Fort Erie Creeks Watershed Plan - Niagara Peninsula Conservation ...

More documents

Recommendations

Info

TABLE 5.3.1: INTEGRATED WATERCOURSE CONSTRAINT RATING Terrestrial Reach ID Fisheries/Habitat Resources 1 Stream Morphology Flooding/Conveyance Net Rating FRC-5 Type 1 M/H M M H FRC-6 Type 1 M/H M M H FRC-7 Type 1 H/H M H H FRC-8 Type 1 M/H M M H FRC-9 Type 1 H/H M M H FRC-10 Type 1 H/H M M H FRC-11 Type 1 L/H M M H FRC-12 Type 1 M/H M M H FRC-13 Type 1 H/H M H H FRC-14 Type 1 H/H M M H FRC-15 Type 1 M/M M M H Kraft Drain KFD-1 Type 3 H/H M H H KFD-2 Type 3 H/H M H H KFD-3 Type 3 H/H M H H KFD-4 Type 3 H/H M H H KFD-5 Type 3 H/H L H *H Bertie Bay Drain BBD-1 Type 2 L/L M L BBD-2 Type 2 H/L M M Six Mile Creek SMC-1 Type 1 H/H M H H SMC-2 Type 1 H/H M H H SMC-3 Type 1 H/H M H H SMC-4 Type 1 H/H M H H SMC-5 Type 1 H/H M H H SMC-6 Type 1 H/H M H *H SMC-7 Type 1 L/L M H H SMC-8 Type 1 H/L M H H SMC-9 Type 1 H/H M H H SMC-10 Type 1 M/M M H H SMC-11 Type 1 M/L M H H MND-1 Type 1 H/L M H H MND-2 Type 1 H/M M H H MND-3 Type 1 H/L M H H MND-4 Type 1 M/M M H H MND-5 Type 1 H/L M H H MND-6 Type 1 H/L M H H Niagara River #19 DR1,2 Type 3 H/H H Note: a blank indicates a lack of any aquatic, terrestrial, stream morphology or flooding/conveyance constraint. Also, in some of the more isolated headwater reaches, and Municipal Drains in particular, the stream morphologic assessment was not conducted. * These watercourses have been straightened, but the original meandering planform exists on the floodplain, it may be possible to re-establish the watercourse within these old channels to provide aquatic habitat within a natural channel. 1. The first rating is for the adjacent floodplain; the second one is for wetland presence in the creek itself or the immediate bank area. The integrated net constraint rating used in this study (High, Medium and Low constraint) and the MNR fish habitat classification system (Type 1, Type 2, and Type 3 habitat) are both intended to guide the treatment of watercourses when confronted by development, land use changes, or opportunities for protection or rehabilitation. The principal differences between the two systems are as follows: 1. The integrated net constraint rating used in this report is applied at the subwatershed scale, and is not based on detailed, site-specific information of the sort that is required to identify ‘critical’ habitats, as defined in the MNR system. 2. The system used in this study addresses the potential for watercourses to benefit from alteration, based largely on the assumption that fish communities in degraded channels are likely to benefit from alterations that restore natural features, whereas fish March 2008 159 Fort Erie Creeks Watershed Plan General Report (105116)
communities in natural channels with good quality habitat are less likely to benefit, and are more likely to be harmed, by alterations. It should be noted that while some reaches have a low integrated net constraint rating, they may still contain Type 2 habitat, and as such are considered ideal for enhancement or restoration projects. The net rating is important as a relative ranking tool, to compare all of the reaches. In the course of any project that has the potential to impact upon a watercourse, an appropriately detailed site-specific study will be required to address the concerns and requirements of DFO, MNR and the NPCA. 5.3.2 Integrated Rating of Terrestrial Natural Heritage Systems Tables 5.3.4 to 5.3.14 summarize by subwatershed the terrestrial natural heritage status and targets, context, implications for natural heritage function and key issues. The wetland data is current as of June 2005; the natural cover data is current as of 2002; the EPA data uses the June 2005 wetland data. (As MNR updates wetland boundaries, current status