Enbridge Pipelines Inc. Environmental and Socio-Economic Assessment Edmonton to Hardisty Pipeline Project December 2012 / 8288
APPENDIX 9
WILDLIFE REPORT
Page A9-1
WILDLIFE REPORT FOR THE ENBRIDGE PIPELINES INC. EDMONTON TO HARDISTY PIPELINE PROJECT
December 2012 8288
Prepared for: Prepared by:
TERA Environmental Consultants Enbridge Pipelines Inc. Suite 1100, 815 - 8th Avenue S.W. Calgary, Alberta T2P 3P2 Edmonton, Alberta Ph: 403-265-2885
Enbridge Pipelines Inc. Wildlife Report Edmonton to Hardisty Pipeline Project December 2012 / 8288
TABLE OF CONTENTS Page 1.0 INTRODUCTION ...... 1 1.1 Project Description ...... 1 1.2 Objectives ...... 2 2.0 METHODS ...... 4 2.1 Study Area Boundaries ...... 4 2.2 Literature / Desktop Review ...... 4 2.3 Species with Special Conservation Status ...... 4 2.4 Field Data Collection ...... 4 3.0 RESULTS OF LITERATURE/DESKTOP REVIEW ...... 6 3.1 Land Use and Environmental Setting ...... 6 3.2 Species with Special Conservation Status - General Habitat Requirements ...... 6 3.3 Occurrence Records ...... 8 3.4 Provincially Identified Wildlife Areas ...... 10 3.5 Environmentally Significant Areas, Parks and Protected Areas ...... 11 3.6 Protective Notations ...... 12 3.7 Past Projects ...... 12 4.0 RESULTS OF THE FIELD WORK ...... 16 4.1 General Site Description ...... 16 4.1.1 Edmonton Terminal ...... 16 4.1.2 Proposed Pipeline Route ...... 16 4.2 Wildlife and Wildlife Habitat Observations ...... 16 4.2.1 Mammals ...... 17 4.2.2 Birds ...... 17 4.2.3 Amphibians and Reptiles ...... 18 4.3 Species with Special Conservation Status ...... 18 5.0 DISCUSSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS ...... 20 5.1 Recommended Supplemental Surveys...... 20 5.2 General Wildlife Recommendations ...... 20 6.0 SUMMARY ...... 21 7.0 REFERENCES ...... 22 7.1 Personal Communications ...... 22 7.2 Literature Cited ...... 22 7.3 GIS Data and Mapping References ...... 26
LIST OF APPENDICES Appendix A Wildlife Species with Conservation Status that have Potential to Occur in Proximity to the Proposed Project ...... A-1 Appendix B Survey Locations ...... B-1 Appendix C Photoplates ...... C-1 Appendix D Wildlife Observations – July 2012 ...... D-1
LIST OF FIGURES Figure 1 Regional Location ...... 3 Figure 2 Provincially Identified Wildlife Areas ...... 14 Figure 3 Environmentally Significant Areas, Parks and Protected Areas ...... 15
Page i
Enbridge Pipelines Inc. Wildlife Report Edmonton to Hardisty Pipeline Project December 2012 / 8288
LIST OF TABLES Table 1 General Land Use and Environmental Setting ...... 6 Table 2 Occurrences of Species with Special Conservation Status Reported Within 2 km of the Proposed Pipeline Route ...... 8 Table 3 Summary of Potential Species with Special Conservation Status ...... 19
LIST OF PLATES Plate 1 View southwest along the Battle River near KP 173.6 (NE 25-42-10 W4M) (July 21, 2012)...... C-2 Plate 2 View northwest in cultivated field along the proposed pipeline route near KP 49.5 (NE 6-49-20 W4M) (July 23, 2012) ...... C-2 Plate 3 View northwest in pasture along the proposed pipeline route near KP 136.4 (NE 26-44-13 W4M) (July 18, 2012)...... C-3 Plate 4 View south in deciduous forest along the proposed pipeline route near KPHD 0.3 (NW 11-50-22 W4M) (July 25, 2012)...... C-3 Plate 5 View northwest at a Swainson’s hawk nest near KP 150.8 (SW 6-44-11 W4M) (July 20, 2012)...... C-4 Plate 6 View northwest along the existing pipeline right-of-way showing the habitat where two common nighthawks were observed near KP 172.3 (SW 36-42-10 W4M) (July 22, 2012)...... C-4 Plate 7 View southwest at the wetland near KP 49.4 (NE 6-49-20 W4M) where two horned grebes with two young were observed (July 23, 2012)...... C-5 Plate 8 View northeast showing a row of willow where three loggerhead shrikes were observed near KP 138.6 (NE 24-44-13 W4M) (July 19, 2012)...... C-5 Plate 9 View south in tame pasture where Sprague’s pipit was observed near KP 81.3 (NW 19-47-17 W4M) (July 16, 2012)...... C-6 Plate 10 View north in wetland habitat where a yellow rail was observed near KP 142.0 (NE 17-44-12 W4M) (July 19, 2012)...... C-6
Page ii
Enbridge Pipelines Inc. Wildlife Report Edmonton to Hardisty Pipeline Project December 2012 / 8288
1.0 INTRODUCTION 1.1 Project Description Enbridge Pipelines Inc. (Enbridge) currently operates their mainline system that transports crude oil within Canada between Edmonton, Alberta and the United States border near Gretna, Manitoba. Enbridge is proposing the Edmonton to Hardisty Pipeline Project (the Project) in order to accommodate the need for increased crude oil transportation between the existing Edmonton and Hardisty terminals. The Project has been developed in conjunction with shippers to address this pipeline transportation capacity constraint. The proposed Project will enable the delivery of crude oil to other existing pipelines and facilities in the Hardisty area, including delivery onto the Enbridge Mainline system. The proposed 914.4 mm O.D. (NPS 36) pipeline will transport crude oil for approximately 181 km, initiating at the existing Enbridge Edmonton Terminal at NW 32-52-23 W4M and terminating at the existing Enbridge Hardisty Terminal at SE 30-42-9 W4M (Figure 1). The proposed pipeline route parallels existing linear disturbances for approximately 96.2% of its length. Enbridge is applying to the National Energy Board (NEB) under Section 52 of the NEB Act to construct and operate the proposed pipeline.
The proposed pipeline route traverses the Transportation/Utilities Corridor (TUC) for 10 km (6%), provincial Crown land for 1.1 km (1%) and the remaining 169.9 km (93%) of its length is privately-owned land. The construction right-of-way will typically be 45 m wide, including an approximately 10-13 m wide permanent easement with the remainder of the width to be used as temporary workspace. When the permanent easement and temporary workspace are taken in the entirety, it is referred to as the construction right-of-way. Additional temporary workspace will be required at select locations to accommodate construction activities (e.g., road, rail, buried utility line and water crossings; sharp sidebends; tie-ins; and locations where extra depth of cover, deep topsoil, three-lift handling or heavy grading is necessary). Enbridge will also acquire temporary workspace for Project construction needs such as stockpile sites, shoo-flies and contractor staging areas.
In addition, Enbridge is applying under Section 58 of the NEB Act to construct and operate three new pump stations and associated facilities. The new pump stations will be located at the Edmonton Terminal at NW 32-52-23 W4M, at the existing Kingman Station at SE 5-49-20 W4M and at the existing Strome Station at SE 2-46-15 W4M. A new booster pump is planned to be installed at the existing Edmonton Terminal at SE 5-52-23 W4M and piping will connect it to the terminal facilities in NW 32-52-23 W4M via a road bore under Baseline Road. Additional associated facilities and infrastructure to be installed include interconnecting piping, receiving and sending traps, new booster pump, electrical infrastructure, instrumentation controls, communication and Supervisory Control and Data Acquisition (SCADA) system equipment at the existing Edmonton and Hardisty terminals.
Pending regulatory approval, construction of the pump stations and facilities is anticipated to commence as early as Q1 2014, with pipeline construction anticipated to commence in August 2014 with a Project in-service date of Q1 2015, with the exception of the Kingman pump station which has an anticipated in-service date of Q3 2015.
As part of the NEB Section 52 Application, an Environmental and Socio-economic Assessment (ESA) has been prepared by TERA Environmental Consultants (TERA) (2012a) (see Section 6.0 of the ESA for the wildlife assessment). To support the application, TERA was commissioned by Enbridge to conduct a wildlife literature/desktop review and wildlife field work along the proposed pipeline route. This report provides the results of this work which were used in Project planning to identify and mitigate potential effects of the Project on wildlife and wildlife habitat.
Page 1
Enbridge Pipelines Inc. Wildlife Report Edmonton to Hardisty Pipeline Project December 2012 / 8288
1.2 Objectives The purpose of the wildlife literature/desktop review and field work was to identify important wildlife habitats along the proposed pipeline route. Specifically, the objectives of the wildlife field work were to:
• identify wildlife presence and use within and adjacent to the proposed pipeline route including wildlife species with special conservation status;
• identify site-specific wildlife habitat and habitat features (e.g., stick nest) important to wildlife along the proposed pipeline route that may be impacted by Project construction and/or operations; and
• recommend technically and economically feasible site-specific mitigative measures, where warranted, to avoid or reduce potential impacts on wildlife (particularly species of concern), important habitat and habitat features identified during the wildlife field work.
Page 2
SADDLE LAKE 125
Bon Accord Elk Point ALEXANDER 134
Morinville 56 56 55 27 26 25 24 23 22 19 21 55 18 Lamont 17 16 15 14 13 12 9 8 7 ¯ Fort 11 55 54 Saskatchewan CFB EDMONTON Two Hills December 2012 St. 54 54 Albert Elk Island FIGURE 1 53 National Park REGIONAL LOCATION Spruce Edmonton Terminal 53 0 Mundare 53 WILDLIFE REPORT FOR THE Grove "J( T ENBRIDGE PIPELINES INC. E0 - E15.4 52 Edmonton HA EDMONTON TO HARDISTY PIPELINE PROJECT STONY PLAIN 135 52 Vegreville 52 HB 13 8288 ( Beaverhill V 51 Lake e rm 20 il 51 io Environment KP n ( ( 51 R i HC ver Tofield ! Edmonton to Hardisty 50 Beaumont Environment KPH Deviation Devon 30 Vermilion ( 50 HD 50 Existing Pipeline 49 Leduc HE 40 Edmonton to Hardisty Pipeline ( HF 49 Kingman Station MOT 892 Highway 49 UV 50 ("J D0 - D2.0 Road 48 HG ( C0 - C2.1 48 Railway 60 48 47 ( 70 Watercourse Bu HH 80 ffa lo ( R Viking i Waterbody 47 ve 90 47 r ( PIGEON LAKE 138A City/Town Pigeon Camrose 100 Lake ( Indian Reserve Wetaskiwin 46 110 46 HI ( Strome Station Park LOUIS BULL 138B "J 28 HJ 120 27 26 HK 25 24 23 22 ( Military 21 45 19 18 13 ERMINESKIN 138 17 16 15 14 12 11 9 8 7 130 45 Daysland ( SCALE: 1:600,000 km Iron Creek Wainwright SAMSON 137 44 ( 0 10 20 30 44 (All Locations Approximate) 140 150 ( CAMP WAINWRIGHT MONTANA 139 B a MILITARY RESERVE M tt Sedgewick ee l 160 43 ti e R ng iv ( Cree er 43 Ponoka k (Hardisty UTM Zone 12N 175.5176 Hillshade: TERA Environmental Consultants, derived from 170 ("J Natural Resources Canada 2008; Railways & Hydrography: 42 United States National Imagery & Mapping Agency 2000; 42 Municipal Boundaries: AltaLIS 2012; Roads: Natural Resources Canada 2012. Hardisty Terminal Military: IHS Inc. 2011; Indian Reserves: Government of Canada 2012; 41 Parks: Alberta Tourism, Parks and Recreation 2011. 41 Although there is no reason to believe that there are Buffalo any errors associated with the data used to generate Lacombe Lake this product or in the product itself, users of these data are advised that errors in the data may be present. 40 40 Mapped By: TB Checked By: MM t8288_Fig1_Regional_Location_rev03.mxd
r River Dee d e Stettler R ek re C e n to s ib R Enbridge Pipelines Inc. Wildlife Report Edmonton to Hardisty Pipeline Project December 2012 / 8288
2.0 METHODS 2.1 Study Area Boundaries The proposed pipeline route was considered in relation to the Footprint Study Area (Footprint) (i.e., construction right-of-way and temporary workspace), a Local Study Area (LSA) and a Regional Study Area (RSA). Further detail on the LSA and RSA is presented in Section 6.2.10.1 of the ESA (TERA 2012a).
2.2 Literature / Desktop Review Primary sources of information that were consulted prior to field work and used in the preparation of this report include the following:
• provincially identified wildlife mapping (Alberta Environment and Sustainable Resource Development [AESRD] 2010-2012);
• AESRD Fisheries and Wildlife Management Information System (FWMIS) wildlife occurrence data (AESRD 2012a);
• previously completed survey data and information for the area (TERA 1994, 1996, 2004, 2007, 2008, 2009a,b);
• Environmentally Significant Areas (Alberta Tourism, Parks and Recreation [ATPR] 2009);
• parks and protected areas (ATPR 2011); and
• Migratory Bird Sanctuaries (Environment Canada 2012), National Wildlife Areas (Environment Canada 2012), Important Bird Areas (BirdLife International et al. 2012), Western Hemisphere Shorebird Reserves (Western Hemisphere Shorebird Reserve Network [WHSRN] 2012), Ramsar wetlands (Bureau of the Convention on Wetlands 2012), and World Biosphere Reserves (United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization [UNESCO] 2012).
Other supporting studies conducted by TERA that provide useful information on the biophysical environment encountered along the proposed pipeline route were also reviewed and relevant elements were incorporated into this report. These include the aquatic assessment, the vegetation survey and the wetland evaluation (TERA 2012b,c,d).
2.3 Species with Special Conservation Status Prior to commencing the wildlife field work, a list of wildlife species with special conservation status that have the potential to occur along the proposed pipeline route was prepared. This list, provided in Appendix A, is based on wildlife species identified as having the potential to occur in the Central Parkland Subregion of the Parkland Natural Region and the Dry Mixedwood Subregion of the Boreal Forest Natural Region (Natural Regions Committee 2006). The list includes federal designations as listed by the Species at Risk Act (SARA) (Government of Canada 2011) and the Committee on the Status of Endangered Wildlife in Canada (COSEWIC) (2012), as well as provincial status designations.
2.4 Field Data Collection Wildlife field work was conducted from July 13 to 26, 2012 along selected segments of the proposed pipeline route. Survey locations were selected based on the desktop/literature review that identified habitat types with the potential to support species with special conservation status or important wildlife features. Segments surveyed included:
• areas of native vegetation, tame pasture, and treed-pasture greater than 500 m in length;
• large wetlands in the vicinity of the proposed project;
• named watercourse crossings (e.g., the Battle River);
Page 4
Enbridge Pipelines Inc. Wildlife Report Edmonton to Hardisty Pipeline Project December 2012 / 8288
• locations with known records for species with special conservations status (i.e., from FWMIS records); and
• locations where land access was in place at the time of the wildlife field work.
A wildlife survey was conducted at the wetland and treed areas at Edmonton Terminal on July 12 and 13, 2012. Kingman Station, Strome Station and Hardisty Terminal were not surveyed because modifications to Kingman Station and Hardisty Terminal will occur within an existing large, previously disturbed industrial site, and the expansion area at Strome Station will occur on cultivated land, which is not considered suitable wildlife habitat. The locations of wildlife field work are provided in Appendix B. Selected Photoplates from the July 2012 wildlife field work are provided in Appendix C.
Field work was conducted on foot and included breeding bird point count surveys, visual scans and ground inspections at all surveyed locations to observe wildlife and wildlife habitats along and immediately adjacent to the proposed pipeline route. All wildlife observations, evidence of wildlife use and important wildlife habitat features were recorded during the field work (i.e., field-data sheets, UTMs taken with a hand-held GPS and photographs for record-keeping).
