Acknowledgements

Conservation Halton would like to extend our thanks to all the individuals who provided technical assistance, sampling equipment, data and advice in support of the monitoring efforts undertaken for the 2007 field season. Special thanks to the following volunteers, co-op students, summer students, interns and staff who provided valuable assistance in the field collecting information for use in this project.

Andrea Dunn Angela Ducharme David Gale Rachel Martens Brenda Van Ryswyk Kim Barett Sarah Hogg Brian Jamieson Lesley Matich Kent Rundle Jennifer Roberts Jennifer Wilson Michael McGill

Contributors/Writing Team

Andrea Dunn ……………………………. Monitoring Ecologist Rachel Martens …....…………………..… Aquatic Monitoring Technician Sarah Hogg ………………………..…….. Aquatic Monitoring Technician David Gale …………………………..….. Watershed Planner Brenda Van Ryswyk ………..……..……. Natural Heritage Ecologist Lesley McDonell ……………………...... Natural Heritage Ecologist Brad Rennick ………………………….... GIS Specialist Meghan Tydd-Hrynyk ………………….. GIS Technician Bill Gaines ……..……………….………. Coordinator, Forestry and Landscape Kim Barrett ……………………..…….. Senior Terrestrial Ecologist Samantha Mason………………………. Senior Aquatic Ecologist Brenda Axon…………………………… Manager, Watershed Planning Services

Table of Contents

1.0 Introduction...... 1 1.1 Conservation Halton Long Term Environmental Monitoring Program ...... 1 1.2 Supplementary Monitoring...... 3 2.0 Long Term Environmental Monitoring Program (LEMP) ...... 5 2.1 Aquatic Monitoring...... 5 2.1.1 Fish Community Monitoring ...... 5 2.1.2 Benthic Community Monitoring...... 9 2.1.3 Channel Morphology...... 16 2.1.4 Surface Water Quality Monitoring ...... 16 2.1.5 Groundwater Monitoring...... 24 2.1.6 Water Temperature Monitoring ...... 26 2.2 Terrestrial Monitoring...... 28 2.2.1 Ecological Land Classification ...... 28 2.2.2 Ecological Monitoring and Assessment Network (EMAN) ...... 31 2.2.3 Marsh Monitoring (Amphibians and Marsh Birds) ...... 34 2.2.4 Forest Bird Monitoring...... 37 2.2.5 Forest Pest Monitoring...... 39 2.3 Landscape Analysis for the Bronte Creek Watershed ...... 40 3.0 Supplemental Monitoring...... 43 3.1 Bronte Creek Atlantic Salmon Program ...... 43 3.2 Redside Dace (Clinostomus elongatus) Monitoring...... 44 3.3 Check Your Watershed Day – Bronte Creek...... 47 3.4 Fisheries Data Gap Sampling...... 52 3.5 Waterdown Woods Jefferson Salamander Radio Telemetry...... 52 4.0 Conclusion and Recommendations...... 53 5.0 Glossary of Terms...... 55 6.0 References...... 56 List of Tables

Table 1: IBI ratings and associated scores using the Modified Index of Biotic Integrity (IBI). ... 6 Table 2: Distribution of IBI scores in the Bronte Creek watershed...... 8 Table 3: Inter-year comparison of IBI scores for Sixteen Mile Creek Annual Monitoring Sites.. 2 Table 4: Inter-year comparison of IBI scores for Bronte Creek Annual Monitoring Sites...... 3 Table 5: Inter-year comparison of IBI scores for Fourteen Creek Annual Monitoring Sites...... 4 Table 6: Inter-year comparison of IBI scores for Grindstone Creek Annual Monitoring Sites. ... 5 Table 7: Inter-year comparison of IBI scores for Sheldon Creek Annual Monitoring Sites...... 6 Table 8: Distribution of IBI Scores at Annually Sampled Watersheds...... 7 Table 9: Benthic Invertebrate Indices and Associated Classifications...... 10 Table 10: Distribution of Water Quality Classifications at Stations Sampled in 2008...... 14 Table 11: Provincial Water Quality Objectives (PWQO) and/or desired objectives...... 17 Table 12: Bronte Creek, Percent Forest Cover...... 41 Table 13: Bronte Creek, Patch Size and Distribution...... 41 Table 14: Bronte Creek, Interior Forest Patch Habitat...... 42 Table 15: Bronte Creek, Percent Wetland...... 42