percentages for both wetlands and EPA may change.) Minimum guidelines for wetland, treed cover, riparian cover and interior forest are by percentage of the subwatershed and, along with largest forest patch, refer to Environment Canada (2004a) guidelines. Given the large extent of original wetland, the minimum guideline of 10% of the watershed as wetland is used over 6% of each subwatershed. The 18% guideline for protected area (EPA plus ECA) is the threshold for an “excellent” rating set by the Niagara Region Report Card. Guidelines for distribution of natural landscape types and slough mosaic among the 2002 natural areas use the proportions within the pre-settlement natural areas specific to each subwatershed. Targets were assigned as the additions to the 2002/2005 status – both as percentage and hectares - needed to meet the guidelines; urban subwatersheds had some leniency to allow for infill development that helps maintain the natural areas in the nearby rural subwatersheds. The interior forest guideline for forest further than 200 m from the forest edge was omitted because the road grid density makes this guideline unrealistic. It is strongly emphasized that all the guidelines are minimum generic guidelines for ecosystem function. The very high extent of pre-settlement wetland in the study area suggests that optimum functioning for this landscape will require considerably more than the 10% minimum guideline. Exceedance of the minimum guideline should not be interpreted as surplus wetland. All wetlands play important roles and should be protected. Protection is far easier, cheaper and more supportive of well-functioning systems than restoration once they have been converted. March 2008 160 Fort Erie Creeks Watershed Plan General Report (105116)
Page 1 and 2:
FORT ERIE CREEKS - WATERSHED PLAN M
Page 3 and 4:
TABLE OF CONTENTS Section Page No.
Page 5 and 6:
TABLE OF CONTENTS Section Page No.
Page 7 and 8:
TABLE OF CONTENTS GENERAL REPORT AP
Page 9 and 10:
1.3 Administration This study has b
Page 11 and 12:
2. WATERSHED AREA CHARACTERIZATION
Page 13 and 14:
sediment and topographic breaks. In
Page 15 and 16:
The make up of the Halton Till and
Page 17 and 18:
Any modest level of additional grou
Page 19 and 20:
NPCA Groundwater Study did delineat
Page 21 and 22:
oundary under the Drainage Act. The
Page 23 and 24:
The majority of the urban areas of
Page 25 and 26:
groups. A soil map based on the hyd
Page 27 and 28:
Baker Creek TABLE 2.2.5: Con’t SU
Page 29 and 30:
Creek and Baker Creek have higher u
Page 31 and 32:
Location Node TABLE 2.2.8: FREQUENC
Page 33 and 34:
RiverCAD TM has been used to develo
Page 35 and 36:
Culvert ID Watersheds TABLE 2.3.1:
Page 37 and 38:
Culvert ID Watersheds TABLE 2.3.1:
Page 39 and 40:
agricultural purposes prior to 1955
Page 41 and 42:
fields. Due to the scale and qualit
Page 43 and 44:
were constructed between 1978 and 2
Page 45 and 46:
level survey of the site extending
Page 47 and 48:
Field Investigations 2.5.2 Work Act
Page 49 and 50:
Marginal Habitat: those fisheries h
Page 51 and 52:
natural channel, except for a 1.3 k
Page 53 and 54:
The fish community in the lower por
Page 55 and 56:
TABLE 2.5.2: RECENT MINISTRY OF NAT
Page 57 and 58:
Characterization of the natural her
Page 59 and 60:
TABLE 2.6.1: TERRESTRIAL NATURAL HE
Page 61 and 62:
The soil units included in each lan
Page 63 and 64:
• Percent of interior forest: >10
Page 65 and 66:
Subwatershed TABLE 2.6.4: COVER TYP
Page 67 and 68:
The main percentage shift from “o
Page 69 and 70:
and 1976. These changes removed a f
Page 71 and 72:
The regulated species are listed in
Page 73 and 74:
TABLE 2.6.9: PROVINCIALLY & NATIONA
Page 75 and 76:
illed Gull (spring migration only),
Page 77 and 78:
ated Locally Significant, a high pr
Page 79 and 80:
subwatersheds, many of the forest p