A thorough ground search was conducted along the surveyed segments to identify wildlife presence and use within and adjacent to the proposed pipeline route and to document site-specific habitats and habitat features important to wildlife. Ground investigations were limited to the proposed construction right-of-way in compliance with landowner requests. Visual scans using binoculars were conducted from the proposed pipeline route in an effort to observe and review as much of the area as possible.
Point counts were conducted along the surveyed segments of the proposed pipeline route following the methods for breeding bird surveys (point count methods) outlined in the Sensitive Species Inventory Guidelines (ASRD 2010a). Point count surveys were conducted in the morning, beginning approximately one half hour before sunrise under satisfactory weather conditions including good visibility, little or no precipitation and light winds less than 20 km/h. All birds seen or heard at each point count location during a five minute period following a one minute quiet period after arrival at the site were recorded. Incidental information on birds (heard and/or seen) was also recorded along the proposed pipeline route during the field work.
Wetlands and watercourses encountered by the proposed pipeline route along the segments surveyed were assessed for amphibians (individuals, egg masses, tadpoles) based on presence/not-detected methods with guidance from Sensitive Species Inventory Guidelines for amphibians (ASRD 2010a). Amphibians seen or heard were identified to species, where possible.
All mammals, birds, amphibians and reptiles identified by sight, sound or sign, as well as important habitat features were noted. A summary of wildlife species and/or their sign observed during the wildlife field work is provided in Appendix D.
Page 5
Enbridge Pipelines Inc. Wildlife Report Edmonton to Hardisty Pipeline Project December 2012 / 8288
3.0 RESULTS OF LITERATURE/DESKTOP REVIEW 3.1 Land Use and Environmental Setting A general summary of the land use and environmental setting along the proposed pipeline route is provided in Table 1. Greater detail on land use and the environmental setting is provided in Section 5.0 of the ESA (TERA 2012a).
Locations along the existing Enbridge pipeline corridor are referred to by Kilometre Post (KP). The system of KPs used in this report are Environment KPs, which have a long history of use along this Enbridge mainline right-of-way. Using this Environment KP system, the currently proposed pipeline route begins at KPT 0.0 at the Edmonton Terminal (NW 32-52-23 W4M) and ends at KP 175.5 at the Hardisty Terminal (SE 30-42-9 W4M), following the Enbridge mainline right-of-way that has been in place since the early 1950s. A substantial pipeline route deviation from the Enbridge mainline was adopted to use the TUC during the Enbridge Line 4 Extension Project in 2007, and was identified at the time of that project as a subset of the KP numbering system, KPE 0.0 to KPE 15.4 (SE 32-52-23 W4M to SW 36-51-23 W4M) (the E is for Edmonton reroute). This deviation numbering system has also been carried forward to the current Project. Additional deviations that are greater than approximately 60 m from the existing mainline right-of- way have been assigned with their own reroute numbering system for the current Project, as KPHA 0.0 to KPHA 1.0 (SW 28-52-23 W4M to NW 21-52-23 W4M), KPHB 0.0 to KPHB 0.8 (SW 4-52-23 W4M to NW 33-51-23 W4M) and so on. For additional clarity, legal locations and, where appropriate, UTM co- ordinates of site-specific issues are included in tables and text throughout this report.
TABLE 1
GENERAL LAND USE AND ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING
Setting Information Project Details Total Length • 181.0 km Length in the TUC • 10.0 km (6%) Length on Crown Land • 1.1 km (1%) Length on Privately Owned Land • 169.9 km (93%) Length Parallel to existing Linear Corridor • 172.4 (96.2%) District/County • Strathcona County, Leduc County, Camrose County, Beaver County, Flagstaff County, Municipal District of Provost Wildlife Management Unit (WMU) • WMU 202 (Neutral Hills), 203 (Alliance), 228 (Camrose), 230 (Wavy), 232 (Hardisty), 242 (Beaverhill) and 248 (Edmonton) (AESRD 2012b) Registered Trapping Areas • None (Alberta Energy 2012) Land Use • Oil and gas activity, agriculture River Basin • North Saskatchewan River Basin (Sub Basins: North Saskatchewan River and Battle River) (AESRD 2012c) Named Watercourse Crossings • Goldbar Creek, Mill Creek, Irvine Creek, Battle River Natural Region • Central Parkland Subregion of the Parkland Natural Region and Dry Mixedwood Subregion of the Boreal Natural Region (Natural Regions Committee 2006)
3.2 Species with Special Conservation Status - General Habitat Requirements Wildlife species in Appendix A that are listed under Schedule 1 of the SARA or by COSEWIC that have potential to occur along the proposed pipeline route were identified during the literature/desktop review. Based on species range, species habitat requirements, existing information and professional knowledge, these wildlife species include those listed below.
Little Brown Myotis (Endangered by COSEWIC): During summer, reproductive females form colonies, typically in buildings and large tree hollows. Adult males and non-reproductive females roost alone or in small groups in buildings, trees, rock crevices, wood piles and caves (Fenton and Barclay 1980). Foraging often occurs in open fields or over waterbodies and streams that have a high abundance of aquatic insects (Anthony and Kunz 1977). Winter hibernacula are typically caves and abandoned mines where temperatures stay above freezing and humidity is high (Fenton and Barclay 1980).
Page 6
Enbridge Pipelines Inc. Wildlife Report Edmonton to Hardisty Pipeline Project December 2012 / 8288
Baird’s Sparrow (Special Concern by COSEWIC): Originally thought to be a native grassland specialist, the Baird’s sparrow has been found to adapt and nest in forage crops, such as hayfields and pasture (Davis and Sealy 1998). Occurrence of Baird’s sparrows is more influenced by grazing practices than plant species composition, with a higher density of birds occurring in areas of ungrazed prairie than in grazed areas (Sutter et al. 1995).
Barn Swallow (Threatened by COSEWIC): Barn swallows prefer various types of open habitats for foraging. Nesting sites are often in and on artificial structures, including barns and other outbuildings, garages, houses, bridges and road culverts (COSEWIC 2011).
Bobolink (Threatened by COSEWIC): Bobolink historically nests in tall-grass prairie, but since recent clearing and expansion of agricultural lands the bobolink nests primarily in forage fields (e.g., hayfields and pasture). Bobolink also nests in grassland habitats, including uncultivated prairie, peatland, and fields dominated by tall grasses (COSEWIC 2010a).
Chestnut-collared Longspur (Threatened on Schedule 1 of SARA and by COSEWIC): Chestnut-collared longspur typically breeds in grazed or mowed short- and mixed-grass prairie. This species prefers short vegetation (20-30cm) but will use tall grass if it is mowed or grazed. Conversion of native prairie to cultivated land has fragmented this species habitat, and patches that remain are left idle and therefore unsuitable for breeding (COSEWIC 2009c).
Common Nighthawk (Threatened on Schedule 1 of SARA and by COSEWIC): Open habitats are required for common nighthawk nesting and foraging and can include logged or slash burned areas, woodland clearings, open mixed and coniferous forests, grasslands, pastures and wetlands (COSEWIC 2007).
Ferruginous Hawk (Threatened on Schedule 1 of SARA and by COSEWIC): Considered a native grassland specialist, preferred nesting sites are located in pasture or native grassland (COSEWIC 2008a). This species often roosts on the ground and a variety of structures are used for nesting, including cliffs, tress, farm buildings and machinery, and hay stacks (COSEWIC 2008a). Preferred foraging habitat of ferruginous hawks may be that of their main prey species, the Richardson’s ground squirrel; areas with 30% cultivation and grass below <30 cm in height (COSEWIC 2008a).
Horned Grebe (Special Concern by COSEWIC): Horned grebes forage by diving in shallow waters often near emergent vegetation and will also forage on surface prey and snatch insects from the air or overhanging plants (Johnsgard 1987). Their diet mainly consists of small fishes, crustaceans and aquatic insects and also includes amphibians and leeches (Semenchuk 1992). Horned grebes nest in both open and forested areas, preferring those ponds, sloughs and lakes with extensive marshy vegetation. The emerging vegetation provides nest materials, concealment and anchorage, and protection for young (COSEWIC 2009b). Nests are a floating mass of decayed and fresh aquatic vegetation built up in shallow waters and anchored to reeds (Semenchuk 1992).
Loggerhead Shrike (Threatened on Schedule 1 of SARA and by COSEWIC): Loggerhead shrikes inhabit a wide variety of habitats with open foraging areas adjacent to nesting and foraging areas, including grasslands, sagebrush stands, pastures, agricultural areas and thinly wooded areas with small trees and shrubs (Government of Canada 2011). They prefer small bushy trees and dense or thorny bushes for foraging perches and nesting sites (COSEWIC 2004). In Alberta, loggerhead shrikes preferably forage in areas with medium (15-35 cm) to tall grasses (>35 cm) (COSEWIC 2004).
Long-billed Curlew (Special Concern on Schedule 1 of SARA and by COSEWIC): Long-billed curlews nest in fescue grasslands, sandhills, and short or mixed grass native prairie (Hill 1998). Although long- billed curlews will nest in agricultural land, preferred sites are in large areas of relatively low, irregular vegetation (Government of Canada 2011). After the young hatch, parents often move the young to areas with denser, taller vegetation (COSEWIC 2002). In the Grassland Natural Region of Alberta, long-billed curlews are twice as numerous in areas containing >50% native grassland (Hill 1998). Only the southern portion of the proposed pipeline route is located within the long-billed curlew range (Federation of Alberta Naturalists 2007).
Page 7
Enbridge Pipelines Inc. Wildlife Report Edmonton to Hardisty Pipeline Project December 2012 / 8288
Piping Plover (Endangered on Schedule 1 of SARA and by COSEWIC): Piping plovers nest just above the normal high watermark on exposed sandy or gravelly beaches of large lakes and shallow, saline lakes (Government of Canada 2011).
Short-eared Owl (Special Concern on Schedule 1 of SARA and by COSEWIC): Short-eared owls are often associated with open habitat, including grasslands, bogs, marshes, old pastures and occasionally agricultural fields (COSEWIC 2008b). The short-eared owl breeds in open country with short vegetation including rangelands, grasslands, near dry marshes, farmlands, brushy fields and forest clearings (Semenchuk 1992). A combination of areas of suitable resting and nesting cover, with adjacent hunting areas is a dominant factor in selecting breeding habitat (Johnsgard 1988).
Sprague’s Pipit (Threatened on Schedule 1 of SARA and by COSEWIC): Sprague’s pipit prefers open native vegetation of intermediate height and density, with moderate amounts of litter and no or low shrub density (COSEWIC 2010b). This species is rarely found in cultivated lands or areas where native grasses have been replaced with introduced forages.
Yellow Rail (Special Concern on Schedule 1 of SARA and by COSEWIC): Yellow rail are found in wetlands (e.g., fens) dominated by sedges, grasses and rushes where there is little or no standing water (generally 0-12 cm water depth), and where the substrate remains saturated throughout the summer (Federation of Alberta Naturalists 2007, Semenchuk 1992). It has been suggested that only wetlands large enough to support a small group of territorial birds will have yellow rails on a long-term basis (Semenchuk 1992). Nests are constructed of grasses and other dead emergent vegetation and are situated on the ground and well concealed by a canopy of bent over grass in or near a marsh (Semenchuk 1992).
Provincially listed species that have the potential to occur are listed in Appendix A.
3.3 Occurrence Records A search of the AESRD FWMIS database (AESRD 2012a) reported observations of six species listed under Schedule 1 of SARA or by COSEWIC 2012 within 2 km of the proposed pipeline route. In addition, the FWMIS search and a review of the Line 4 Extension Project wildlife report identified 34 provincially- listed wildlife species within 2 km of the proposed pipeline route (AESRD 2012a, TERA 2007). A summary of these species is provided in Table 2.
TABLE 2
OCCURRENCES OF SPECIES WITH SPECIAL CONSERVATION STATUS REPORTED WITHIN 2 km OF THE PROPOSED PIPELINE ROUTE
Species Provincial Common Name Scientific Name Federal Designation1 Designation2 Comments American Taxidea taxus -- Sensitive One den reported within 2 km of the proposed pipeline route badger (AESRD 2012a). American bittern Botaurus -- Sensitive American bitterns were observed at five locations along the lentiginosus proposed pipeline route during the wildlife survey of the Line 4 Extension Project in 2007 (TERA 2007). American Falco sparverius -- Sensitive No nests reported within 2 km of the proposed pipeline route. kestrel Three sightings of individual birds within 2 km of the proposed pipeline route (AESRD 2012a). American white Pelecanus -- Sensitive No breeding colonies reported within 1 km of the proposed pelican erythrorhynchos pipeline route. Several sightings and nests on Joseph lake, approximately 1.5 km from proposed route (AESRD 2012a). bald eagle Haliaeetus -- Sensitive No nests reported within 1 km of the proposed pipeline route. Two leucocephalus recorded sightings within 2 km of the proposed pipeline route (AESRD 2012a). black tern Chlidonias niger -- Sensitive No nesting colonies reported along the proposed pipeline route (AESRD 2012a). Black terns were observed at 14 locations along the proposed pipeline route during the wildlife survey of the Line 4 Extension Project in 2007 (TERA 2007).
Page 8
Enbridge Pipelines Inc. Wildlife Report Edmonton to Hardisty Pipeline Project December 2012 / 8288
TABLE 2 Cont'd
Species Provincial Common Name Scientific Name Federal Designation1 Designation2 Comments black-crowned Nycticorax -- Sensitive No nest sites reported on the proposed pipeline route. One night heron nycticorax sighting of an individual reported within 2 km of the proposed route (AESRD 2012a). broad-winged Buteo platypterus -- Sensitive No nest sites reported along the proposed pipeline route. One hawk sighting of an individual reported within 2 km of the proposed route (AESRD 2012a). burrowing owl Athene cunicularia Endangered (COSEWIC, At Risk Unconfirmed possible burrow location (1985). The proposed SARA Schedule 1) pipeline route occurs outside of currently mapped burrowing owl breeding range (COSEWIC 2006). Canadian toad Anaxyrus -- May Be At Risk One record located along the proposed pipeline route. Four hemiophrys additional records within 2 km of the proposed pipeline route (AESRD 2012a). chestnut- Calcarius ornatus Threatened (COSEWIC, Sensitive Three sightings of individuals reported within 2 km of the proposed collared SARA Schedule 1) route (AESRD 2012a). longspur common Geothlypis trichas -- Sensitive Two records of individuals within 2 km of the proposed route. yellowthroat great blue heron Ardea herodias -- Sensitive A single great blue heron was observed flying over the proposed route during the wildlife survey of the Line 4 Extension Project in 2007 (TERA 2007). great gray owl Strix nebulosa -- Sensitive No nest sites reported within 1 km of the proposed pipeline route. Several records of individuals and a probable nest within 2 km of the proposed route (AESRD 2012a). green-winged Anas crecca -- Sensitive No nest sites reported along the proposed pipeline route. Three teal sightings of individuals reported within 1 km of the proposed route (AESRD 2012a). horned grebe Podiceps auritus -- Sensitive No records reported at wetlands crossed by the proposed pipeline route. Two records within 2 km of the proposed pipeline route (AESRD 2012a). least flycatcher Empidonax -- Sensitive One sighting on an individual reported within 2 km of the proposed minimus route (AESRD 2012a). lesser scaup Aythya affinis -- Sensitive No nest sites reported along the proposed pipeline route. Two individuals reported within 2 km of the proposed route (AESRD 2012a). northern Accipiter gentilis -- Sensitive No nest sites reported along the proposed pipeline route. One goshawk sighting on an individual reported within 1km of the proposed route (AESRD 2012a). northern harrier Circus cyaneus -- Sensitive No nest sites reported along the proposed pipeline route. Two sightings of individuals reported within 2 km of the proposed route (AESRD 2012a). northern hawk Surnia ulula -- Sensitive No nest sites reported along the proposed pipeline route. Two owl sightings of individuals reported within 2 km of the proposed route (AESRD 2012a). northern leopard Lithobates pipiens Special Concern At Risk One record reported, found dead (1971) (AESRD 2012a). frog (COSEWIC, SARA Northern leopard frog is not in the Project range based on the Schedule 1) recent range map for this species (COSEWIC 2009a) peregrine falcon Falco peregrinus -- May Be At Risk An artificial nest site reported >1 km from the proposed pipeline Threatened3 route (2010). One record of a juvenile within 1 km of the proposed pipeline route (AESRD 2012a). plains garter Thamnophis radix -- Sensitive Two individuals recorded, no hibernacula reported snake (AESRD 2012a). purple martin Progne subis -- Sensitive One record of this species within 2 km of the proposed pipeline route (AESRD 2012a). sandhill crane Grus canadensis -- Sensitive One recorded individual within 2 km of the proposed pipeline route (AESRD 2012a). sedge wren Cistothorus -- Sensitive Sedge wrens were heard in three locations along the proposed platensis pipeline route during the survey of the Line 4 Extension Project in 2007 (TERA 2007). sharp-tailed Tympanuchus -- Sensitive No lek sites reported within 500 m of the proposed pipeline route. grouse phasianellus Two records of individuals within 2 km of the proposed pipeline route (AESRD 2012a).