List of Figures

Figure 1: Conservation Halton Watersheds ...... 4 Figure 2: Frequency Distribution of Fish Species Captured in the Bronte Creek Watershed...... 1 Figure 3: Fisheries Sampling Stations and Associated Biotic Integrity Classifications...... 1 Figure 4: Annual Fisheries Sampling Stations and Associated Biotic Integrity Classifications. .. 8 Figure 5: Benthic Sampling Stations and Associated Water Quality Associations...... 12 Figure 6: Annual Benthic Sampling Stations and Associated Water Quality Classifications..... 15 Figure 7: Sample “Box Plot” Chart...... 17 Figure 8: Surface Water Quality Monitoring Stations...... 18 Figure 9: Chloride concentrations (mg/L) at Conservation Halton’s annual (PWQMN) Monitoring Stations...... 19 Figure 10: Nitrate + Nitrite concentrations (mg/L) at Conservation Halton’s annual (PWQMN) Monitoring Stations...... 20 Figure 11: Total Phosphorous concentrations (mg/L) at Conservation Halton’s annual (PWQMN) Monitoring Stations...... 21 Figure 12: Lead concentrations (µg/L) at Conservation Halton’s annual (PWQMN) Monitoring Stations...... 22 Figure 13: Copper concentrations (µg/L) at Conservation Halton’s annual (PWQMN) Monitoring Stations...... 23 Figure 14: Zinc concentrations (µg/L) at Conservation Halton’s annual (PWQMN) Monitoring Stations...... 24 Figure 15: Groundwater Quality Monitoring Stations...... 25 Figure 16: Water Temperature Sampling Stations and Associated Classifications...... 27 Figure 17: Ecological Land Classification Sites...... 30 Figure 18: Rattlesnake Point EMAN plot setup ...... 33 Figure 19: Terrestrial Monitoring Locations...... 36 Figure 20: Flux – Bronte Catchments...... 49 Figure 21: Proportion of Flow – Bronte Catchments...... 50 Figure 22: Proportion of Flow Category – Bronte Catchments...... 51

List of Appendices

Appendix 1: Fish Species observed in the Bronte Creek Watershed...... 61 Appendix 2: Fish species observed at Annual Monitoring Sites...... 63 Appendix 3: Benthic Invertebrates Observed in Bronte Creek...... 64 Appendix 4: Benthic Species observed at Annual Monitoring Sites...... 67 Appendix 5: Bronte Creek Geomorphic Indices...... 70 Appendix 6: Annual Monitoring Stations Geomorphic Indices ...... 72 Appendix 7: Bronte Creek Water Temperature Graphs ...... 73 Appendix 8: EMAN Initial Analysis of Rattlesnake Point Tree Canopy Composition ...... 78 Appendix 9: Amphibian abundance Hilton Falls...... 79 Appendix 10: Bird species recorded within 100 m fixed distance at Stations A and B, Hilton Falls Conservation Area, 2007...... 80 Appendix 11: Amphibian abundance Mountsberg Conservation Area...... 81 Appendix 12: Bird species recorded with the 100 m fixed distance at Stations A, B and C Mountsberg Conservation Area...... 82 Appendix 13: Birds observed through the Forest Bird Monitoring Program...... 83

1.0 Introduction

1.1 Conservation Halton Long Term Environmental Monitoring Program

Conservation Halton’s Long Term Environmental Monitoring Program (LEMP) was developed in 2005 to assess the long term health of the Conservation Halton watershed. The results of the program will assist with verifying whether Conservation Halton’s mission to “help protect the natural environment from lake to escarpment for the benefit and enjoyment of future generations” is being fulfilled (HRCA 2005).

Objectives of the program include the following:

• Monitor indicators of watershed health over a number of years to determine change (if any) in the health of the watershed. • Incorporate established and scientifically based monitoring protocols that are compatible with agencies throughout the province. • Partner with individuals and agencies monitoring throughout the Conservation Halton watershed to build a strong monitoring network. • Engage the community in monitoring activities to educate and promote the wise use of our natural resources. • Provide stakeholders with the necessary information to make wise management decisions (HRCA 2006).

The monitoring program covers the entire Conservation Halton jurisdiction including the major watersheds of Grindstone Creek, Bronte Creek and Sixteen Mile Creek as well as fourteen smaller watersheds. It focuses on both the aquatic and terrestrial ecosystems using biological indicators of watershed health. These site specific biological indicators/monitoring programs include the fish community, benthic community, channel morphology, surface water quality, groundwater, vegetation and forest health, marsh monitoring, forest bird monitoring and forest pest monitoring. In addition, larger landscape level monitoring using ortho-photography is used. This level of monitoring is intended to capture large scale changes to a given watershed that are less evident than site specific monitoring. By incorporating these two levels of monitoring Conservation Halton is able to determine if there are any changes in the ecological conditions within the watershed.

The Long Term Monitoring Program has been designed to focus on one specific watershed or watershed grouping (i.e. urban creeks) annually on a five-year cycle. In addition, annual stations spread throughout multiple watersheds, have been incorporated into the program to determine yearly fluctuations at existing stations. This schedule has been adjusted to coincide with Conservation Ontario’s Watershed Report Card schedule. This will allow results of the Long Term Environmental Monitoring Program to be incorporated into a reporting structure that is consistent with Conservation Authorities across Ontario. It will also provide the general public with a generalized assessment of the watershed they live in. After the first cycle of monitoring, the program will be simplified to follow a five-year schedule consistent with Conservation Ontario’s reporting schedule. The cycle for the first ten years of the monitoring program is as follows:

Conservation Halton Long Term Environmental Monitoring Program 1 Bronte Creek and Supplemental Monitoring

Year 1 - Sixteen Mile Creek (2005) Year 2 - Grindstone Creek (2006) Year 3 - Bronte Creek (2007) Year 4 - Urban Creeks (2008) Year 5 - Sixteen Mile Creek (2009) Year 6 - Grindstone Creek (2010) Year 7- Bronte Creek (2011) Year 8 - Conservation Halton owned properties and reservoirs (2012) Year 9 – Sixteen Mile Creek (2013) Year 10 – Grindstone Creek (2014)