Page 81 and 82:
proportions; many of the mesic site
Page 83 and 84:
TABLE 2.7.4: NPCA BENTHIC INVERTEBR
Page 85 and 86:
Site ID Date Alkalinity Aluminum Am
Page 87 and 88:
Page 89 and 90:
Page 91 and 92:
Page 93 and 94:
A review of the NPCA water quality
Page 95 and 96:
TABLE 2.7.1 SUMMARY OF ANNUAL CONTA
Page 97 and 98:
The Lake Erie Shoreline Management
Page 99 and 100:
ackshore. In most area, the structu
Page 101 and 102:
3. SUMMARY OF POLICIES, OBJECTIVES
Page 103 and 104:
TABLE 3.1.1: SUMMARY OF ACTS AND GU
Page 105 and 106:
Level of Government Regional Level
Page 107 and 108:
The Clean Water Protection Act 2006
Page 109 and 110:
3.1.3 Stream Morphology It is NPCA
Page 111 and 112:
Type 3: areas with low productive c
Page 113 and 114:
The principles advanced in the docu
Page 115 and 116: TABLE 3.1.3: SUMMARY OF POLICIES, S
Page 117 and 118: e) To ensure the preservation of La
Page 119 and 120: • Prevent installation of barrier
Page 121 and 122: Targets: • Priority to long-term
Page 123 and 124: The purpose of the hydrologic model
Page 125 and 126: Watershed / Subcatchment TABLE 4.1.
Page 127 and 128: TABLE 4.1.4: 100 YEAR PEAK FLOW COM
Page 129 and 130: Watershed Damage Location NPCA Floo
Page 131 and 132: not necessarily reflect absolute ch
Page 133 and 134: potentially increase the erosion in
Page 135 and 136: TABLE 4.22: SUMMARY OF ANNUAL CONTA
Page 137 and 138: Several Special Policy Areas includ
Page 139 and 140: TABLE 4.3.2: TERRESTRIAL NATURAL HE
Page 141 and 142: TABLE 4.3.2: TERRESTRIAL NATURAL HE
Page 143 and 144: Subwatershed TABLE 4.3.4: MODERATE
Page 145 and 146: Similar to other Fort Erie Creeks,
Page 147 and 148: the channel as part of the Niagara
Page 149 and 150: In order to summarize the findings
Page 151 and 152: lakes, seepage areas, recharge/disc
Page 153 and 154: Regional Municipality of Niagara ca
Page 155 and 156: • Maintain existing shading veget
Page 157 and 158: d) Restoration of the slough mosaic
Page 159 and 160: ‣ Enhancement for subwatersheds w
Page 161 and 162: and value of the stream system. The
Page 163 and 164: If there is no registered floodplai
Page 165: TABLE 5.3.1: INTEGRATED WATERCOURSE
Page 169 and 170: TABLE 5.3.5: INTEGRATED RATING OF T
Page 171 and 172: TABLE 5.3.7: INTEGRATED RATING OF T
Page 173 and 174: % wetland % original wetland** TABL
Page 175 and 176: TABLE 5.3.11: INTEGRATED RATING OF
Page 177 and 178: TABLE 5.3.13: INTEGRATED RATING OF
Page 179 and 180: 5.4 Local Subwatershed Opportunitie
Page 181 and 182: ase conditions have almost eliminat
Page 183 and 184: c) Confirm and/or refine wetland bo
Page 185 and 186: • Kraft Drain north of Dominion R
Page 187 and 188: REACH NAME TABLE 5.4.3: PLANNING LE
Page 189 and 190: TABLE 5.4.6: SUMMARY OF LOCAL OPPOR
Page 191 and 192: TABLE 5.4.10: SUMMARY OF LOCAL OPPO
Page 193 and 194: TABLE 5.4.14: SUMMARY OF LOCAL OPPO
Page 195 and 196: Watercourses (erosion, fisheries) T
Page 197 and 198: In addition to the priority assigne
Page 199 and 200: TABLE 6.1.2: SUMMARY OF PRIORITIZED
Page 201 and 202: TABLE 6.1.6: SUMMARY OF PRIORITIZED
Page 203 and 204: TABLE 6.1.10: SUMMARY OF PRIORITIZE
Page 205 and 206: Cost Summary Each of the subwatersh
Page 207 and 208: In terms of water quality, the NPCA
Page 209 and 210: REFERENCES American Forests, 1999.
Page 211 and 212: Kingston, M.S. and E.W. Presant. 19
Page 213 and 214: GLOSSARY OF TERMS Alluvial Soil Sed
Page 215 and 216: Enhancement Strategies and actions
Page 217 and 218:
Hydraulics Science pertaining to fl
Page 219 and 220:
Off-line Stormwater infrastructure
Page 221 and 222:
Settlement Area In the Fort Erie Cr
Page 223 and 224:
ECA EIS EMC END EPA FEC FRC HEC-RAS
show all

Fort Erie Creeks Watershed Plan - Niagara Peninsula Conservation ...

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?