Page 9
Enbridge Pipelines Inc. Wildlife Report Edmonton to Hardisty Pipeline Project December 2012 / 8288
TABLE 2 Cont'd
Species Provincial Common Name Scientific Name Federal Designation1 Designation2 Comments short-eared owl Asio flammeus Special Concern May Be At Risk Two individuals found dead of unknown causes (1965, 1977) (COSEWIC, SARA within 2 km of the proposed pipeline route (AESRD 2012a). Schedule 1) sora Porzana carolina -- Sensitive Multiple records recorded within 2 km of the proposed pipeline route (2008, 2009) (AESRD 2012a). Sprague’s pipit Anthus spragueii Threatened (COSEWIC, Sensitive, Sprague’s pipits were heard and observed at six locations along SARA Schedule 1) Special Concern3 the proposed pipeline route during the wildlife survey of the Line 4 Extension Project in 2007 (TERA 2007). In addition, three FWMIS records reported Sprague’s pipits within 2 km of the proposed pipeline route in 2009 (AESRD 2012a). Swainson’s Buteo swainsoni -- Sensitive Multiple records along the proposed pipeline route hawk (AESRD 2012a). wandering Thamnophis -- Sensitive Museum specimen found dead of unknown causes (1944) garter snake elegans approximately 1.5 km from proposed pipeline route (AESRD 2012a). western grebe Aechmophorus -- Sensitive No breeding colonies reported within 1 km of the proposed occidentalis Special Concern3 pipeline route. Multiple records and nests at Hastings Lake, approximately 1.5 km from the proposed pipeline route (AESRD 2012a). yellow rail Coturnicops Special Concern -- Yellow rails were observed at four locations along the proposed noveboracensis (COSEWIC, SARA pipeline route during the wildlife survey of the Line 4 Extension Schedule 1) Project in 2007 (TERA 2007). In addition, three FWMIS records were reported within 2 km of the proposed pipeline route in 2009 (AESRD 2012a). Sources: AESRD 2012a, NatureServe 2012a,b, TERA 2007. Notes: 1 COSEWIC 2012, Government of Canada 2011 2 ASRD 2011 3 ASRD 2010b
3.4 Provincially Identified Wildlife Areas A summary of the provincially identified wildlife areas in relation to the proposed pipeline route is provided below and shown on Figure 2.
The proposed pipeline route:
• is located within Sensitive Raptor Range for bald eagle from KPT 0.0 to KP 19.1 (NW 32-52-23 W4M to SE 17-51-22 W4M) and KP 28.9 to KP 90.0 (NE 15-50-22 W4M to SE 11-47-17 W4M) (AESRD 2010-2012);
• is not located within the 1,000 m setback of any provincially identified colonial nesting bird waterbodies (AESRD 2010-2012);
• is not located within the 200 m setback of any provincially identified piping plover waterbodies (AESRD 2010-2012). The closest piping plover waterbody is Oliver Lake, approximately 4 km east of the proposed pipeline route;
• is not located within the 800 m setback of any provincially identified trumpeter swan waterbodies (AESRD 2010-2012). The closest trumpeter swan waterbody is Cooking Lake, approximately 5 km northeast of the proposed pipeline route; and
• does not traverse any provincially identified Key Wildlife and Biodiversity Zones (AESRD 2010-2012). The closest Key Wildlife and Biodiversity Zone, associated with the North Saskatchewan River, is approximately 1.9 km northwest of KPT 0.0 (NW 32-52-23 W4M) of the proposed pipeline route.
Page 10
Enbridge Pipelines Inc. Wildlife Report Edmonton to Hardisty Pipeline Project December 2012 / 8288
Edmonton Terminal is located within Sensitive Raptor Range for bald eagle (AESRD 2010-2012). Kingman Station, Strome Station and Hardisty Terminal are not located within a provincially identified wildlife area (AESRD 2010-2012).
3.5 Environmentally Significant Areas, Parks and Protected Areas Environmentally Significant Areas The proposed pipeline route crosses four environmentally significant areas (ATPR 2009), as shown on Figure 3 and summarized below.
• Environmentally Significant Area No. 717 is crossed by the proposed pipeline route from KPHD 0.04 to KPHD 0.5 (in NW 11-50-22 W4M), KP 33.5 to KP 34.4 (in SW 1-50-22 W4M) and KP 34.9 to KP 35.3 (in NE 36-49-22 W4M to SE 36-49-22 W4M). The Environmentally Significant Area is 27,239 ha in area and supports important wildlife habitat for species, including the American white pelican, ferruginous hawk, piping plover and northern myotis. It also contains sites of recognized significance, including the Ministik, Joseph and Oliver Lakes IBA and the Miquelon Lake IBA.
• Environmentally Significant Area No. 380 is crossed by the proposed pipeline route from KP 114.4 to KP 115.0 (in SW 36-45-15 W4M). The Environmentally Significant Area covers 5,422 ha and includes large natural areas and habitat for focal species including ferruginous hawk. It also contains the Wavy Lake IBA, a site of recognized significance. The Wavy Lake IBA (IBA AB037) is a critical moulting and staging area for waterfowl including various species of duck, snow goose, greater white-fronted goose and sandhill crane.
• Environmentally Significant Area No. 117 is divided into multiple segments. It is crossed by the proposed pipeline route from KP 138.9 to KP 142.9 (NW 19-44-12 W4M to NW 16-44-12 W4M), and is also located 0.5 km southwest of the proposed pipeline route at KP 164.7 (NE 8-43-10 W4M). It covers 374,350 ha and includes large natural areas and habitat for ferruginous hawk.
• Environmentally Significant Area No. 362 is crossed by the proposed pipeline route from KP 171.8 to KP 172.1 (in SE 35-42-10 W4M) and from KP 174.7 to KP 175.0 (in SW 30-42-9 W4M). It is 24,468 ha in area and supports large natural areas, intact riparian areas, important wildlife habitat and habitat for focal species including ferruginous hawk and northern grasshopper mouse (Fiera Biological Consulting [Fiera] 2009).
Edmonton Terminal, Kingman Station, Strome Station and Hardisty Terminal are not located within any environmentally sensitive areas (ATPR 2009).
Parks and Protected Areas The proposed pipeline route does not cross any parks (ATPR 2011). The closest is Strathcona Science Provincial Park which is located approximately 2.0 km northwest of KPT 0.0 (NW 32-52-23 W4M) (Figure 3). The proposed pipeline route does not traverse any Ducks Unlimited Canada Priority Areas (DUC 2010).
The proposed pipeline route does not traverse any IBAs (BirdLife International et al. 2012, IBA Canada 2012), however, a segment of the proposed pipeline route is located directly adjacent to the Ministik, Joseph and Oliver Lakes IBA (IBA AB070) between KP 33.5 and KP 34.2 (in SW 1-50- 22 W4M). The Ministik, Joseph and Oliver Lakes IBA, listed as Globally Significant, contains excellent habitat for dabbling ducks and has recorded globally significant numbers of waterfowl in late summer. Joseph Lake hosts a number of colonial nesting birds such as American white pelicans, California gulls, double-crested cormorants, and the entire area is an important spring and fall staging site for waterfowl, including tundra swans (BirdLife International et al. 2012, IBA Canada 2012). Additional IBA’s are located in the vicinity of the proposed pipeline route, including Miquelon Lake (AB071), Wavy Lake (AB037), Bellshill Lake (AB116) and Shultz Lake (AB117) (BirdLife International et al. 2012, IBA Canada 2012).
The proposed pipeline route does not cross any National Wildlife Areas, Migratory Bird Sanctuaries, Western Hemisphere Shorebird Reserves, Ramsar wetlands or World Biosphere Reserves (BirdLife International et al. 2011, Environment Canada 2012, WHSRN 2011, UNESCO 2011).
Page 11
Enbridge Pipelines Inc. Wildlife Report Edmonton to Hardisty Pipeline Project December 2012 / 8288
Beaver Hills Initiative The proposed pipeline route traverses the Beaver Hills Initiative (BHI) area for approximately 25 km from KPE 10.7 (NE 33-51-23 W4M) to KP 32.5 (NE 2-50-22 W4M) in Strathcona and Leduc counties (BHI 2012). The BHI area (also known as the Cooking Lake Moraine) is an extensively treed, upland area consisting of rolling to hummocky terrain rich in native wetlands and aspen dominated boreal mixedwood forest habitat. This ecosystem supports a high diversity of vegetation and wildlife. The BHI was developed in 2002 from a collective recognition among all levels of government agencies, academia, industry and locally-active environmental groups that for this ecosystem to remain sustainable, the sensitivity of the BHI area needs to be considered when planning growth and development (BHI 2012).
One of the policies of the Strathcona County municipal development plan (MDP) is to identify, conserve and protect to the greatest extent possible, environmentally sensitive lands such as the Beaver Hills Moraine (i.e., BHI area) and all water bodies (Strathcona County 2007). Leduc County does not have any policies that are specifically related to development with the BHI area (Leduc County 2010).
3.6 Protective Notations The proposed pipeline route encounters one Protective Notation (PNT) (Alberta Energy 2012). PNT 030043 at NW 11-50-22 W4M (located between KP 30.5 to KPHD 0.5), is administered by the AESRD Red Deer Fish and Wildlife Office and is noted as being an Ungulate Habitat Protection Area. Referral to AESRD is required prior to issuing any dispositions in the treed areas. No additional clearing within this PNT is permitted without AESRD consent (Alberta Energy 2012). In addition, there is a January 1 to March 31 timing restriction for this PNT, which may be relaxed during mild winters (Moore pers. comm.).
3.7 Past Projects TERA has previously conducted wildlife field work along three pipeline rights-of-way that will be paralleled by the proposed pipeline route. Although this work was conducted in 1994, 1996, 2004, 2007, 2008 and 2009 these reports were reviewed as part of the literature/desktop review and provided information on wildlife habitat features and species with conservation status that were identified. A summary of the findings specific to wildlife and wildlife habitat are provided below.
Capacity Expansion Program The IPL Capacity Expansion Program Project included environmental studies for an initially proposed 705 km of new pipeline from Edmonton, Alberta to Regina, Saskatchewan. Wildlife surveys took place between May 13 and 25, 1994 at selected native prairie and tame pasture along the route (TERA 1994). No species with special conservation status were observed during the 1994 wildlife field work along segments in the vicinity of the proposed pipeline route (TERA 1994).
System Expansion Program II The IPL System Expansion Program II Project consisted of new segments of pipeline between Edmonton and Regina. Wildlife surveys were performed from May 24 to 30, 1996 on 42 segments of the route, which included segments located between KP 22.3 to KP 109.7 (SE 4-51-22 W4M to NE 4-46-15 W4M), KP 117.8 to KP 122.5 (SE 30-45-14 W4M to SW 22-45-14 W4M) and KP 135.2 to KP 170.0 (NW 26-44-13 W4M to SW 2-43-10 W4M) (TERA 1996). During the May 1996 survey, no site-specific wildlife habitat features were identified along this segment. No COSEWIC species of concern were observed (TERA 1996).
Joffre Feedstock Pipeline NOVA Chemicals Corporation (NOVA Chemicals) Joffre Feedstock Pipeline (JFP) project consisted of approximately 181.5 km of pipeline to transport propane and other natural gas liquids from the existing North End Facility in Fort Saskatchewan (8-14-55-22 W4M) to the existing NOVA Chemicals’ Joffre Site petrochemical facilities in SW 32-38-25 W4M. The JFP project parallels the proposed pipeline route from KPE 0.5 to KPE 10.0 (SW 33-52-23 W4M to NW 33-51-23 W4M). Wildlife surveys took place on June 1 to 4, July 6, and July 21, 2004 at selected areas (greater than 500 m) of native vegetation and tame pasture along the route (TERA 2004). No species with special conservations status were observed along the
Page 12
Enbridge Pipelines Inc. Wildlife Report Edmonton to Hardisty Pipeline Project December 2012 / 8288 segment paralleled by the proposed pipeline route. Several red-tailed hawk stick nests were observed along the JFP project, however, none were close enough to the route to be of concern (TERA 2004).
Line 4 Extension Project The Enbridge Line 4 Extension Project extended Line 4 from Hardisty to Edmonton, Alberta by connecting three existing inactive segments of pipe with three new segments of pipe to form an integrated pipeline to transport oil from Edmonton to Hardisty. In addition, new pumps were added at Edmonton Terminal, and Kingman and Strome Stations. Wildlife field work was conducted from June 11 to 16, 2007 at selected sites along the Line 4 Extension Project that parallels the proposed pipeline route, including from KP 0.4 to KP 37.0 (NE 32-52-23 W4M to NW 30-49-21 W4M), KP 51.4 to KP 98.6 (SE 5-49-20 W4M to SE 28-46-16 W4M) and KP 112.3 to KP 161.6 (SW 2-46-15 W4M to NE 13-43-11 W4M) (TERA 2007). During the 2007 survey, seven wildlife species with special conservation status were observed, including American bittern, American white pelican, black tern, great blue heron, sedge wren (all provincially-listed as Sensitive), Sprague’s pipit (Threatened on Schedule 1 of SARA and by COSEWIC) and yellow rail (Special Concern on Schedule 1 of SARA and by COSEWIC). No site-specific wildlife habitat features were identified along this segment (TERA 2007).
Page 13
R 25 W4M R 24 W4M R 23 W4M R 22 W4M R 21 W4M R 20 W4M R 19 W4M R 18 W4M R 17 W4M R 16 W4M R 15 W4M R 14 W4M R 13 W4M R 12 W4M R 11 W4M R 10 W4M R 9 W4M R 8 W4M 4 5 4 855
5 15 VU T 28 U 830 857 45 T VU V VU VU VU VU870 VU881 December 2012
Elk Island 3 5
3 T FIGURE 2
5 National Park 834
T 0 VU Mundare ¯ PROVINCIALLY IDENTIFIED WILDLIFE AREAS V !. VU631 e r Edmonton Sherwood m 2 WILDLIFE REPORT FOR THE 5
2 i T ENBRIDGE PIPELINES INC.
5 l Park i EDMONTON TO HARDISTY T Vegreville o n 2 14 13 PIPELINE PROJECT VU VU U855 R V i VU629 v 8288 !. 824 Beaverhill Lake e 1
216 5 U VU r 1 V T !. Environment KP 5
857 T VU630 VU !. 36 Edmonton to Hardisty Pipeline Tofield VU VU870 20 UV892 Highway
626 0
Beaumont U 854 5 834 V
0 833 VU 19 625 VU T Road 5 U VU V VU T !. Railway 30 Watercourse
814 9 4 Leduc U Waterbody 9 V !. T 4 855 T U623 VU City/Town 40 V VU21 !. 617 60 VU Provincially Identified Wildlife Areas 619 8 4 VU 8 50 !. 70 T 4 Bald Eagle T 616 VU !. VU14 Peregrine Falcon VU833 80 Viking 619 Prairie Falcon VU 870 7 4
Millet !. UV 7 90 T Key Wildlife and 4
T Biodiversity Zone 822 !. Trumpeter Swan Waterbodies/ U 100 26 V VU Watercourses and 500 m Buffer 6
834 4 Camrose VU !. 870 Colonial Nesting Birds T 6 110 VU 4
T Sharp-tailed Grouse 13 Wetaskiwin 613 VU VU !. 120 Piping Plover Waterbodies and Buffer 5 4
5 !. T
4 130
T Daysland !. 140 Camp Wainwright 4 4 822 Military Reserve 4 VU 611 !. T 4
VU 150
T 2A VU VU609 Killam VU609 Sedgewick !. 160 3
822 4 U B T 3 V !.