In 2007, the Long Term Environmental Monitoring Program began its third year of monitoring with a focus on the Bronte Creek watershed. The Bronte Creek watershed is the second largest watershed within the Conservation Halton jurisdiction and drains an area of over 300 square kilometers. The watershed extends across a number of municipal jurisdictions (City of Hamilton, City of Burlington, Town of Milton, Town of Oakville, and Puslinch Township). It also encompasses a variety of significant natural areas including large provincially significant wetlands, the Niagara Escarpment, headwater wetlands and forests, significant valley systems and coldwater fish habitat. The majority of the watershed is rural in nature, with many residents depending on both the groundwater and surface water resources for their domestic water supply, recreational uses and irrigation and watering. As in many watersheds across Ontario, these uses are often in conflict with each other and the natural environment and as such monitoring to ensure the protection of the natural resources is a priority (Conservation Halton 2002). Additional monitoring at annual and semi-annual sites across the Conservation Halton jurisdiction was also completed in support of the LEMP. Figure 1 illustrates the Conservation Halton jurisdiction and the watersheds within its boundaries. Ecological indicators used in support of the LEMP include:

Fish Community: Ontario Stream Assessment Protocol Benthic Community: Ontario Benthos Biomonitoring Network Protocol Channel Morphology: Ontario Stream Assessment Protocol Surface Water Quality: Provincial Water Quality Monitoring Network Groundwater Quality: Provincial Ground Water Quality Network Landscape Analysis: GIS based Forest Community: Ecological Land Classification Forest Community: Ecological Monitoring and Assessment Network Marsh Monitoring: Bird Studies Canada Marsh Monitoring Program Bird Monitoring: Forest Bird Monitoring Program Forest Pest Monitoring: Modified Kaladar Plot and pheromone trapping

Conservation Halton Long Term Environmental Monitoring Program 2 Bronte Creek and Supplemental Monitoring 1.2 Supplementary Monitoring

In addition to monitoring completed as part of the Long Term Environmental Monitoring Program, Conservation Halton staff also completed additional monitoring in support of rehabilitation projects, planning initiatives and other studies and/or research programs. In the 2007 field season, staff were involved with the following initiatives:

• Bronte Creek Atlantic Salmon Program • Redside Dace Intensive Monitoring • Fisheries Data Gap sampling • Check Your Watershed Day • Waterdown Woods Jefferson Salamander Radio Telemetry

Results of these additional monitoring initiatives can be found in Section 3.0.

Conservation Halton Long Term Environmental Monitoring Program 3 Bronte Creek and Supplemental Monitoring Figure 1: Conservation Halton Watersheds

Conservation Halton Long Term Environmental Monitoring Program 4 Bronte Creek and Supplemental Monitoring 2.0 Long Term Environmental Monitoring Program (LEMP)

2.1 Aquatic Monitoring

Sampling and monitoring of the aquatic environment was completed at numerous sites throughout the Conservation Halton watershed in order to document baseline conditions and identify changes in the aquatic environment. In doing so, specific biological communities (fish and benthic invertebrates) were sampled as well as their physical environment and habitat conditions (water quality and channel morphology). When compiled, the biological communities and examination of the physical environment can provide an assessment of stream health in a given reach. Aquatic monitoring completed through the LEMP was broken into both watershed focused sampling (Bronte Creek in 2007) and annual station sampling (jurisdiction wide), both of which followed the same sampling protocols.

2.1.1 Fish Community Monitoring

Sampling Methodology

Conservation Halton’s fish community monitoring uses module 3 of the Ontario Stream Assessment Protocol (OSAP) to sample the fish community (Stanfield 2005). According to this protocol, sampling stations are first identified by locating both a downstream and upstream crossover that are separated by a minimum of 40m and are comprised of at least one riffle/pool sequence. Once identified, the sampling station is sampled by using a Smithroot backpack electrofishing unit progressing across all available habitats from bank to bank. The amount of effort Conservation Halton staff electrofishing on the Main expended at each sampling station is Branch of Bronte Creek. dependent on the total area of the site. This is then multiplied by two and five, to find the minimum and maximum number of electrofishing seconds. This ensures that Conservation Halton’s protocol is within the OSAP screening level assessments (Stanfield 2005). All fish captured are then bulk weighed and measured with the exception of any sportfish, which are individually weighed and measured. The condition of the fish and any identifiable diseases are also noted. All fish are then released back to the stream.

Analysis

Fish community monitoring was assessed using a modified Index of Biotic Integrity (IBI) first adapted to Southern Ontario Streams by Steedman (1988). This methodology measures fish community associations to identify the general health of a stream ecosystem based on its

Conservation Halton Long Term Environmental Monitoring Program 5 Bronte Creek and Supplemental Monitoring upstream drainage area. Steedman’s original IBI utilizes ten different indices including indicators species, trophic composition, fish abundance and health. Although these metrics are useful indicators of stream health all indices may not be suited to all streams. In order to use the IBI analysis for both warmwater and coldwater tributaries throughout the watershed, two sub-indices were modified to better reflect stream conditions. The first sub-indice removed was the presence of blackspot, a common parasite of fish. Although this may affect stream fish, it does not necessarily reflect unhealthy stream conditions and as such was removed from the analysis. The second sub-indice modified, the presence or absence of Brook Trout, was removed to better reflect stream conditions where Brook Trout would not naturally occur (i.e. warmwater tributaries). In order to account for the removal of these sub-indices, IBI scores for coldwater stations were based on nine sub-indices whereas warmwater stations were based on eight sub- indices and are standardized to be equally weighted for direct comparison with coldwater stations, as was done in the Humber River Fisheries Management Plan (OMNR and TRCA 2005). Indices used to form the Index of Biotic Integrity are found below:

SPECIES RICHNESS Number of native species Number of darter and/or sculpin species Number of sunfish and/or trout species Number of sucker and/or catfish species

LOCAL INDICATOR SPECIES Presence or absence of Brook Trout (coldwater stations only) Presence or absence of Rhinichthys species

TROPHIC COMPOSITION Percent of sample as omnivores Percent of samples as piscivores

FISH ABUNDANCE Catch per minute of sampling

It should be noted that with the IBI methodologies, assessment appears to be sensitive to the capture of particular species such as darters, trout and suckers. Generally, a year catch that by chance fluctuated by darter, sucker or trout species could shift the IBI scores significantly. It is also important to note that if suitable information is not collected (i.e. the number or biomass of fish) IBI analysis cannot be completed. For this reason, analysis based on historical information may not be possible. Table 1 provides a summary of IBI ratings and associated scores. Table 1: IBI ratings and associated scores using the Modified Index of Biotic Integrity (IBI).

IBI Rating Modified IBI Scores Poor 9-20 Fair 21-27 Good 28-37 Very Good 38-45

Conservation Halton Long Term Environmental Monitoring Program 6 Bronte Creek and Supplemental Monitoring Watershed Focus - Bronte Creek

The fish community within the Bronte Creek watershed is varied with approximately 69 different species of fish recorded since the early 1900’s. This diverse assemblage of fish species inhabit a wide variety of habitats including small and intermediate riverine coldwater, intermediate riverine warmwater, rivermouth and nearshore habitats. It should be noted that only wadable habitats within the Bronte Creek watershed were sampled as part of the Long Term Environmental Monitoring Program, due largely to access and site suitability (relating to both safety and monitoring protocol).

In the 2007 sampling season, extensive monitoring was completed on the Bronte Creek watershed, due largely in part to the Long Term Environmental Monitoring Program and the Atlantic Salmon Monitoring Program. Additional monitoring was also completed within Bronte Creek as part of Redside Dace (Clinostomus elongates) monitoring and data gap electrofishing. For analysis purposes and since these monitoring programs all focused on the same watershed, all information collected on the Bronte Creek watershed is included in this discussion.

As a result of the extensive sampling completed throughout the watershed a total of 41 different species were observed and over 5,400 fish were captured within the riverine, nearshore and marsh habitats within the watershed. Species ranged from warmwater forage fish to coldwater sportfish indicating the wide variety of species and habitat diversity within the watershed. However as seen in Figure 2, this diversity has shifted significantly since the original Twelve Mile Creek Conservation Report (1960). Of the species captured in 2007, Creek Chub A number of trout species waiting to be identified and (Semotilus atromaculatus) was by far measured. the most abundant species followed closely by Rainbow Darter (Etheostoma caeruleum). Additional abundant species include Blacknose Dace (Rhinichthys atratulus), Longnose Dace (Rhinichthys cataractae) and Fantail Darter (Etheostoma flabellare). As seen in Figure 2, Creek Chub White Sucker (Catostomus commersoni) and Blacknose Dace were the most widely distributed species and were encountered at 64%, 58% and 56% of the stations, respectively. The remaining species were found in relatively low numbers in comparison and were randomly distributed throughout the watershed. Invasive species within the watershed were also found in relatively low numbers. Common Carp (Cyprinus carpio) was observed at only two stations within the watershed and with only two individuals captured. Round Goby (Neogobius melanostomus) was found in the lower reaches of the watershed within Bronte Marsh and along the Lake Ontario shoreline within Bronte Harbour. Gobies were observed at three stations within this area and a total of 64 individuals were captured. No sampling was conducted between Bronte Marsh and the QEW

Conservation Halton Long Term Environmental Monitoring Program 7 Bronte Creek and Supplemental Monitoring highway, an area where Round Gobies have been found in large numbers in the past. It is hypothesized that their presence continues to be large in this area however there is little evidence indicating they have moved further upstream. See Appendix 1 for a list of species caught within the Bronte Creek watershed in 2007.

As illustrated in Table 2, the Index of Biotic Integrity (IBI) analysis of the fish community showed a range of biotic health from “poor” to “good” across the watershed, however no stations were considered to be in “very good” condition. Stations considered to be in poor biotic health generally had low species diversity based on their stream habitat and location within the watershed. In contrast, sites considered to be in good biotic health had a higher diversity of species and fewer generalist or invasive species. These stations also contained higher numbers of fish and associated biomass, indicating higher stream productivity. Figure 3 illustrates the distribution of sampling stations within the watershed and the associated IBI rankings for each station.

Table 2: Distribution of IBI scores in the Bronte Creek watershed.

