacent to boardwalks will and

has been necessary.

• Material is being hauled by ATV, RTV and Tractor and has been cut to a size

that is manageable by staff and equipment

• Haul routes are identified and utilized until area is complete. Haul routes will

be rehabilitated when complete and where necessary through tree planting.

• Attempting to contract in a horse logger to assist with movement across the

numerous boardwalks and bridges

68 Trying to strike a balance between leaving enough wood onsite for wildlife and ecological value and concerns over aesthetics and safety issues.

• Smaller trees and material is largely being left on the forest floor to for forest

health reasons with some larger material left to provide specific wildlife habitat use

• Some material removed from site and transported to City of Mississauga

works yard for inclusion in Region of Peel Green Waste program due to volumes we are dealing with to mitigate aesthetic issues and create areas for tree planting

• Value added opportunities being explored (Ontario Wood Turners Guild,

Ontario Woodworkers Association, etc.)

• Some material chipped at landing sites to produce chips for future tree

planting mulch at the site.

• Removed trees containing sawlog material will be separated at landing areas

for potential revenue used to offset costs (i.e. TreeAzin)

69 With all this activity and disturbance form just the removal activities and the loss

• f ash restoration is a big part of this plan

Key activities are:

• Removal of invasive shrubs in planting areas where they pose a threat to the

success of native tree plantings

• Tree planting will be carried out over several subsequent years to mitigate the

loss of forest canopy

• Other plantings such as seeding with cover crops or native seed mixes will be

used in select areas where this is necessary such as landing areas to restore land into a ‘better than before’ condition’.

• Tree planting will commence in areas once all work is completed by tree

management crews.

• Initial 2014 plantings completed northward along Silver Birch trail.
• In 2015- 165 two gallon and 120 three gallon potted stock will be planted

strategically along trails

• CYC groups and community to conduct planting

70

• 2015 tree felling expected to resume in February
• Funding dependent it is our hope that we can get through most of the other work

zones by end of 2015 or winter 2016.

• Tree Planting is paramount and will continue past those years.
• Invasive plant species removal will continue where necessary to complement

removals and ensure restoration success

• Community volunteers to assist with invasive plant removal
• Assessment of forest health will continue to ensure our management and

measures taken are having a net benefit.

Lastly a big thank you to volunteers who have assisted with closing trails off and answering questions from the public, they’ve been a great help and asset….and thank you to many of the residents in the area who have been very understanding of the need for this work and the support they have given our crews down there, everything from words of encouragement to bringing coffee and snacks to them. 11/21/2014 71

Thought I would wrap up with some FAQ’s we have been getting consistently about the work going on to maybe quickly get at many of the questions you may have. 1- remember death curve…getting ahead of work and also nature of dieback. Trees may seem healthy but are not 2- Generally no. Only if they are a hazard tree. Some invasives being removed in planting areas 3- We can’t earmark certain funds for a specific tree, but any funds will go towards continued injections of trees 4- native trees to the area that are appropriate for each site 5- we can look at some local chip use as a way to utilize material, but generally chipping isn’t a sustainable trail maintenance practice long term, so it may only be a temporary use and measure 6-generally our areas are away from the flood zone. Any chip placement in these areas would only be a temporary storage measure 7- Movement of wood out of the landing areas will be done by mid December. We try to expedite movement as quickly as feasible when working with contractors or agents receiving the material 11/21/2014 72

8- Areas where there is bare soil will be rehabilitated when work in the area is complete by application of appropriate native seed mixes and cover crops to assist with regenerating natural cover 11/21/2014 72

11/21/2014 73

74

75

76

77

78

79

80

81

82

83

84

85

86

87

11/21/2014 88