4 a M t 170 T tl ee e R tin i SCALE: 1:750,000 g v C 856 VU869 175.5 e U !. km re V Ponoka ek r Hardisty 0 5 10 15 20 855 !. 2
U 4 815 V (All Locations Approximate) T 2 VU 4 B T 13 872 a VU 854 VU t VU 608 t Bashaw 53 VU l VU e VU608 R 1 4 821 i UTM Zone 12N T 1 VU v Roads: Natural Resources Canada 2011; Railways and 4 56 e Watercourses: United States National Imagery and Mapping T VU r
d Agency 2000; Waterbodies: ESRI 2005; Environmentally x Significant Areas: Alberta Tourism, Parks and m . Recreation 2009; Wildlife Areas: Alberta Sustainable 3 850 0 U v V 861 Resource Development (ASRD) 2010; e U r V Wildlife & Biodiversity Zone: ASRD 2011.
_ tt
a 0 e B l f i Buffalo Lake e 4 l 0 R Although there is no reason to believe that there are d
l i
4 v T i 50 er any errors associated with the data used to generate T W VU 855 _ 12 this product or in the product itself, users of these data 2 835 VU 602 g U i V VU U are advised that errors in the data may be present. F 601 V _ VU 8 8
2 Mapped By: IL Checked By: TD 8 t R 25 W4M R 24 W4M R 23 W4M R 22 W4M R 21 W4M R 20 W4M R 19 W4M R 18 W4M R 17 W4M R 16 W4M R 15 W4M R 14 W4M R 13 W4M R 12 W4M R 11 W4M R 10 W4M R 9 W4M R 25 W4M R 24 W4M R 23 W4M R 22 W4M R 21 W4M R 20 W4M R 19 W4M R 18 W4M R 17 W4M R 16 W4M R 15 W4M R 14 W4M R 13 W4M R 12 W4M R 11 W4M R 10 W4M R 9 W4M R 8 W4M VU28A 28 45 54T T 54T VU VU VU15 Elk Island December 2012 U830 V 53T National Park FIGURE 3 T 53T Mundare ¯ 0 V e ENVIRONMENTALLY 631 r !. U m SIGNIFICANT AREAS, PARKS Edmonton VU834 V Sherwood il AND PROTECTED AREAS i
o 52T Park n T 52T Vegreville WILDLIFE REPORT FOR THE 16 R ENBRIDGE PIPELINES INC. VU i 13 VU824 v e EDMONTON TO HARDISTY Beaverhill r !. VU629 PIPELINE PROJECT VU216 VU630 Lake T 51T 8288 T 51T !. VU14 Tofield 881 VU !. Beaumont 20 VU626 Environment KP
19 625 50T VU VU 36 VU870 Edmonton to Hardisty Pipeline T 50T !. VU VU2 UV892 Highway 30 VU833 VU857 Road Leduc !.VU623 49T Railway T 49T 40 Watercourse !. 60 VU617 Waterbody City/Town 50 !. 70 854 48T
T 48T VU VU616 !. Park 619 80 VU Military Viking Millet 814 !. VU 90 47T Environmentally Significant Areas T 47T !. International 100 26 VU National Camrose !. 110 46T Provincial T 46T Wetaskiwin 613 VU U13 !. V 120 VU21 !. 130 45T T 45T Daysland !. 140 Camp Wainwright Iron Creek Military Reserve VU611 !. 44T
T 44T 150 609 Killam VU Sedgewick !. 160 2A VU 822 Ba VU ttl e !. 43T Mee Ri 855 T 43T tin ve VU 170 g C r 856 ree VU 175.5 SCALE: 1:750,000 k VU869 !. km Ponoka 56 VU Hardisty !. 0 5 10 15 20 (All Locations Approximate) B T 42T
a T 42T t t l 608 e 605 Bashaw VU53 VU R 815 VU i VU v e UTM Zone 12N r 41T Roads: Natural Resources Canada 2011; Railways and Watercourses: United States National Imagery and Mapping T 41T 821 872 Agency 2000; Waterbodies: ESRI 2005; Environmentally VU 861 U Significant Areas: Alberta Tourism, Parks and 850 VU V Recreation 2009. Buffalo VU Bat tle Although there is no reason to believe that there are
Lake 40T 12 50 Ri any errors associated with the data used to generate T 40T VU VU ve 835 r 602 this product or in the product itself, users of these data VU VU601 VU852 VU are advised that errors in the data may be present. Mapped By: TFB Checked By: t8288_Fig3_ESA_rev03.mxd R 25 W4M R 24 W4M R 23 W4M R 22 W4M R 21 W4M R 20 W4M R 19 W4M R 18 W4M R 17 W4M R 16 W4M R 15 W4M R 14 W4M R 13 W4M R 12 W4M R 11 W4M R 10 W4M R 9 W4M Enbridge Pipelines Inc. Wildlife Report Edmonton to Hardisty Pipeline Project December 2012 / 8288
4.0 RESULTS OF THE FIELD WORK 4.1 General Site Description 4.1.1 Edmonton Terminal The Edmonton Terminal is located within a highly developed petrochemical corridor. Two existing tanks are located in the north portion of the Edmonton Terminal in NW 32-52-23 W4M. The remainder of the property in NW 32-52-23 W4M is primarily cultivated with several isolated wetlands, a wetland complex and treed areas. There are extensive reed beds, some areas of wet grasses and thick poplar/willow woodland bordering a large deep marsh (Class IV) wetland complex and associated open water ponds.
The new pump stations to be located at the Edmonton Terminal at NW 32-52-23 W4M are anticipated to permanently disturb a portion of a deep marsh (Class IV) wetland complex (1.4 ha). In addition, a portion a deep marsh (Class IV) in NE 32-52-23 W4M will be traversed by the proposed transfer lines (i.e., temporarily disturbed).
4.1.2 Proposed Pipeline Route The proposed pipeline route traverses the TUC for 10 km (6%), provincial Crown land for 1.1 km (1%) and privately-owned land for 169.9 km (93%) in the White Area. Land uses include oil and gas activity and agriculture. Terrain is generally level to gently undulating along the proposed pipeline route with moderate slopes encountered at some locations along the southeast end of the route. Land use along the proposed pipeline route consists of: cultivated land (55.8%); tame pasture (18.8%); hay (11.7%); treed- pasture (10.4%); treed areas (2.4%); native prairie (0.1%); disturbed land (0.2%); open water (0.3%); a tree nursery (0.2%); and campground (0.1%) (Plates 1 to 4, Appendix C). The proposed pipeline route crosses seven watercourses including Goldbar Creek, Mill Creek, Irvine Creek, an unnamed channelized ditch at KP 94.1, two unnamed tributaries to Iron Creek at KP 135.6 and KP 140.6 and the Battle River. Further detail on the watercourses crossed by the proposed pipeline route is provided in the aquatics assessment (TERA 2012b).
4.1.2.1 Representative Habitat Types The proposed pipeline route traverses agricultural lands (including tame pasture, hay and cultivation), deciduous forests, coniferous forests, mixedwood forests, native prairie, wetlands, drainage features and vegetated pipeline rights-of-way.
Deciduous forests traversed by the proposed pipeline route include both aspen and balsam poplar dominated forests. Coniferous forests traversed by the proposed pipeline route are dominated by black spruce canopies with common Labrador tea and Schreber’s moss dominant understories. Mixedwood forest cover is characterized by trembling aspen, balsam poplar and white spruce. Native prairie was dominated by native graminoid species including Sandberg’s bluegrass, needle-and-thread, sand grass and blunt sedge. Vegetation structure of tame pasture was similar to native prairie, however, graminoid species were dominated by non-native species including Kentucky bluegrass and timothy (TERA 2012c).
The 2012 wetland field surveys has confirmed that 138 wetlands (13 km) are identified as being crossed by the proposed pipeline construction right-of-way, comprising approximately 7.75% of the proposed pipeline route. Wetlands crossed include 5 Class V wetlands, 23 Class IV wetlands, 74 Class III wetlands, 19 Class II wetlands, 3 Class I wetlands and 14 shrubby swamps. This list will be revised after the 2013 wetland field surveys at locations that were not visited in 2012 (TERA 2012d).
Further detail on vegetation types and wetlands encountered along the proposed pipeline route is provided in the vegetation survey (TERA 2012c) and the wetland evaluation (TERA 2012d).
4.2 Wildlife and Wildlife Habitat Observations A summary of wildlife species and/or their sign observed during the wildlife field work conducted in June and July 2012 is provided in Appendix D. The results of the wildlife are summarized below.
Page 16
Enbridge Pipelines Inc. Wildlife Report Edmonton to Hardisty Pipeline Project December 2012 / 8288
4.2.1 Mammals Ungulates Ungulate species and their sign (tracks, pellets, beds) observed during the wildlife field work included mule deer, white-tailed deer and moose. Mule deer were observed near KPHE 0.3 (SW 31-49-21 W4M) and KP 158.0 (NW 23-43-11 W4M), and white-tailed deer were observed near KPE 8.8 (SW 4-52-23 W4M), KP 27.3 (NW 22-50-22 W4M), KP 143.9 (SE 16-44-12 W4M), KP 159.6 (SE 23-43-11 W4M) and KP 168.6 (SE 3-43-10 W4M). Evidence (tracks, pellets, beds) of both mule deer and white-tailed deer were common along the proposed pipeline route in areas of tame pasture, treed-pasture and forest. Evidence of moose (pellets) was observed at one location near KPHD 0.0 (NW 11-50-22 W4M). No mineral licks were observed during the wildlife field work.
Carnivores Coyote and American badger were recorded during the survey. Coyote tracks and scat were observed in several locations along the proposed pipeline route. Old American badger burrows were observed near KP 81.2 (NW 19-47-17 W4M) and KP 141.1 (SW 20-44-12 W4M). No recent sign of American badger was observed. No other dens were observed during the wildlife field work.
Small Mammals Small mammals observed during the wildlife field work included red squirrel, Richardson’s ground squirrel, northern pocket gopher and mouse species. Red squirrels were observed in deciduous forest near KP 16.4 (SE 19-51-22 W4M), KP 17.2 (NE 18-51-22 W4M) and KP 25.2 (NE 28-50-22 W4M). A mouse (species unidentified) was observed in tame pasture near KP 133.2 (NW 34-44-13 W4M). Richardson’s ground squirrels and their sign (burrows) were observed along the length of the proposed pipeline route, primarily in areas of tame pasture. Evidence of northern pocket gopher (dirt mounts) was observed in all upland habitat types encountered by the proposed pipeline route.
Semi-aquatic Mammals Recent beaver activity (chewed trees, runs, tracks) was observed at the wetland traversed by the proposed pipeline route near KP 160.8 (NE 13-43-11 W4M). The proposed pipeline right-of-way does not appear to cross any beaver dams in this area. No other beaver sign was observed during the wildlife field work. A muskrat was observed in the Battle River near KP 173.6 (NE 25-42-10 W4M).
4.2.2 Birds Raptors, Vultures and Owls Raptors recorded during the wildlife field work included northern harrier, red-tailed hawk and Swainson’s hawk. Great horned owl and turkey vulture were also observed in the general area.
A stick nest occupied by an adult Swainson’s hawk with two young was observed in a willow approximately 50 m north of the existing pipeline right-of-way at KP 150.8 (SW 6-44-11 W4M) (Plate 5, Appendix C). Two other unoccupied raptor stick nests were observed adjacent to the proposed right-of- way at KPHD 0.1 (NW 11-50-22 W4M) and KP 66.2 (SW 14-48-19 W4M). A pair of Swainson’s hawks was observed behaving defensively south of KP 123.0 (NE 15-45-14 W4M), suggesting they were nesting in the area. However, a nest was not found since land access to search a larger area was not in place at the time of the field work.
Black-billed magpie and American crow nests were noted along and adjacent to the proposed pipeline route. None of the nests were occupied at the time of the wildlife field work.
Passerines A total of 50 passerines were recorded during the wildlife field work and included four SARA Schedule 1 and COSEWIC listed species including barn swallow, common nighthawk, loggerhead shrike and Sprague’s pipit (see Table 3 in Section 4.4). Five provincially-listed passerine species were also observed including Baltimore oriole, common yellowthroat, least flycatcher, purple martin and western wood-pewee.
Page 17
Enbridge Pipelines Inc. Wildlife Report Edmonton to Hardisty Pipeline Project December 2012 / 8288
Woodpeckers Woodpecker species observed along the proposed pipeline route included downy woodpecker, hairy woodpecker, northern flicker and yellow-bellied sapsucker. Evidence of pileated woodpecker (old work on trees) was noted near KP 27.1 (NW 22-50-22 W4M), KP 29.5 (NW 14-50-22 W4M), KP 30.1 (SW 14-50-22 W4M), KPHD 0.0 (NW 11-50-22 W4M) and KP 172.3 (SW 36-42-10 W4M).
Waterbirds Two SARA Schedule 1 or COSEWIC listed waterbird species, horned grebe and yellow rail, were recorded during the wildlife field work (see Table 3 in Section 4.4).
Eight provincially-listed wildlife species were also observed including American bittern, American white pelican, black tern, great blue heron, green-winged teal, lesser scaup, pied-billed grebe, sandhill crane and sora. American bitterns were observed in wetlands containing cattail and bulrush near KP 140.1 (SE 19-44-12 W4M) and KP 143.9 (SE 16-44-12 W4M). A flock of 31 American white pelicans was observed on the large wetland north of KP 138.6 (NE 24-44-13 W4M) and 3 were observed flying overhead near KPHD 0.1 (NW 11-50-22 W4M). Green-winged teals were observed near KP 139.0 (NW 19-44-12 W4M) and at a wetland north of the proposed pipeline route near KP 145.1 (NW 10-44-12 W4M). A lesser scaup was also observed at the wetland north of KP 145.1 (NW 10-44-12 W4M). Sandhill cranes were observed west of KP 138.6 (NE 24-44-13 W4M) and great blue herons were observed flying overhead near KP 84.4 (NW 16-47-17 W4M) and KP 138.9 (NW 19-44-12 W4M). Pied-billed grebes were observed at the wetland crossed by the proposed pipeline route near KP 159.6 (SE 23-43-11 W4M) as well as at wetlands located east of KP 16.2 (NE 19-51-22 W4M) and north of KP 139.0 (NW 19-44-12 W4M). Soras and black terns were observed at several wetlands along the length of the proposed pipeline route.
Additional waterfowl observed include American wigeon, blue-winged teal, bufflehead, Canada goose, canvasback, common goldeneye, dowitcher (species unidentified), eared grebe, gadwall, mallard, northern shoveler and ruddy duck. A pair of common loons were observed flying overhead during the field work. Additional shorebirds observed include, American avocet, American coot, greater yellowlegs, killdeer, lesser yellowlegs, marbled godwit, spotted sandpiper and Wilson’s snipe. Several gulls were also observed.
4.2.3 Amphibians and Reptiles Amphibians identified during the field work included wood frog and boreal chorus frog, primarily along the margins of wetlands, near watercourses and in wet pastures. No other amphibian species were observed during the wildlife field work.
No observations or evidence of reptiles were recorded during the survey.
4.3 Species with Special Conservation Status Table 3 provides a summary of the species with special conservation status that were identified during the literature/desktop review (Section 3.2), and any observations (i.e., seen, heard or sign) and information related to potential habitat along the proposed pipeline route. No SARA Schedule 1 or COSEWIC-listed species were observed during the July 2012 field work. Provincially-listed species recorded during the wildlife field work are provided in Appendix D.