Subwatershed Poor Fair Good Very Good (9-20) (21-27) (28-37) (38-45) Flamboro Creek - 1 (100%) - - Indian Creek - 1 (50%) 1 (50%) - Kilbride Creek - 3 (100%) - - Limestone Creek 1 (20%) 3 (60%) 1 (20%) - Lowville Creek - 1 (100%) - - Main Bronte 3 (17%) 12 (66%) 3 (17%) - Mount Nemo Creek - - - - Mountsberg Creek 3 (60%) - 2 (40%) - Strabane Creek - - - - Willoughby Creek - 4 (100%) - - Overall Bronte 7 (18%) 25 (64%) 7 (18%) 0

The IBI scores for the majority of the watershed were relatively consistent however distinct changes were noticed in specific sub-watersheds. Generally, Main Bronte Creek was considered to be in fair condition as it had the largest number of stations as fair (12), with only 3 good stations and 3 poor stations. Stations considered to be in poor condition through this reach were generally associated with a decrease in natural habitat (adequate riffle/pool sequences and woody debris or instream habitat structure), limited riparian habitat and human influence. An example of such stations included two within Lowville Park, which exhibited all of these issues. Stations considered to be in good biotic health had ample pool habitat and refugia, large amounts of woody debris and intact and dense riparian habitat. Two of the three stations with a good IBI score were also found within protected valleylands with limited human influence. These stations

Conservation Halton Long Term Environmental Monitoring Program 8 Bronte Creek and Supplemental Monitoring were able to support larger numbers of fish, including a higher proportion of piscivores and specialist species.

IBI scores for the remaining subwatersheds varied. The Lowville Creek subwatershed had only one station surveyed within its area which was considered to be in fair condition. This station was relatively silt laden with exposed banks and pools of stagnant water. Somewhat similar conditions within the Willoughby Creek subwatershed resulted in fair biotic health. Although target species (Brook Trout) for this subwatershed were captured, large alterations to the habitat and adjacent lands have resulted in detrimental affects on the stream. One station sampled on private lands downstream of Cedar Springs Road was so heavily laden with silt that it was difficult to sample. Downstream, within the Cedar Springs Community, extensive alterations to the creek were evident as extensive barriers and dams were installed along the length of the reach. This has resulted in substantial isolation of fish populations through the reach. As a result, extremely low numbers of fish were observed and species caught consisted largely of Brook Trout (Salvelinus fontinalis) and Blacknose Dace.

The Limestone Creek subwatershed, which has similar natural characteristics to the Willoughby Creek subwatershed had four stations sampled within its drainage area. These stations were considered to be healthier and in fair biotic health. This is likely attributed to the natural and largely unaltered stream conditions. Larger numbers of salmonids were captured within this subwatershed and there was an increase in diversity with the addition of Brown Trout (Salmo trutta) and Rainbow Trout (Orcorhynchus mykiss), which were found in the mid to lower reaches of the subwatershed. The Kilbride Creek subwatershed was also considered to be in fair condition. Habitat structure at the stations sampled were all in relatively good condition with ample woody debris, undercut banks and refugia, however this subwatershed was one of many areas that were heavily affected by drought conditions and low water levels exhibited in the summer of 2007. Additional stations slated for sampling could not be done due to dry stream conditions. The dry conditions likely had an adverse effect on biotic health through this reach. Similar conditions were also exhibited in the Flamboro Creek subwatershed. Only one station, less then 500 m upstream of the confluence with Main Bronte Creek, was able to be sampled in this subwatershed due to the low stream conditions. This station was considered to be in fair biotic health in 2007, although it is possible that in times of higher flows that the reach would be utilized by more fish.

The Mountsberg Creek subwatershed was also considered to be in fair condition. Of the six stations sampled in 2007, three were considered to be poor condition, one fair and two were considered to be in good condition. The stations in good biotic health were in rural areas with adjacent homes, but had healthy intact channels with ample riffles, pools, undercut banks and clean substrates. This resulted in high stream productivity and species diversity and thereby a higher IBI score. In areas considered to be in poor condition, stream widening, excess siltation and uncharacteristic (marsh-like) stream conditions hindered stream productivity resulting in a lower IBI score. The one station considered to be in fair condition was located just upstream of the confluence with Main Bronte creek within Courtcliffe Park. This station had areas of excess silt and limited channel structure on the lower end but also had clean substrates, undercut banks, riffles and pools on the upper end which helped to improve conditions throughout the station.

Conservation Halton Long Term Environmental Monitoring Program 9 Bronte Creek and Supplemental Monitoring The Indian Creek subwatershed was by far the most unique with respect to habitat and biotic health. In contrast to the other stations where habitat played an important role in stream productivity and health, within the Indian Creek subwatershed habitat and channel structure had very little influence on the biotic health. Two stations were sampled within this subwatershed, one in the upper reaches within the vicinity of substantial residential development in Milton and another midway through the subwatershed in a naturalized channel. A third station on the lower end of the subwatershed could not be sampled due to dry stream conditions. The upper station was within a straightened, sluggish, silt-laden channel adjacent to a corn field and directly downstream of a road crossing and reconstructed channel upstream. A small riparian buffer consisting of only a strip of cattails was the only vegetation within the sampling area. Regardless, the fish productivity in this reach was substantial resulting in one of the highest IBI scores of the study. In contrast, the station midway through the subwatershed had a natural channel structure but was silt laden and surrounded by cattails. In this instance, few fish were captured and species diversity diminished resulting in a fair biotic rating. The Indian Creek subwatershed has historically had substantial issues with water quantity and quality and has been known to go dry for periods throughout the summer months (as in 2007). Since the IBI scores decreased as one moves downstream, it is hypothesized that the water quality and quantity issues were minimized in the upper reaches in 2007, however cumulative effects throughout the subwatershed are resulting in unhealthy stream conditions downstream. Further monitoring is recommended to verify this hypothesis.

Dry stream conditions had a substantial affect on stream productivity and fish populations in 2007. As a result of these conditions, no sampling could be completed on either the Strabane Creek or Mount Nemo Creek subwatershed and sampling was limited on the Lowville Creek, Flamboro Creek and Kilbride Creek subwatersheds. It is also possible that increased water levels and flow conditions in other sampling years would have a substantial positive effect on stream conditions and fish community health. As a result, it is important that fish community monitoring be continued to identify changes and potential stresses throughout the watershed.

Conservation Halton Long Term Environmental Monitoring Program 10 Bronte Creek and Supplemental Monitoring Figure 2: Frequency Distribution of Fish Species Captured in the Bronte Creek Watershed.

Frequency Distribution of Fish Species Captured within the Bronte Creek Watershed (1958 vs. 2007)

70 % of Stations (1958) % of Stations (2007) 60

50

40

30 % of Stations Stations of %

20

10

0 Bluegill Bluegill Stonecat Pearl Dace Pearl River Chub Rock Bass Brook Trout Brook Creek Chub Creek Round goby Round BrownTrout BrownTrout Yellow Perch American Eel American Sea Lamprey Sea Gizzard Shad Gizzard Pumpkinseed Northern Pike Northern White Sucker Sucker White Black Crappie Black Redside Dace Redside Johnny Darter Johnny Common Carp Darter Fantail Shiner Golden Green Sunfish Spottail Shiner Spottail Rainbow Trout Rainbow Finescale Dace Brown Bullhead Brown Brassy Minnow Minnow Brassy Emerald Shiner Shiner Emerald Rainbow Darter Darter Rainbow Rosyface Shiner Longnose Dace Dace Longnose Blackside Darter Blackside Common Shiner Common Shiner Blacknose Dace Dace Blacknose Fathead Minnow Fathead Minnow Blacknose Shiner Blacknose Smallmouth Bass Bass Smallmouth Horneyhead Chub Horneyhead Largemouth Bass Brook Stickleback Stickleback Brook Bluntnose Minnow Minnow Bluntnose Central Mudminnow Mudminnow Central Northern Hog Sucker Hog Northern Northern Redbelly Dace Redbelly Northern Species

Conservation Halton Long Term Environmental Monitoring Program 1 Bronte Creek and Supplemental Monitoring Figure 3: Fisheries Sampling Stations and Associated Biotic Integrity Classifications.

Conservation Halton Long Term Environmental Monitoring Program 1 Bronte Creek and Supplemental Monitoring Results for Annual Stations

Annual fisheries monitoring is completed at the same stations as the PWQMN Monitoring in order to gain a more detailed assessment of conditions at these stations on an annual basis. Inter- year comparisons, where available, provide insight into changes in the fish community at each site (see Tables 3-7). It should be noted that sampling at these stations is site specific and does not reflect overall watershed health. Figure 4 displays the location of the annual sampling stations and the associated IBI classification and Table 8 illustrates IBI scores across the annually sampled watersheds. Lists of species captured at the annual monitoring stations are found in Appendix 2. The sampling methodology used here is identical to that presented in Section 2.1.1. Results of the monitoring are presented below.

Sixteen Mile Creek (SXM)

Fisheries sampling along Sixteen Mile Creek resulted in numerous differences between the four sampling stations within the watershed. Sampling at Lower Baseline East (SXM-205) as well as No. 3 Sideroad (SXM-63) showed that the stream health in these locations was only considered to be fair, with an IBI score of 24.75 and 22 respectively. The 5th Line and Steeles Avenue (SXM-349) station was also considered to be in fair health (26) although it had the largest species diversity of the stations sampled. In contrast, Lower Baseline West (SXM-216) was considered to be at the upper limit of the poor range (20.25). With the exception of slight variations in the actual scores, the biotic health rankings were consistent with those obtained in the 2006 sampling season indicating that there is little change in stream health at these stations. The differences in stream health between these four stations likely reflects the upstream influences, as well as stream order and fish habitat. This seems to be the case with the Lower Baseline West station (associated with the Milton Waste Water Treatment Plant), Interestingly, the 5th Line and Steeles Avenue site was considered to be the highest quality site with respect to fisheries but was still considered to be potentially impaired based on the benthic community (see Section 2.1.2.4). Table 3: Inter-year comparison of IBI scores for Sixteen Mile Creek Annual Monitoring Sites.

Category Metric SXM-63 SXM-205 SXM-216 SXM-349 2006 2007 2006 2007 2006 2007 2006 2007 Species Richness No. of Native Fish Species 3 3 3 5 3 3 5 5 No. of Darter/Sculpin Species 3 3 3 3 1 1 33 No. of Sunfish/Trout Species 1 1 1 1 1 1 3 1 No. of Sucker/Catfish Species 1 3 1 1 1 1 35 Local Indicator +/- Brook Trout 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 % Sample as Rhinichthys Species spp. 5 5 5 5 5 5 55 Trophic Composition % Sample as Omnivores 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 % Sample as large Piscivores 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1

Conservation Halton Long Term Environmental Monitoring Program 2 Bronte Creek and Supplemental Monitoring Category Metric SXM-63 SXM-205 SXM-216 SXM-349 2006 2007 2006 2007 2006 2007 2006 2007 Fish Abundance Catch Per Unit Effort 1 1 1 1 1 1 5 1 Fish Condition % Sample with Blackspot 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 IBI Score 20 22 20 22 18 18 30 26 Adjusted Score 22.5 24.75 20.25 20.25

Bronte Creek (BRO)