Page 18
Enbridge Pipelines Inc. Wildlife Report Edmonton to Hardisty Pipeline Project December 2012 / 8288
TABLE 3
SUMMARY OF POTENTIAL SPECIES WITH SPECIAL CONSERVATION STATUS
Species and Status FWMIS Records / Observations during July 2012 Field Work little brown myotis (Endangered by No observations. Suitable foraging habitat is present throughout the route. Suitable roosting habitat is likely limited to a COSEWIC) few stands of mature forest in this area. Baird’s sparrow (Special Concern No observations. Suitable habitat was observed in hay and tame pasture along the proposed pipeline route. by COSEWIC) barn swallow (Threatened by Barn swallows were observed foraging along the proposed pipeline route in the vicinity of wetlands and in tame COSEWIC) pasture near KP 65.4 (SE 13-49-19 W4M), KP 66.2 (SW 14-48-19 W4M), KP 71.8 (NW 5-48-18W4M), KP 107.7 (NE 8-46-15 W4M), south of KP 123.4 (NE 15-45-14 W4M) and near KP 136.4 (NE 26-44-13 W4M). No suitable nesting sites for this species were noted along the proposed pipeline route in the areas surveyed, although there is suitable nesting sites at the facility sites. bobolink (Threatened by No observations. Suitable habitat was present along the route in hay, tame pasture and areas of native prairie. COSEWIC) chestnut-collared longspur AESRD FWMIS identified records of chestnut-collared longspur within 500 m of the proposed pipeline route (Threatened on Schedule 1 of (AESRD 2012a). SARA and by COSEWIC) No observations. Suitable breeding habitat is present along the proposed pipeline route in grazed or mowed native prairie and tame pasture. common nighthawk (Threatened Two common nighthawks were observed along the proposed pipeline route between KP 171.8 and KP 172.3 on Schedule 1 of SARA and by (SE 35-42-10 W4M to SW 36-42-10 W4M) (Plate 6, Appendix C). Suitable habitat was observed in open mixed and COSEWIC) coniferous forests, grasslands and tame pasture with sandy soils, such as those located from KP 169.5 to KP 169.8 (in SW 2-43-10 W4M ) and KP 171.0 to KP 172.3 (NW 35-42-10 W4M to SW 36-42-10 W4M). ferruginous hawk (Threatened on No observations. Suitable habitat occurs along the length of the proposed pipeline in areas supporting trees suitable Schedule 1 of SARA and by for nesting and in areas of native prairie and tame pasture. COSEWIC) horned grebe (Special Concern by AESRD FWMIS identified records of horned grebe within 2 km of the proposed pipeline route (AESRD 2012a). COSEWIC) A pair of horned grebes with two young was observed at the wetland crossed by the proposed pipeline route near KP 49.4 (NE 6-49-20 W4M) (Plate 7, Appendix C). Horned grebes were also observed at a wetland located approximately 210 m north of the proposed pipeline route near KP 145.1 (NW 10-44-12 W4M). Suitable nesting habitat occurs at wetlands crossed by the proposed pipeline route that support open water and sufficient emergent vegetation for nesting and cover. No suitable nesting habitat occurs within the proposed pump station location at the Edmonton Terminal; however, wetlands with open water and emergent vegetation occur in the southwest corner of the terminal site. Given the existing level of disturbance surrounding these open water wetlands, the habitat is considered to have low potential to support nesting horned grebes. loggerhead shrike (Threatened on Three loggerhead shrikes were observed in a row of willow adjacent to the north side of the existing pipeline right-of- Schedule 1 of SARA and by way near KP 138.6 (NE 24-44-13 W4M) (Plate 8, Appendix C). The row of willow appears to be suitable for nesting COSEWIC) habitat. The proposed pipeline route lies south of the existing right-of-way in this location, therefore, the row of willows will not be disturbed. A loggerhead shrike was also observed hunting in tame pasture and treed-pasture near KP 150.6 (SW 6-44-11 W4M), but no potential nesting habitat was observed near this location. Suitable habitat for loggerhead shrike occurs along the length of the proposed pipeline route in open areas, including tame pasture, agricultural areas and thinly wooded areas with small bushy trees and dense or thorny bushes for nesting. long-billed curlew (Special No observations. Native prairie suitable for nesting habitat is limited along the proposed pipeline route. Only the Concern on Schedule 1 of SARA southern portion of the route is within the long-billed curlew range (Federation of Alberta Naturalists 2007). and by COSEWIC) piping plover (Endangered on No observations. Suitable water bodies for piping plover were not observed along the proposed pipeline route. Schedule 1 of SARA and by COSEWIC) short-eared owl (Special Concern AESRD FWMIS identified records of short-eared owl within 2 km of the proposed pipeline route (AESRD 2012a). on Schedule 1 of SARA and by No observations. Suitable habitat occurs along the length of the proposed pipeline in tame pasture, farmland and COSEWIC) occasionally agricultural fields. Sprague’s pipit (Threatened on AESRD FWMIS identified records of Sprague’s pipit within 500 m of the proposed pipeline route (AESRD 2012a). Schedule 1 of SARA and by Sprague’s pipits were observed at multiple sites during the July 2012 field work: in tame pasture near KP 81.3 COSEWIC) (NW 19-47-17 W4M), KP 122.8 (NE 15-45-14 W4M), KP 136.5 (NE 26-44-13 W4M), KP 137.3 (SW 25-44-13 W4M), KP 137.5 (SW 25-44-13 W4M) and KP 143.2 (SW 16-44-12 W4M); and in a mix of tame pasture and hay near KP 65.3 (SE 15-48-19 W4M). An additional Sprague’s pipit was heard at a distance of more than 350 m from the proposed pipeline route near KP 172.3 (SW 36-42-10 W4M) over a segment of treed-pasture (Plate 9, Appendix C). Observations were generally made in suitable habitat: open grasslands greater than 500 m in length containing mixed height grasses and litter cover. yellow rail (Special Concern on AESRD FWMIS identified records of yellow rail within 500 m of the proposed pipeline route (AESRD 2012a). Schedule 1 of SARA and by One yellow rail was observed at a wetland on the right-of-way near KP 142.0 (NE 17-44-12 W4M) (Plate 10, COSEWIC) Appendix C). Habitat in this area was dominated by sedges, rushes and grasses, with some shallow standing water. Additional locations containing suitable habitat for yellow rail were noted near KP 132.7 (NE 33-44-13 W4M), KP 139.7 (SW 19-44-12 W4M), KP 140.5 (SE 19-44-12 W4M), north/northeast of KP 139.3 (NW 19-44-12 W4M) and north of KP 143.8 (SE 16-44-12 W4M).
Page 19
Enbridge Pipelines Inc. Wildlife Report Edmonton to Hardisty Pipeline Project December 2012 / 8288
5.0 DISCUSSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS The wildlife field work conducted in July 2012 provided an opportunity to assess wildlife habitat and wildlife use along the proposed pipeline route and to identify any routing constraints from a wildlife habitat perspective. Based on the results of the literature and desktop review and wildlife field work, and given the length parallel to existing linear corridors, a realignment of the proposed pipeline route is not warranted from a wildlife habitat perspective.
5.1 Recommended Supplemental Surveys A supplemental wildlife survey is recommended for the proposed Project in summer 2013 at the following locations:
• areas that were not able to be surveyed during the 2012 field season due to incomplete land access to obtain more detailed information at specific areas of interest; and
• at selected areas along the proposed pipeline route that were realigned after the July 2012 survey. Reroutes through areas of native vegetation, tame pasture and treed-pasture greater than 500 m in length will be surveyed.
5.2 General Wildlife Recommendations Mitigation measures to reduce potential environmental effects on wildlife and wildlife habitat during construction and operation of the Project are provided in the Environmental Protection Plan (EPP) prepared for this Project (TERA 2012e) and in Table 6.24 of the ESA (TERA 2012a).
Page 20
Enbridge Pipelines Inc. Wildlife Report Edmonton to Hardisty Pipeline Project December 2012 / 8288
6.0 SUMMARY Wildlife field work was conducted from July 13 to 26, 2012. Six Schedule 1 and COSEWIC listed wildlife species were observed during the July 2012 field work: barn swallow, common nighthawk, horned grebe, loggerhead shrike, Sprague’s pipit and yellow rail. Suitable nesting habitat for these species, with the exception of barn swallow, was identified along the surveyed segments of the proposed pipeline route. Overall project planning in combination with mitigation measures will reduce potential environmental effects to wildlife and wildlife habitat.
Page 21
Enbridge Pipelines Inc. Wildlife Report Edmonton to Hardisty Pipeline Project December 2012 / 8288
7.0 REFERENCES 7.1 Personal Communications Moore, D. Area Wildlife Biologist. Alberta Environment and Sustainable Resource Development. Vermilion, Alberta.
7.2 Literature Cited Alberta Conservation Information Management System. 2011a. Current element occurrence data emails. Alberta Tourism, Parks, Recreation and Culture. Edmonton, AB. Various Dates.
Alberta Conservation Information Management System. 2011b. Frequently Asked Questions. Website: http://tpr.alberta.ca/parks/heritageinfocentre/datarequests/faqs.aspx. Accessed: September 2012.
Alberta Conservation Information Management System. 2011c. Animal - Tracking and Watch Lists. Website: http://tpr.alberta.ca/parks/heritageinfocentre/animals/default.aspx. Accessed: September 2012.
Alberta Energy. 2012. Geographic Land Information Management and Planning System (GLIMPS). Project-specific search request completed July 20, 2012.
Alberta Environment and Sustainable Resource Development. 2010-2012. Wildlife Sensitivity Data Sets (digital files). Edmonton, Alberta. Available: http://www.srd.alberta.ca/MapsPhotosPublications/Maps/WildlifeSensitivityMaps/Default.aspx. Acquired: October 2010 - January 2012. Last Update Check: July 2012.
Alberta Environment and Sustainable Resource Development. 2012a. Fisheries and Wildlife Management Information System Records. Received from ASRD Edmonton (Delaney Anderson), Red Deer (R. Russell), and Vermilion (Dave Moore) Offices: June 2012.
Alberta Environment and Sustainable Resource Development. 2012b. Wildlife Management Units: WMU Maps and Legal Land Descriptions. Website: http://www.srd.alberta.ca/FishWildlife/FishingHuntingTrapping/HuntingAlberta/WildlifeManageme ntUnits.aspx. Accessed: September 2012.
Alberta Environment and Sustainable Resource Development. 2012c. Alberta's River Basins. Website: http://www.environment.alberta.ca/apps/basins/default.aspx?Basin=4. Accessed: September 2012.
Alberta Natural Heritage Information Centre. 2007. Explanation of Ranks. Website: http://tpr.alberta.ca/parks/heritageinfocentre/animals/definitions.aspx. Accessed: September 2012.
Alberta Sustainable Resource Development. 2010a. Sensitive Species Inventory Guidelines. 69 pp.
Alberta Sustainable Resource Development. 2010b. Species Assessed by Alberta's Endangered Species Conservation Committee: Short List. Updated June 3, 2010. 2 pp.
Alberta Sustainable Resource Development. 2011. General Status of Alberta Wild Species 2010. Website: http://www.srd.alberta.ca/FishWildlife/SpeciesAtRisk/GeneralStatusOfAlbertaWildSpecies/Genera lStatusOfAlbertaWildSpecies2010/SearchForWildSpeciesStatus.aspx. Accessed: September 2012.
Alberta Tourism, Parks and Recreation. 2009. Environmentally Significant Areas of Alberta. 1:1,000,000 map. Website: http://tpr.alberta.ca/parks/heritageinfocentre/environsigareas/docs/esa_pdfwebmap_update2009. pdf. Accessed: September 2012.
Page 22
Enbridge Pipelines Inc. Wildlife Report Edmonton to Hardisty Pipeline Project December 2012 / 8288
Alberta Tourism, Parks and Recreation. 2011. Parks and Protected Areas (including Crown Reservations). 1:1,000,000 map. Parks Division. Website: http://tpr.alberta.ca/parks/landreferencemanual/docs/pasites_2011sept.pdf. Accessed: September 2012.
Anthony, E. and T. Kunz. 1977. Feeding strategies of the little brown bat, Myotis lucifugus, in southern New Hampshire. Ecology 58: 775-786.
Banfield, A.W.G. 1974. The Mammals of Canada. University of Toronto Press. Toronto, Ontario. 438 pp.
Beaver Hills Initiative. 2012. The Beaver Hills Initiative. Website: http://www.beaverhills.ab.ca/. Accessed: October 2012.
BirdLife International, Bird Studies Canada and Nature Canada. 2012. Important Bird Areas. Website: http://www.ibacanada.com/. Accessed: September 2012.
Bureau of the Convention on Wetlands. 2012. The Ramsar List: The List of Wetlands of International Importance. Website: http://www.ramsar.org/pdf/sitelist.pdf. Accessed: September 2012.
Committee on the Status of Endangered Wildlife in Canada. 2002. COSEWIC Assessment and Status Report on the Long-billed Curlew Numenius americanus in Canada. Ottawa, Ontario, ON. vii + 31 pp.
Committee on the Status of Endangered Wildlife in Canada. 2004. COSEWIC Assessment and Update Status Report on the Loggerhead Shrike excubitorides subspecies Lanius ludovicianus in Canada. Ottawa, ON. vi + 24 pp.
Committee on the Status of Endangered Wildlife in Canada. 2006. COSEWIC Assessment and Update Status Report on the Burrowing Owl Athene cunicularia in Canada. Ottawa, ON.vii + 31 pp.
Committee on the Status of Endangered Wildlife in Canada. 2007. COSEWIC Status Report on the Common Nighthawk Chordeiles minor prepared for the Committee on the Status of Endangered Wildlife in Canada. Chelsea, Quebec. 27 pp.
Committee on the Status of Endangered Wildlife in Canada. 2008a. COSEWIC Assessment and Update Status Report on the Ferruginous Hawk Buteo regalis in Canada. Ottawa, ON. vii + 24 pp.
Committee on the Status of Endangered Wildlife in Canada. 2008b. COSEWIC Assessment and Status Report on the Short-eared Owl Asio flammeus in Canada. Ottawa, ON. vi + 24 pp.
Committee on the Status of Endangered Wildlife in Canada. 2009a. COSEWIC assessment and update status report on the Northern Leopard Frog Lithobates pipiens, Rocky Mountain population, Western Boreal/Prairie populations and Eastern populations, in Canada. Ottawa, ON. vii + 69 pp.
Committee on the Status of Endangered Wildlife in Canada. 2009b. COSEWIC Assessment and Status Report on the Horned Grebe Podecips auritus, Western population and Magdalen Islands population, in Canada. Ottawa, ON. vii + 42 pp.
Committee on the Status of Endangered Wildlife in Canada. 2009c. COSEWIC Assessment and Status Report on the Chestnut-collared Longspur Calcarius ornatus in Canada. Ottawa, ON. vi + 36 pp
Committee on the Status of Endangered Wildlife in Canada. 2010a. COSEWIC Assessment and Status Report on the Bobolink Dolichonyx orizyvorous, in Canada. Ottawa, ON. vi + 42 pp.
Committee on the Status of Endangered Wildlife in Canada. 2010b. COSEWIC Assessment and Status Report on the Sprague’s Pipit Anthus spragueii in Canada. Ottawa, ON. ix + 34 pp.
Committee on the Status of Endangered Wildlife in Canada. 2011. COSEWIC Assessment and Status Report on the Barn Swallow Hirundo rustica in Canada. Ottawa, ON. ix + 37 pp.
Page 23
Enbridge Pipelines Inc. Wildlife Report Edmonton to Hardisty Pipeline Project December 2012 / 8288
Committee on the Status of Endangered Wildlife in Canada. 2012. Canadian Species at Risk. Website: http://www.cosewic.gc.ca/eng/sct5/index_e.cfm. Accessed: September 2012.
Davis, S. K., and S. G. Sealy. 1998. Nesting biology of the Baird’s sparrow in southwestern Manitoba. Wilson Bulletin 110: 262-270.
Ducks Unlimited Canada. 2010. Current Priority Area Inventory. Ducks Unlimited Canada Priority Areas, Alberta, Canada. Map.
Environment Canada. 2012. Map of Environment Canada’s Protected Areas in Alberta. Website: http://www.ec.gc.ca/ap-pa/default.asp?lang=En&n=E6CF894E-1. Accessed: September 2012.
Federation of Alberta Naturalists. 2007. The Atlas of Breeding Birds of Alberta: A Second Look. Federation of Alberta Naturalists, Edmonton, Alberta. 626 pp.
Fenton, M.B. and R.M.R. Barclay. 1980. Myotis lucifigus. Mammalian Species 142: 1-8.
Fiera Biological Consulting. 2009. Environmentally Significant Areas. Provincial Update 2009. Edmonton, Alberta.
Government of Alberta. 2012. Integrated Standards and Guidelines: Enhanced Approval Process. July 16, 2012. 87 pp.
Government of Canada. 2011. Species at Risk. Website: http://www.sararegistry.gc.ca/species/default_e.cfm. Accessed: September 2012.
Hill, D.P. 1998. Status of the Long-billed Curlew (Numenius americanus) in Alberta. Alberta Environmental Protection, Fisheries and Wildlife Management Division,and Alberta Conservation Association, Wildlife Status Report No. 16. Edmonton, Alberta. 20 pp.
IBA Canada. 2012. Important Bird Areas. Website: http://www.ibacanada.ca. Accessed: September 2012.
Johnsgard, P.A. 1987. Diving Birds of North America. University of Nebraska Press. Lincoln, NB. 292 pp.
Johnsgard, P. A. 1988. North American owls: biology and natural history. Smithsonian Institute Press. Washington, D.C.
Leduc County. 2010. Municipal Development Plan (with amendments up to and including Bylaw No. 20- 10). Website: http://www.leduc-county.com/municipal-development-plan. Accessed: October 2012.
Natural Regions Committee. 2006. Natural Regions and Subregions of Alberta. Compiled by D.J. Downing and W.W. Pettapiece. Government of Alberta. Pub. No. T/852.
NatureServe. 2012a. NatureServe Explorer - An Online Encyclopedia of Life. Website: http://www.natureserve.org/explorer/index.htm. Accessed: September 2012.
NatureServe. 2012b. Heritage Status: Global, National and Subnational Conservation Status Ranks. Website: http://www.natureserve.org/explorer/ranking.htm. Accessed: September 2012.
Russell, A. and A.M. Bauer. 1993. The Amphibians and Reptiles of Alberta. University of Calgary Press. 264 pp.
Semenchuk, G.P. 1992. The Atlas of Breeding Birds of Alberta. Published by the Federation of Alberta Naturalists. 391 pp.
Smith, H.D. 1993. Alberta Mammals: An atlas and guide. Provincial Museum of Alberta. Edmonton, AB. 238 pp.
Stebbins, R.C. 1966. A Field Guide to Western Reptiles and Amphibians. The Peterson Field Guide Series. Houghton Mifflin Company. 279 pp.
Page 24
Enbridge Pipelines Inc. Wildlife Report Edmonton to Hardisty Pipeline Project December 2012 / 8288
Strathcona County. 2007. Municipal Development Plan Bylaw 1-2007. Chapter 1: Introduction. Website: http://www.strathcona.ca/departments/Planning_and_Development_Services/Zoning_planning_p olicies/municipal-development-plan-bylaw.aspx. Accessed: October 2012.
Strathcona County. 2008. General Environmental Conditions – Migratory Birds. 1 pp.
Sutter, G. C., T. Troupe and M. Forbes. 1995. Abundance of Baird’s sparrows, Ammodramus bairdii, in native prairie and introduced vegetation. Ecoscience 2: 344-348.
TERA Environmental Consultants (Alta.) Ltd. 1994. Survey of Fauna with Special Conservation Status for the Interprovincial Pipe Line Inc. 1994 Capacity Expansion Program. Prepared for Interprovincial Pipe Line Inc.
TERA Environmental Consultants (Alta.) Ltd. 1996. Wildlife Survey for the Interprovincial Pipe Line Inc. System Expansion Program Phase II. Prepared for Interprovincial Pipe Line Inc.
TERA Environmental Consultants. 2004. Conservation and Reclamation Report for the Proposed NOVA Chemicals Corporation Joffre Feedstock Pipeline. Prepared for Sunstone Projects Ltd.
TERA Environmental Consultants. 2007. Wildlife and Habitat Survey for the Proposed Enbridge Pipelines Inc. Line 4 Extension Project. Prepared for Enbridge Pipelines Inc.
TERA Environmental Consultants. 2008. Supplemental Wildlife and Habitat Survey for the Enbridge Pipelines Inc. Line 4 Extension Project. Prepared for Enbridge Pipelines Inc. June 2008.
TERA Environmental Consultants. 2009a. Pre-Clean-up Wildlife Surveys for the Enbridge Pipelines Inc. Line 4 Extension Project. Letter-report. Prepared for Enbridge Pipelines Inc. May 21, 2009.
TERA Environmental Consultants. 2009b. Pre-Clean-up Wildlife Surveys for the Enbridge Pipelines Inc. Line 4 Extension Project: Report 2. Letter-report. Prepared for Enbridge Pipelines Inc. May 29, 2009
TERA Environmental Consultants. 2012a. Environmental and Socio-Economic Assessment for the Enbridge Pipelines Inc. Edmonton to Hardisty Pipeline Project. Prepared for Enbridge Pipelines Inc.
TERA Environmental Consultants. 2012b. Aquatic Assessment for the Enbridge Pipelines Inc. Edmonton to Hardisty Pipeline Project. Prepared for Enbridge Pipelines Inc.
TERA Environmental Consultants. 2012c. Vegetation Survey for the Enbridge Pipelines Inc. Edmonton to Hardisty Pipeline Project. Prepared for Enbridge Pipelines Inc.
TERA Environmental Consultants. 2012d. Wetland Evaluation for the Enbridge Pipelines Inc. Edmonton to Hardisty Pipeline Project. Prepared for Enbridge Pipelines Inc.
TERA Environmental Consultants. 2012e. Environmental Protection Plan for the Enbridge Pipelines Inc. Edmonton to Hardisty Pipeline Project. Prepared for Enbridge Pipelines Inc.
United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization. 2012. Man and the Biosphere, Biosphere Reserves Directory. Website: Website: http://www.unesco.org/new/en/natural- sciences/environment/ecological-sciences/biosphere-reserves/europe-north-america/. Accessed: September 2012.
Western Hemisphere Shorebird Reserve Network. 2012. Sites in the Western Hemisphere Shorebird Reserve Network. Website: http://www.whsrn.org/sites/map-sites/sites-western-hemisphere- shorebird-reserve-network. Accessed: September 2012.
Page 25
Enbridge Pipelines Inc. Wildlife Report Edmonton to Hardisty Pipeline Project December 2012 / 8288
7.3 GIS Data and Mapping References Alberta Environment and Sustainable Resource Development. 2012. Trumpeter Swan Buffers (digital file). Edmonton, AB. Available: http://www.srd.alberta.ca/MapsPhotosPublications/Maps/WildlifeSensitivityMaps/Default.aspx. Acquired: August 2012. Last Update Check: September 2012.
Alberta Environment and Sustainable Resource Development. 2012. Trumpeter Swan Waterbodies and Watercourse (digital file). Edmonton, AB. Available: http://www.srd.alberta.ca/MapsPhotosPublications/Maps/WildlifeSensitivityMaps/Default.aspx. Acquired: August 2012. Last Update Check: September 2012.
Alberta Sustainable Resource Development. 2010. Colonial Nesting Birds (digital file). Edmonton, AB. Availablehttp://www.srd.alberta.ca/MapsPhotosPublications/Maps/WildlifeSensitivityMaps/Default. aspx. Acquired: November 2010. Last Update Check: September 2012.
Alberta Sustainable Resource Development. 2010. Piping Plover Buffers (digital file). Edmonton, AB. Available: http://www.srd.alberta.ca/MapsPhotosPublications/Maps/WildlifeSensitivityMaps/Default.aspx. Acquired: November 2010. Last Update Check: November 2010.
Alberta Sustainable Resource Development. 2010. Sensitive Raptor Range (digital file). Edmonton, AB. Available: http://www.srd.alberta.ca/MapsPhotosPublications/Maps/WildlifeSensitivityMaps/Default.aspx. Acquired: November 2010. Last Update Check: September 2012.
Alberta Sustainable Resource Development. 2010. Sharp-tailed Grouse Range (digital file). Edmonton, AB. Available: http://www.srd.alberta.ca/MapsPhotosPublications/Maps/WildlifeSensitivityMaps/Default.aspx. Acquired: November 2010. Last Update Check: July 2012.
Alberta Sustainable Resource Development. 2011. Key Wildlife and Biodiversity Zone (digital file). Edmonton, AB. Available: http://www.srd.alberta.ca/MapsPhotosPublications/Maps/WildlifeSensitivityMaps/Default.aspx. Acquired: July 2011. Last Update Check: September 2012.
Alberta Tourism, Parks and Recreation - Parks Division. 2012. Protected Areas (digital file). Edmonton, AB. Available: hhttp://albertaparks.ca/albertaparksca/library/downloadable-data-sets.aspx. Acquired: August 2012. Last Update Check: August 2012.
Alberta Tourism, Parks and Recreation. 2009. Environmentally Significant Areas (ESAs) in Alberta (digital file). Edmonton, AB. Available: http://tpr.alberta.ca/parks/heritageinfocentre/environsigareas/default.aspx. Acquired: August 2009. Last Update Check: May 2012.
AltaLIS. 2009. Alberta Township System version 4.1 (digital file). Calgary, AB. Available: http://www.altalis.com. Acquired: October 2009. Last Update Check: June 2012.
AltaLIS. 2012. Alberta Municipal Boundaries (digital file). Calgary, AB. Available: http://www.altalis.com. Acquired: September 2012. Last Update Check: September 2012.
Government of Canada. 2012. Aboriginal Lands, Canada (digital file). Edmonton, AB. Available: http://www.geobase.ca. Acquired: September 2012. Last Update Check: September 2012.
IHS Inc. 2004. IHS Hydro Region Data (digital file). Calgary, AB. Available: http://energy.ihs.com/Solutions/Regions/Canada/. Acquired: June 2011. Last Update Check: July 2012.
Page 26
Enbridge Pipelines Inc. Wildlife Report Edmonton to Hardisty Pipeline Project December 2012 / 8288
IHS Inc. 2011. IHS First Nations (digital file). Calgary, AB. Available: http://energy.ihs.com/Solutions/Regions/Canada/. Acquired: June 2011. Last Update Check: July 2012.
IHS Inc. 2011. IHS Miscellaneous Boundaries (digital file). Calgary, AB. Available: http://energy.ihs.com/Solutions/Regions/Canada/. Acquired: June 2011. Last Update Check: July 2012.
Natural Resources Canada. 2012. National Road Network – Alberta (digital file). Sherbrooke, QC. Available:http://www.geobase.ca/geobase/en/data/nrn/index.html. Acquired: September 2012. Last Update Check: September 2012.
TERA Environmental Consultants. 2008. Hillshade. Derived from Natural Resources Canada, Earth Sciences Sector, Centre for Topographic Information. 2000-2008. Canadian Digital Elevation Data 250k (digital files). Sherbrooke, QC. Available: http://www.geobase.ca/geobase/en/data/cded/index.html. Acquired: 2008. Last Update Check: December 2010.
United States National Imagery and Mapping Agency. 2000. Vector Map Level 0, Digital Chart of the World, Water Courses (digital file). Bethesda, MD. Available: http://geoengine.nima.mil/ftpdir/archive/vpf_data/v0noa.tar.gz. Acquired: September 2009. Last Update Check: September 2012.