Fisheries sampling was completed on Bronte Creek at only two of the four annual stations normally sampled. The Indian Creek station at Appleby Line (BRO-16) could not be sampled due to dry stream conditions. BRO-119 in Petro Canada Park could not be sampled for safety reasons and as such will need to be moved in coming years. As a result, only the Mountsberg Creek station in Courtcliffe Park (BRO-119) and the Main Bronte station at Carlisle Road (BRO- 8) were sampled. Both stations were considered to be in fair condition in 2007, which was a small improvement for the Carlisle Road station. This is likely due to an icrease in the number of suckers caught and a decrease in the % of omnivores captured. The Mountsberg Creek station remained consistently fair however a decrease in native fish species and an increase in the % omnivores lowered the score. This station continues to produce high fish numbers and a diversity of species. Table 4: Inter-year comparison of IBI scores for Bronte Creek Annual Monitoring Sites.

Category Metric BRO-8 BRO-16 BRO-154 BRO-119 2006 2007 2006 2006 2007 2006 Species Richness No. of Native Fish Species 3 3 3 5 3 3 No. of Darter/Sculpin Species 1 1 1 3 3 1 No. of Sunfish/Trout Species 1 1 1 1 1 1 No. of Sucker/Catfish Species 1 3 3 5 5 1 Local Indicator +/- Brook Trout 1 1 0 1 1 0 Species % Sample as Rhinichthys spp. 5 5 5 5 5 5 Trophic Composition % Sample as Omnivores 5 3 3 5 3 5 % Sample as large Piscivores 1 1 1 1 1 1 Fish Abundance Catch Per Unit Effort 1 5 1 1 1 1 Fish Condition % Sample with Blackspot 0 0 0 0 0 0 IBI Score 19 23 18 27 23 18 Adjusted Score 20.25 20.25

Conservation Halton Long Term Environmental Monitoring Program 3 Bronte Creek and Supplemental Monitoring Fourteen Mile Creek (FOR)

A single annual station (FOR-2) was sampled on Fourteen Mile Creek upstream of the QEW highway. This station had been moved from below the QEW highway after the 2006 sampling season due to sampling suitability and to reduce the high influence the highway was having on the results. In the 2007 season, this station was considered to be in good biotic health. Interestingly, this station had distinctly different habitat types throughout the reach thereby providing suitable habitat for a variety of species. Shallows riffles of broken shale provided excellent habitat for a large number of darters while deep pools and woody debris provided ample refugia for an abundance of species. Of special note is that this sampling resulted in the first records of brown trout (Salmo trutta) within the Fourteen Mile Creek watershed. The Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources Lake Ontario Management Unit, stocks Brown Trout in Lake Ontario for recreational purposes in the vicinity of Bronte Harbour. Since two, young of the year, individuals were captured in Fourteen Mile Creek it is likely that they are the offspring of stocked fish entering the creek for spawning purposes. This is the first evidence of natural reproduction of Brown Trout in Fourteen Mile Creek.

Table 5: Inter-year comparison of IBI scores for Fourteen Creek Annual Monitoring Sites.

Category Metric FOR-2 2007 Species Richness No. of Native Fish Species 5 No. of Darter/Sculpin Species 3 No. of Sunfish/Trout Species 3 No. of Sucker/Catfish Species 3 Local Indicator +/- Brook Trout 0 Species % Sample as Rhinichthys spp. 5 Trophic Composition % Sample as Omnivores 3 % Sample as large Piscivores 1 Fish Abundance Catch Per Unit Effort 5 Fish Condition % Sample with Blackspot 0 IBI Score 28 Adjusted Score 22.5

Conservation Halton Long Term Environmental Monitoring Program 4 Bronte Creek and Supplemental Monitoring Grindstone Creek (GRN)

Two stations are sampled annually on Grindstone Creek, one at 5th Concession East (GRN-27) and one upstream of Unsworth Avenue within a naturalized channel within Hidden Valley Park (GRN-101). The station at 5th Concession East was considered to be in fair condition, as in previous years, despite numerous habitat alterations by the adjacent landowner. The site upstream of Unsworth Avenue within Hidden Valley Park was considered to be in poor condition. Although this station was moved slightly upstream from the previous years monitoring (due to large scale stream changes and safety issues) the biotic rating in the vicinity of this station was also considered to be in poor condition in 2006. Possible reasons for this continued trend may include potential water quality impairments due to the Waterdown Wastewater Treatment Plant upstream and increased algal growth as well as limited quality habitat in comparison with rehabilitated upstream reaches.

Table 6: Inter-year comparison of IBI scores for Grindstone Creek Annual Monitoring Sites.

Category Metric GRN-27 GRN-101 2006 2007 2007 Species Richness No. of Native Fish Species 3 3 1 No. of Darter/Sculpin Species 1 1 1 No. of Sunfish/Trout Species 1 1 1 No. of Sucker/Catfish Species 3 3 1 Local Indicator +/- Brook Trout 0 0 0 Species % Sample as Rhinichthys spp. 5 5 1 Trophic Composition % Sample as Omnivores 3 5 5 % Sample as large Piscivores 1 1 1 Fish Abundance Catch Per Unit Effort 5 1 5 Fish Condition % Sample with Blackspot 0 0 0 IBI Score 22 20 16 Adjusted Score (Warmwater) 24.75 22.5

Conservation Halton Long Term Environmental Monitoring Program 5 Bronte Creek and Supplemental Monitoring Sheldon Creek (SHL)

2007 marked the first year of annual sampling on Sheldon Creek. The station was newly added in order to gain information on smaller urban creeks in the watershed and to determine if additional chemicals typical of residential areas (i.e. pesticides etc.) are having an effect on the stream. The station was located just upstream of Lakeshore Road in Oakville within the lower limits of Shell Park, a relatively well used recreational park near the Lake Ontario waterfront. In 2007, this station was considered to be at the lower limit of the fair range. This is potentially due to the limited instream habitat and numerous alterations found within the site (garbage, cement blocks and debris were all observed). In addition to this, at the time of spring benthic sampling in April a significant fish kill was observed upstream of the station. Although the cause of the fish kill was not determined it likely had an adverse affect on the fish community at this station in 2007. Further monitoring will provide details to the long term health of this watershed.