Page 27
APPENDIX A
WILDLIFE SPECIES WITH CONSERVATION STATUS THAT HAVE POTENTIAL TO OCCUR IN PROXIMITY TO THE PROPOSED PROJECT
Right-of-Way within Preferred Habitat on Provincial Federal/Global Scientific Name Common Name Habitat Known Species Range Proposed Right-of-Way Designations Designations MAMMALS Lasionycteris noctivagans silver-haired bat Roosts in the cavities of old, decaying trees, including Yes Yes S3 (T.h)1 -- woodpecker holes and behind loose bark. Forages in openings. Sensitive3 Lasiurus cinereus hoary bat Roosts in coniferous or deciduous forest. Forages in openings, Yes Yes S2 (T.h)1 -- including above the forest canopy. Sensitive3 Lynx canadensis Canada lynx Coniferous and mixed forests. Yes No S4 (W)1 -- Sensitive3 Microtus ochrogaster prairie vole Upland prairie and grassland enclosed by aspen. Yes Yes S3S4 (T)1 -- Myotis lucifugus little brown myotis Roosts in buildings, large decaying trees, and rock Yes Yes S5 (T.h)1 Endangered6 crevices/caves. Forages in a variety of habitats, especially wetlands. Myotis volans long-legged myotis Rocky outcrops and caves. Yes No SU (T.h)1 -- Sorex hoyi pygmy shrew Dry, upland coniferous and deciduous forests. Yes Yes S3 (W)1 --
Page A-1 Spermophilus franklinii Franklin's ground squirrel Aspen parkland, particularly along forest edges with dense Yes Yes SU(W)1 -- grass cover. Taxidea taxus American badger Open grasslands and aspen parkland. Yes Yes S4 (W)1 -- Sensitive3 BIRDS Accipiter gentilis northern goshawk Mature mixedwood forest with high canopy closure. Yes No S3S4 (W)1 -- Sensitive3 Aechmophorus western grebe Deep medium to large lakes with extensive stands of emergent Yes Yes S3 (W)1 -- occidentalis vegetation. Special Concern2 Sensitive3 Ammodramus bairdii Baird's sparrow Ungrazed or lightly grazed native prairie, requires a tangle of Yes Yes S3 (T)1 Special Concern6 grasses for nesting. Sensitive3 Anas acuta northern pintail Open areas with seasonal shallow ponds, marshes and reedy Yes Yes S4S5 (W)1 -- shallow lakes with drier margins. Sensitive3 Anas crecca green-winged teal Wooded ponds and streams. Nests in upland area in dense Yes Yes S4S5 (W)1 -- cover, often in shrubs or sedges. In grassland subregions, Sensitive3 typically nests in sedges on low ground near sloughs. Anthus spragueii Sprague's pipit Open native grasslands of intermediate height and low shrub Yes Yes S3S4 (T)1 Threatened5,6 density Special Concern2 Sensitive3 Aquila chrysaetos golden eagle Rocky outcrops, sparsely treed mountain slopes and grassland Yes No S3 (W)1 -- habitats with coulees, steep riverbanks and canyons. Sensitive3 Ardea herodias great blue heron Open shallow water at edges of freshwater lakes and streams. Yes Yes S3 (W)1 -- Sensitive3 Asio flammeus short-eared owl Open meadows, marshes and clear cuts adjacent to cover and Yes Yes S3 (T)1 Special Concern5,6 hunting areas. May Be At Risk3
Right-of-Way within Preferred Habitat on Provincial Federal/Global Scientific Name Common Name Habitat Known Species Range Proposed Right-of-Way Designations Designations Aythya affinis lesser scaup Permanent and semi-permanent wetlands with tall, dense Yes Yes S5 (W)1 -- herbaceous vegetation for nesting. Sensitive3 Bartramia longicauda upland sandpiper Open, grassy uplands, hay fields, pastures, wet meadows and Yes Yes S3 (W)1 -- old fields with minimal shrub or tree growth. Sensitive3 Botaurus lentiginosus American bittern Areas with a dense growth of emergent vegetation or tall Yes Yes S3S4 (W)1 -- grasses. Sensitive3 Buteo platypterus broad-winged hawk Mature forests. Yes No S3 (W)1 -- Sensitive3 Buteo regalis ferruginous hawk Sparsely treed dry mixed grass prairie. Yes Yes S2S3 (T)1 Threatened5,6 Endangered2 At Risk3 Buteo swainsoni Swainson's hawk Open areas with tall shrubs or low trees for nesting. Yes Yes S4 (W)1 -- Sensitive3 Calcarius ornatus chestnut-collared Native pastures, grazed grasslands and hayland. Yes Yes S51 Threatened5,6 longspur Sensitive3 Cathartes aura turkey vulture Areas with trees for roosting, near water. Yes Yes S2S3 (T)1 -- Certhia americana brown creeper Coniferous and mixed mature forests. Yes Yes S3S4 (W)1 -- Sensitive3 Charadrius melodus piping plover Extensive sandy, gravelly beaches on shores of saline lakes or Yes Yes S2 (T)1 G34 Page A-2 ponds. Endangered2 Endangered5,6 At Risk3 Chlidonias niger black tern Shallow lakes, marshes, sloughs, ponds and wet meadows. Yes Yes S4 (W)1 -- Sensitive3 Chordeiles minor common nighthawk Open forest and forest clearings (e.g., logged or burned areas, Yes Yes S4 (T)1 Threatened5,6 natural woodland clearings), grasslands, rock outcrops and flat Sensitive3 gravel rooftops of buildings. Typically nest in open areas near logs, boulders, grassy clumps and shrubs. Circus cyaneus northern harrier Open areas near wetlands or marshy meadows. Yes Yes S5 (W)1 -- Sensitive3 Cistothorus platensis sedge wren Uncultivated and cultivated tall grass fields, bogs and Yes Yes S2 (T)1 -- meadows. Sensitive3 Coccyzus black-billed cuckoo Brushy thickets along roads and streams or dense bush in Yes Yes SU (W)1 -- erythropthalmus coulees. Contopus cooperi olive-sided flycatcher Forests and woodlands, burned areas with standing dead Yes No S3 (T)1 Threatened5,6 trees, taiga, subalpine coniferous forest and mixed coniferous- May Be At Risk3 deciduous forest, especially near wetland areas. Contopus sordidulus western wood-pewee Conifer and mixedwood forest, forest edges and woodlands; Yes Yes S4 (W)1 -- poplar forests and riparian areas. Sensitive3 Coturnicops yellow rail Large, dense grass or sedge marshes. Yes Yes SU (T)1 Special Concern5,6 noveboracensis Cygnus buccinator trumpeter swan Small to medium-sized shallow, isolated lakes with well Yes Yes S2S3 (T)1 -- developed emergent and submergent plant communities. Threatened2 At Risk3 Dolichonyx oryzivorus bobolink Open grassland areas; prefers large hayfields, moist meadows Yes Yes S2S3 (W)1 Threatened6 and weedy fields dominated by tall grasses. Sensitive3 Dryocupus pileatus pileated woodpecker Mature forests with large trees. Yes Yes S3S4 (W)1 -- Sensitive3
Right-of-Way within Preferred Habitat on Provincial Federal/Global Scientific Name Common Name Habitat Known Species Range Proposed Right-of-Way Designations Designations Empidonax flaviventris yellow-bellied flycatcher Moist coniferous forests, swamps, bogs. Yes No SU (T)1 -- Empidonax minimus least flycatcher Deciduous and mixedwood forests. Yes Yes S5 (W)1 -- Sensitive3 Euphagus carolinus rusty blackbird River groves, wooded swamps, muskeg. Yes No S4 (T)1 Special Concern5,6 Sensitive3 Falco peregrinus anatum peregrine falcon, anatum Cliffs near water, open fields, swamps and marshes. Yes No S2S3 (T)1 G4T3 subspecies Threatened2 Threatened5 At Risk3 Special Concern6 Falco sparverius American kestrel Open or partly open habitats (e.g., grasslands, farmland, Yes Yes S5 (W)1 -- watercourses) with scattered trees or woodlands. Sensitive3 Geothlypis trichas common yellowthroat Areas with dense, low vegetation (e.g., wetlands, early Yes Yes S4 (W)1 -- successional forests, forests with dense understory Sensitive3 vegetation). Grus canadensis sandhill crane Marshes, bogs adjacent to ponds. Yes Yes S4 (W)1 -- Sensitive3 Haliaeetus leucocephalus bald eagle Typically nest in mature trees along forest edges; often Yes Yes S4 (W)1 -- associated with lakes or rivers. Sensitive3 Himantopus mexicanus black-necked stilt Wet pasture and grassy shoreline of shallow pools, mudflats, Yes Yes S2S3 (W)1 -- marshes and lakes. Sensitive3 Page A-3 Hirundo rustica barn swallow Open areas near water. Often nest in overhangs of man-made Yes Yes S4 (W)1 Threatened6 structures (e.g., barns, bridges), cliffs or caves. Sensitive3 Icterus galbula Baltimore oriole Deciduous forests or mixedwood forests dominated by Yes Yes S4 (W)1 -- deciduous trees. Nest typically associated with forest edges Sensitive3 where tree density is low and water is near. Lanius ludovicianus loggerhead shrike Lightly wooded river valleys, coulees and grassland areas with Yes Yes S3 (T)1 Threatened5,6 trees/bushes. Special Concern2 Sensitive3 Lophodytes cucullatus hooded merganser Ponds, lakes, rivers that have fish available and woodland to Yes Yes S2S3 (T)1 -- provide nesting habitat. Melanitta fusca white-winged scoter Islands or shores of inland ponds, lakes or slow-moving Yes Yes S3S4 (W)1 -- streams in wooded, bushy, or overgrown sites; less commonly Special Concern2 in concealed or bare sites in open tundra or prairie; strongly Sensitive3 philopatric to nesting areas. Myiarchus crinitus great-crested flycatcher Mature deciduous and mixedwoods close to clearings. Yes Yes S2S3 (T)1 -- Sensitive3 Numenius americanus long-billed curlew Large tracts of open grassland with low vegetative cover for Yes Yes S3 (T)1 Special Concern5,6 nesting. Special Concern2 Sensitive3 Nycticorax nycticorax black-crowned night Large marshy lakes or ponds; man-made impoundments. Yes Yes S2 (T)1 -- heron Sensitive3 Pandion haliaetus osprey Trees or man-made structures (e.g., utility poles) near Yes Yes S4 (W)1 -- waterbodies. Sensitive3 Pelecanus American white pelican Shallow, turbid lakes remote from human activity. Yes Yes S2S3 (T)1 -- erythrorhynchos Sensitive3 Phalacrocorax auritus double-crested cormorant Large lakes or reservoirs, low-lying islands. Yes Yes S3 (W)1 -- Piranga ludoviciana western tanager Mature mixedwood forests. Yes No S3S4 (W)1 -- Sensitive3
Right-of-Way within Preferred Habitat on Provincial Federal/Global Scientific Name Common Name Habitat Known Species Range Proposed Right-of-Way Designations Designations Podiceps auritus horned grebe Shallow ponds and marshes. Nest along edge of emergent Yes Yes S3 (W)1 Special Concern6 vegetation near open water. Sensitive3 Podilymbus podiceps pied-billed grebe Marshes and ponds with dense emergent vegetation along Yes Yes S4 (W)1 -- periphery. Sensitive3 Porzana carolina sora Wetlands with a mix of both shallow and moderately deep Yes Yes S5 (W)1 -- water and emergent vegetation. Sensitive3 Progne subis purple martin Burned forests, logged areas or muskeg with snags for nesting. Yes No S3S4 (W)1 -- Uses nest boxes in urban areas. Sensitive3 Rallus limicola Virginia rail Freshwater lakes, ponds, marshes, sloughs and bogs. Yes Yes SU (T)1 -- Sayornis phoebe eastern phoebe Open wooded areas, often at forest edges. Prefers habitat near Yes Yes S4 (W)1 -- lakes or streams. Typically nest on cliff edges, caves, earth- Sensitive3 bank overhangs; sometimes nest in buildings, culverts or bridges. Sterna forsteri Forster's tern Marshes and marshy bays bordering lakes. Yes Yes S2S3 (T)1 -- Sensitive3 Strix nebulosa great gray owl Mature forests. Yes Yes S4 (W)1 -- Sensitive3 Strix varia barred owl Mature mixedwoods with open areas; lakeshores and stream Yes No S3S4 (W)1 -- valleys. Special Concern2
Page A-4 Sensitive3 Surnia ulula northern hawk owl Open coniferous or mixedwoods, muskeg. Yes No S3S4 (W)1 -- Tympanuchus sharp-tailed grouse Open prairie, shrubby sandhills, coulees and margins of Yes Yes S3S4 (W)1 -- phasianellus watercourses. Sensitive3 REPTILES Thamnophis elegans wandering garter snake Broad habitat preference: frequents (but not restricted to) Yes Yes S4 (T.h)1 -- ponds or marshes or ditches or dugouts in all habitat types. Sensitive3 Thamnophis radix plains garter snake Broad habitat preferences; frequents (but not restricted to) Yes Yes S4 (W)1 -- ponds or lakes or dugouts or marshes in short-grass prairie, Sensitive3 aspen parkland and marginally boreal forest. Thamnophis sirtalis red-sided garter snake Broad habitat preference; frequents (but not restricted to) Yes Yes S4 (W)1 -- ponds, marshes, ditches or dugouts and streams in all habitat Sensitive3 types. AMPHIBIANS Anaxyrus hemiophrys Canadian toad Primarily boreal forest, aspen parkland and shallows of Yes Yes S3 (T)1 -- temporary water bodies. May Be At Risk3 INVERTEBRATES7 Copablepharon dusky dune moth Sparsely vegetated active sand dunes and blowouts. Yes No S11 Endangered5,6 longipenne Danaus plexippus monarch Abandoned farmlands, roadsides and other open places where Yes Yes S31 Special Concern5,6 milkweed, goldenrod, asters and purple loosestrife grow. Sensitive3 Sources: ACIMS 2011a,b,c, ANHIC 2007, ASRD 2010b, 2011, Banfield 1974, COSEWIC 2012, Federation of Alberta Naturalists 2007, Government of Canada 2011, NatureServe 2012a,b, Russell and Bauer 1993, Semenchuk 1992, Smith 1993, Stebbins 1966
Notes: 1. Provincial (S) ranks are assigned by the provincial and federal Conservation Data Centre(s); in cases of conflict or missing data, the provincial CDC will have preference. Ranks range from 1 (five or fewer occurrences) to 5 (demonstrably secure under present conditions); definitions below are adapted from NatureServe (2012b) unless noted otherwise. S1 = Critically Imperilled: because of extreme rarity or because of some factor(s) making it especially vulnerable to extirpation. Typically 5 or fewer occurrences or very few remaining individuals (<1,000). S2 = Imperilled: because of rarity or because of some factor(s) making it very vulnerable to extirpation. Typically 6-20 occurrences or few remaining individuals (1,000-3,000). S3 = Vulnerable: because rare and uncommon, or found in a restricted range (even if abundant at some locations), or because of other factors making it vulnerable to extirpation. Typically 21-100 occurrences or between 3,000 and 10,000 individuals. S4 = Apparently Secure: uncommon but not rare, and usually widespread in the province. Possible cause of long-term concern. Usually more than 100 occurrences and more than 10,000 individuals. S5 = Secure: common, widespread, and abundant in the province. Essentially ineradicable under present conditions. Typically with considerably more than 100 occurrences and more than 10,000 individuals. S#S# = Range Rank: a numeric range rank (e.g., S2S3) is used to indicate the range of uncertainty about the exact status of the element. SU = Unrankable: currently unrankable due to lack of information or due to substantially conflicting information about status or trends. T = Designates a rank associated with a subspecies. (W) = Watch List: elements that are not currently considered as high conservation concern, but there is some information to suggest that they may become rare should there be significant alterations to the element’s habitats or population. Data for watch listed elements are collected by ACIMS (ACIMS 2011b). NR = Unranked: rank not yet assessed. (T) = Tracking List: elements for which ACIMS is actively collecting information on and processing element occurrences for because they are elements that current information suggests are rare or of conservation concern due to threats to populations or habitats or documented declines (ACIMS 2011b). (T.h) = Tracking List - hibernacula: elements for which ACIMS is collecting detailed information on known locations of hibernacula only (ACIMS 2011a).
Page A-5 2. Alberta's Wildlife Act. A species legislated as Endangered, Threatened or Special Concern under the Wildlife Act as designated by the Endangered Species Conservation Committee (ESCC) using definitions based on those used by the Committee on the Status of Endangered Wildlife in Canada (ASRD 2010b) (see Note 6). 3. Status designation assigned in the 2010 General Status of Alberta Wild Species (ASRD 2011). Only 'At Risk', 'May Be At Risk' and 'Sensitive' status designations are included herein. Definitions below are from ASRD (2011). At Risk: Any species known to be 'At Risk' after formal detailed status assessment and legal designation as Endangered or Threatened in Alberta. May Be At Risk: Any species that 'May Be At Risk' of extinction or extirpation, and is therefore a candidate for detailed risk assessment. Sensitive: Any species that is not at risk of extinction or extirpation but may require special attention or protection to prevent it from becoming at risk. 4. Global (G) ranks are based on species status world-wide and follow a system parallel to that for Provincial Ranks (Note 1), ranging from 1 (5 or fewer occurrences) to 5 (demonstrably secure under present conditions). Only Global Ranks of concern (G1 to G3) or questionable ranks are displayed, range ranks (G#G#) which include a G1 to G3 ranking are also included (e.g., G3G4) (NatureServe 2012b). 5. Species at Risk Act (SARA). The Act establishes Schedule 1 as the list of species to be protected on all federal lands in Canada. The Act also applies to all lands in Canada for Schedule 1 bird species cited in the Migratory Birds Convention Act and Schedule 1 aquatic species as determined by Fisheries and Oceans Canada. Endangered: a species that is facing imminent extirpation or extinction. Threatened: a species that is likely to become an endangered species if nothing is done to reverse the factors leading to its extirpation or extinction. Special Concern: A species that is particularly sensitive to human activities or natural events, but is not an endangered or threatened species. 6. Committee on the Status of Endangered Wildlife in Canada (COSEWIC 2012). Species listed as 'Extirpated', 'Not at Risk' or 'Data Deficient' were generally not included in the table without other noteworthy factors being present. Endangered: A species facing imminent extirpation or extinction. Threatened: A species likely to become endangered if limiting factors are not reversed. Special Concern: A species that is particularly sensitive to human activities or natural events, but is not an endangered or threatened species. 7. Only invertebrate species that are listed on SARA Schedule 1 are included.
Enbridge Pipelines Inc. Wildlife Report Edmonton to Hardisty Pipeline Project December 2012 / 8288
APPENDIX B
SURVEY LOCATIONS
Legal Land Location KP (W4M) Land Use(s) Comments Edmonton Terminal NW 32-52-23 W4M Cultivated, wetlands, treed areas Surveyed in July 2012 E 7.9 to E 8.7 NW 4-52-23 Treed-pasture, wetlands Surveyed in July 2012. E 8.7 to HB 0.5 SW 4-52-23 Cultivated, wetlands Surveyed in July 2012. 14.7 to 15.2 SW 30-51-22 Treed-pasture Surveyed in July 2012. 16.2 to 17.2 SE 19-51-22 Treed-pasture, wetland Surveyed in July 2012. 17.2 to 17.3 NE 18-51-22 Treed-pasture, wetland Surveyed in July 2012. 17.3 to 18.1 NW 17-51-22 Tame pasture, treed-pasture, hay Surveyed in July 2012. 18.1 to 18.8 SW 17-51-22 Treed-pasture, wetland Surveyed in July 2012. 19.1 to 20.0 NE 8-51-22 Tame pasture Surveyed in July 2012. 22.4 to HC 0.4 SE 4-51-22 Treed, wetland Surveyed in July 2012. 23.0 to 23.3 NE 32-50-22 Tame pasture Surveyed in July 2012. 25.0 to 25.9 NE 28-50-22 Treed-pasture, wetland Surveyed in July 2012. 25.9 to 26.1 SE 28-50-22 Treed-pasture, wetland Surveyed in July 2012. 26.9 to 27.6 NW 22-50-22 Treed-pasture Surveyed in July 2012. 27.6 to 27.9 NE 22-50-22 Treed-pasture, tame pasture Surveyed in July 2012. 27.9 to 28.8 SE 22-50-22 Treed-pasture Surveyed in July 2012. 28.8 to 29.3 NE 15-50-22 Treed-pasture, hay Surveyed in July 2012. 29.3 to 29.7 NW 14-50-22 Treed-pasture, tame pasture Surveyed in July 2012. 29.7 to 30.5 SW 14-50-22 Treed, tame pasture Surveyed in July 2012. 30.5 to HD 0.3 NW 11-50-22 Treed, hay Surveyed in July 2012. HE 0.3 to 36.5 SW 31-49-21 Treed, cultivated Surveyed in July 2012. 42.6 to 42.8 NW 15-49-21 Tame pasture No land access at the time of the field work. Assessed from adjacent location to confirm land use (tame pasture). 42.8 to 43.1 NE 15-49-21 Tame pasture Surveyed in July 2012. 44.3 to 44.8 SW 14-49-21 Treed-pasture Surveyed in July 2012. 44.8 to 45.2 SE 14-49-21 Treed-pasture Surveyed in July 2012. 45.2 to 45.8 NE 11-49-21 Tame pasture Surveyed in July 2012. 45.8 to 46.7 NW 12-49-21 Treed-pasture, tame pasture Surveyed in July 2012. 46.8 to 47.7 SE 12-49-21 Tame pasture, treed, cultivated Surveyed in July 2012. 49.3 to 49.4 NE 6-49-20 Treed, wetland Surveyed in July 2012. 50.5 to 50.7 SE 5-49-20 Cultivated, wetlands Surveyed in July 2012. 60.7 to 60.8 NW 20-48-19 Cultivated, wetland Surveyed in July 2012. D 1.5 to 63.1 SW 21-48-19 Tame pasture, wetlands Surveyed in July 2012. 63.2 to 63.4 NE 16-48-19 Cultivated, wetlands Surveyed in July 2012. 65.2 to 65.8 SE 15-48-19 Tame pasture, hay Surveyed in July 2012. 65.8 to 66.7 SW 14-48-19 Hay/tame pasture Surveyed in July 2012. C 1.2 to C 1.7 NE 12-48-19 Tame pasture Surveyed in July 2012. 71.7 to 71.9 NW 5-48-18 Hay, wetland Surveyed in July 2012. 81.1 to 81.6 NW 19-47-17 Tame pasture Surveyed in July 2012. 81.6 to 82.4 NE 19-47-17 Treed-pasture, tame pasture, wetlands Surveyed in July 2012. 83.7 to 84.1 SE 20-47-17 Cultivated, wetland Surveyed in July 2012. 84.4 to 84.7 NW 16-47-17 Cultivated, wetlands Surveyed in July 2012. 86.5 to 87.2 SW 15-47-17 Tame pasture Surveyed in July 2012. 104.9 to 105.5 SW 18-46-15 Tame pasture, wetland Surveyed in July 2012. 107.6 to HJ 0.4 NE 8-46-15 Tame pasture, wetland Surveyed in July 2012. 120.6 to 120.9 NE 21-45-14 Cultivated, wetland Surveyed in July 2012. 120.9 to 121.2 SE 21-45-14 Cultivated, wetland Surveyed in July 2012. 122.4 to 122.5 SE 22-45-14 Tame pasture Surveyed in July 2012. 122.5 to 123.4 NE 15-45-14 Tame pasture Surveyed in July 2012. 132.1 to 132.9 NE 33-44-13 Tame pasture Surveyed in July 2012. 132.9 to 133.5 NW 34-44-13 Tame pasture Surveyed in July 2012. 135.2 to 135.8 NW 26-44-13 Tame pasture, wetland Surveyed in July 2012. 135.8 to 136.7 NE 26-44-13 Native prairie, wetlands Surveyed in July 2012. 136.7 NW 25-44-13 Tame pasture Surveyed in July 2012. 136.7 to 137.7 SW 25-44-13 Tame pasture, wetland Surveyed in July 2012.
Page B-1
Enbridge Pipelines Inc. Wildlife Report Edmonton to Hardisty Pipeline Project December 2012 / 8288
Legal Land Location KP (W4M) Land Use(s) Comments 138.3 to 138.9 NE 24-44-13 Tame pasture Surveyed in July 2012. 138.9 to 139.6 NW 19-44-12 Tame pasture, wetland Surveyed in July 2012. 139.6 to 140.7 SW 19-44-12 Tame pasture, wetlands Surveyed in July 2012. 140.7 to 141.3 SE 19-44-12 Tame pasture, wetlands Surveyed in July 2012. 141.3 to 141.4 SW 20-44-12 Tame pasture, wetlands Surveyed in July 2012. 141.4 to 141.6 NW 17-44-12 Tame pasture, wetlands Surveyed in July 2012. 141.6 to 142.6 NE 17-44-12 Tame pasture, wetlands Surveyed in July 2012. 142.9 to 143.6 SW 16-44-12 Tame pasture Surveyed in July 2012. 143.6 to 144.4 SE 16-44-12 Tame pasture, wetland Surveyed in July 2012. 144.5 to 145.5 NW 10-44-12 Tame pasture Surveyed in July 2012. 150.0 to 150.3 SE 1-44-12 Tame pasture No land access at the time of the field work. Assessed from adjacent roadway to confirm land use (tame pasture). 150.3 to 151.0 SW 6-44-11 Tame pasture Surveyed in July 2012. 157.9 to 158.6 NW 23-43-11 Tame pasture, Treed-pasture Surveyed in July 2012. 159.1 to 159.8 SE 23-43-11 Cultivated, wetland Surveyed in July 2012. 160.0 to 160.1 SW 24-43-11 Cultivated, wetland Surveyed in July 2012. 160.7 to 161.8 NE 13-43-11 Cultivated, wetland Surveyed in July 2012. 166.8 to 167.4 NE 4-43-10 Tame pasture, hay No land access at the time of the field work. Assessed from adjacent roadway to confirm land use (pasture). 168.4 to 169.4 SE 3-43-10 Tame pasture/native prairie, treed- Surveyed in July 2012. pasture 169.4 to 170.0 SW 2-43-10 Tame pasture, treed-pasture Surveyed in July 2012. 170.2 to 171.1 NW 35-42-10 Treed-pasture Surveyed in July 2012. 171.7 to 172.1 SE 35-42-10 Treed-pasture Surveyed in July 2012. 172.1 to 173.1 SW 36-42-10 Treed-pasture Surveyed in July 2012. 173.5 to 173.6 NE 25-42-10 Treed-pasture, Battle River Surveyed in July 2012. 174.0 to 174.7 NW 30-42-9 Treed-pasture Surveyed in July 2012.
Page B-2
Enbridge Pipelines Inc. Wildlife Report Edmonton to Hardisty Pipeline Project December 2012 / 8288
APPENDIX C
PHOTOPLATES
Page C-1
Enbridge Pipelines Inc. Wildlife Report Edmonton to Hardisty Pipeline Project December 2012 / 8288
Plate 1 View southwest along the Battle River near KP 173.6 (NE 25-42-10 W4M) (July 21, 2012).
Plate 2 View northwest in cultivated field along the proposed pipeline route near KP 49.5 (NE 6-49-20 W4M) (July 23, 2012)
Page C-2
Enbridge Pipelines Inc. Wildlife Report Edmonton to Hardisty Pipeline Project December 2012 / 8288
Plate 3 View northwest in pasture along the proposed pipeline route near KP 136.4 (NE 26-44-13 W4M) (July 18, 2012).
Plate 4 View south in deciduous forest along the proposed pipeline route near KPHD 0.3 (NW 11-50-22 W4M) (July 25, 2012).
Page C-3
Enbridge Pipelines Inc. Wildlife Report Edmonton to Hardisty Pipeline Project December 2012 / 8288
Plate 5 View northwest at a Swainson’s hawk nest near KP 150.8 (SW 6-44-11 W4M) (July 20, 2012).
Plate 6 View northwest along the existing pipeline right-of-way showing the habitat where two common nighthawks were observed near KP 172.3 (SW 36-42-10 W4M) (July 22, 2012).
Page C-4
Enbridge Pipelines Inc. Wildlife Report Edmonton to Hardisty Pipeline Project December 2012 / 8288
Plate 7 View southwest at the wetland near KP 49.4 (NE 6-49-20 W4M) where two horned grebes with two young were observed (July 23, 2012).
Plate 8 View northeast showing a row of willow where three loggerhead shrikes were observed near KP 138.6 (NE 24-44-13 W4M) (July 19, 2012).
Page C-5
Enbridge Pipelines Inc. Wildlife Report Edmonton to Hardisty Pipeline Project December 2012 / 8288
Plate 9 View south in tame pasture where Sprague’s pipit was observed near KP 81.3 (NW 19-47-17 W4M) (July 16, 2012).
Plate 10 View north in wetland habitat where a yellow rail was observed near KP 142.0 (NE 17-44-12 W4M) (July 19, 2012).
Page C-6
Enbridge Pipelines Inc. Wildlife Report Edmonton to Hardisty Pipeline Project December 2012 / 8288
APPENDIX D
WILDLIFE OBSERVATIONS – JULY 2012
Common Name Scientific Name Signs Used to Identify Species Conservation Status1 Mammals American badger Taxidea taxus burrows -- American beaver Castor canadensis chewed trees, runs, tracks -- common muskrat Ondatra zibethicus visual -- coyote Canis latrans tracks, scat -- deer sp. Species unidentified tracks, pellets -- moose Alces alces pellets -- mouse sp. Species unidentified visual -- mule deer Odocoileus hemionus visual -- northern pocket gopher Thomomys talpoides dirt mounds -- red squirrel Tamiasciurus hudsonicus burrows -- Richardson’s ground squirrel Urocitellus richardsonii burrows -- white-tailed deer Odocoileus virginianus visual -- Birds alder flycatcher Empidonax alnorum auditory -- American avocet Recurvirostra americana visual -- American bittern Botaurus lentiginosus visual -- American coot Fulica americana visual -- American crow Corvus brachyrhynchos visual, auditory -- American goldfinch Spinus tristis auditory -- American robin Turdus migratorius visual, auditory -- American white pelican Pelecanus erythrorhynchos visual -- American wigeon Anas strepera visual -- Baltimore oriole Icterus galbula visual -- barn swallow Hirundo rustica visual Threatened (COSEWIC) blackbird sp. Species unidentified visual -- black tern Chlidonias niger visual, auditory -- black-billed magpie Pica hudsonia visual, auditory -- black-capped chickadee Poecile atricapilla auditory -- blue jay Cyanocitta cristata visual -- blue-winged teal Anas discors visual -- Bonaparte’s gull Chroicocephalus philadelphia visual -- Brewer’s blackbird Euphagus cyanocephalus visual -- brown-headed cowbird Molothrus ater visual, auditory -- bufflehead Bucephala albeola visual -- California gull Larus californicus visual, auditory -- Canada goose Branta canadensis visual -- canvasback Aythya valisineria visual -- cedar waxwing Bombycilla cedrorum visual, auditory -- clay-colored sparrow Spizella pallida visual, auditory -- cliff swallow Petrochelidon pyrrhonota visual -- common goldeneye Bucephala clangula visual -- common loon Gavia immer visual, auditory -- common nighthawk Chordeiles minor visual, auditory Threatened (SARA, COSEWIC) common raven Corvus corax auditory -- common yellowthroat Geothlypis trichas auditory -- dowitcher sp. Species unidentified visual -- downy woodpecker Picoides pubescens auditory -- duck sp. Species unidentified visual -- eared grebe Podiceps nigricollis visual -- eastern kingbird Tyrannus tyrannus visual, auditory -- European starling Sturnus vulgaris visual, auditory -- flycatcher sp. Empidonax sp. visual --
Page D-1
Enbridge Pipelines Inc. Wildlife Report Edmonton to Hardisty Pipeline Project December 2012 / 8288
Common Name Scientific Name Signs Used to Identify Species Conservation Status1 Franklin’s gull Larus pipixcan visual, auditory -- gadwall Anas strepera visual -- gray catbird Dumetella carolinensis auditory -- great blue heron Ardea herodias visual -- great horned owl Bubo virginianus visual -- greater yellowlegs Tringa melanoleuca visual -- green-winged teal Anas crecca visual -- gull sp. Species unidentified visual -- hairy woodpecker Picoides villosus visual -- hermit thrush Catharus guttatus auditory -- herring gull Larus argentatus visual -- horned grebe Podiceps auritus visual Special Concern (COSEWIC) house sparrow Passer domesticus auditory -- house wren Troglodytes aedon visual, auditory -- killdeer Charadrius vociferus auditory -- Le Conte’s sparrow Ammodramus leconteii auditory -- least flycatcher Empidonax minimus auditory -- lesser scaup Aythya affinis visual -- lesser yellowlegs Tringa flavipes visual -- Lincoln’s sparrow Melospiza lincolnii visual, auditory -- loggerhead shrike Lanius ludovicianus visual Threatened (SARA, COSEWIC) mallard Anas platyrhynchos visual, auditory -- marbled godwit Limosa fedoa visual, auditory -- marsh wren Cistothorus palustris visual, auditory -- mountain bluebird Sialia currucoides visual -- mourning dove Zenaida macroura visual, auditory -- mourning warbler Geothlypis philadelphia visual -- Nelson’s sparrow Ammodramus nelsoni visual, auditory -- northern flicker Colaptes auratus visual -- northern harrier Circus cyaneus visual -- northern shoveler Anas clypeata visual -- pied-billed grebe Podilymbus podiceps visual, auditory -- pileated woodpecker Dryocopus pileatus sign on tree -- purple martin Progne subis visual -- red-eyed vireo Vireo olivaceus auditory -- red-tailed hawk Buteo jamaicensis visual, auditory -- red-winged blackbird Agelaius phoeniceus visual, auditory -- ring-billed gull Larus delawarensis visual -- rock pigeon Columba livia visual -- rose-breasted grosbeak Pheuticus ludovicianus visual, auditory -- ruddy duck Oxyura jamaicensis visual -- sandhill crane Grus canadensis auditory -- sandpiper sp. Species unidentified visual -- savannah sparrow Passerculus sandwichensis auditory -- song sparrow Melospiza melodia auditory -- sora Porzana carolina auditory -- sparrow sp. Species unidentified visual -- spotted sandpiper Actitis macularia visual -- Sprague’s pipit Anthus spragueii auditory Threatened (SARA, COSEWIC) Swainson’s hawk Buteo swainsoni visual -- Tennessee warbler Oreothlypis peregrina auditory -- tree swallow Tachycineta bicolor visual -- turkey vulture Cathartes aura visual -- vesper sparrow Pooecetes gramineus auditory -- vireo sp. Species unidentified visual -- warbling vireo Vireo gilvus auditory -- western meadowlark Sturnella neglecta auditory -- western wood- pewee Contopus sordidulus auditory --
Page D-2
Enbridge Pipelines Inc. Wildlife Report Edmonton to Hardisty Pipeline Project December 2012 / 8288
Common Name Scientific Name Signs Used to Identify Species Conservation Status1 white-breasted nuthatch Sitta carolinensis visual -- white-throated sparrow Zonotrichia albicollis auditory -- Wilson’s snipe Gallinago delicata auditory -- yellow rail Coturnicops noveboracensis auditory Threatened (SARA, COSEWIC) yellow warbler Setophaga petechia auditory -- yellowlegs sp. Species unidentified visual -- yellow-bellied sapsucker Sphyrapicus varius auditory -- yellow-headed blackbird Xanthocephalus xanthocephalus visual -- Amphibians and Reptiles boreal chorus frog Pseudacris triseriata visual, auditory -- wood frog Rana sylvatica visual, auditory -- Sources: Scientific names and status ranks from COSEWIC 2012, Government of Canada 2011, NatureServe 2012a,b. Note: 1 Conservation status is only listed for species with COSEWIC or SARA Schedule 1 status designations.
Page D-3