Table 7: Inter-year comparison of IBI scores for Sheldon Creek Annual Monitoring Sites.

Category Metric SHL-48 2007 Species Richness No. of Native Fish Species 3 No. of Darter/Sculpin Species 1 No. of Sunfish/Trout Species 3 No. of Sucker/Catfish Species 3 Local Indicator +/- Brook Trout 0 % Sample as Rhinichthys Species spp. 5 Trophic Composition % Sample as Omnivores 1 % Sample as large Piscivores 1 Fish Abundance Catch Per Unit Effort 1 Fish Condition % Sample with Blackspot 0 IBI Score 18 Adjusted Score (Warmwater) 22.5

Conservation Halton Long Term Environmental Monitoring Program 6 Bronte Creek and Supplemental Monitoring Table 8: Distribution of IBI Scores at Annually Sampled Watersheds.

Watershed Poor (9-20) Fair (21-27) Good (28-37) Very Good (38-45) Sixteen Mile Creek 1 (25%) 3 (50%) 1 (25%) Fourteen Mile Creek 1 (100%) Bronte Creek * 7( 17%) 27 (66%) 7 (17%) Sheldon Creek 1 (100%) Grindstone Creek 1 (50%) 1 (50%) Overall Watersheds 10 (20%) 31 (64%) 8 (16%) 0

* Indicates both watershed focused and annual stations.

Conservation Halton Long Term Environmental Monitoring Program 7 Bronte Creek and Supplemental Monitoring Figure 4: Annual Fisheries Sampling Stations and Associated Biotic Integrity Classifications.

Conservation Halton Long Term Environmental Monitoring Program 8 Bronte Creek and Supplemental Monitoring 2.1.2 Benthic Community Monitoring

Sampling Methodology

Benthic community monitoring is based on the Ontario Benthos Biomonitoring Network Protocol (OBBN) (2005). The main purpose of the OBBN is to enable the assessment of aquatic ecosystem conditions using benthic invertebrates as indicators of water and habitat quality (Jones et al. 2005). This protocol uses the “reference condition” approach, whereby stations are compared to previously selected reference sites which typically define normal biological conditions for a given habitat. These stations are selected based on their minimal influence from human activity such as, point-source contamination, loss of riparian habitat and aquatic habitat disruption (Jones et al. 2005). Samples collected in 2007 were used to identify stream health across a reach resulting in three transects sampled at each station with:

• Two transects in stream crossovers (riffle Using the kick and sweep method to collect habitat) on the upstream and downstream benthic invertebrates. limits of the station, • One transect across pool habitat, between the two crossovers.

Samples were collected using the kick and sweep method, whereby the sampler stands upstream of a 500μm D-net and excavates the top 10 centimetres of sediment with their feet. This allows any attached and free moving benthic invertebrates to flow into the 500μm D-net and be collected. The sampler continues this action across each stream transect thereby sampling all available habitats. Once collected, live samples were then taken back to the lab and randomly sub-sampled. A minimum of 100 organisms was collected per sub-sample (transect) with all samples being identified to family or lowest possible level for analysis (Jones et al. 2005).

Analysis

The 2007 sampling followed the OBBN sampling methodology however at time of analysis the “reference condition” analytical tools were not available for analysis. As a result, analysis followed traditional parametric indices. These included the % EPT (ephemeroptera, trichoptera and plecoptera), taxa richness, % oligochaeta, % chironomidae, % isopoda, % gastropoda, % diptera, % insect, Hilsenhoff index (HFI) and the Shannon-Weiner diversity index (SDI). Each indice was assessed separately against the target values as set out in Table 9. Final assessments of unimpaired, potentially impaired or impaired were then based on the cumulative results of

Conservation Halton Long Term Environmental Monitoring Program 9 Bronte Creek and Supplemental Monitoring each individual metric in a manner similar to the Citizens Environmental Watch methodology (Borisko 2002). Table 9: Benthic Invertebrate Indices and Associated Classifications.

Water Quality Index Unimpaired Possibly Impaired Impaired

EPT >10 5-10 <5 Taxa Richness >13 <13 % Oligochaeta <10 10-30 >30 % Chironomidae <10 10-40 >40 % Isopoda <1 1-5 >5 % Gastropoda 1-10 0 or >10 >10 % Diptera 20-45 15-20 or>50 <15 or >50 % Insect 50-80 40-50 or 80-90 <40 or >90 % Dominant taxa <40 40-45 >45 HFI <6 6-7 >7 SDI >4 3-4 <3 BioMAP D >12 10-12 <10

Results for Bronte Creek

Sampling of the 27 stations in 2007 resulted in the collection of 98 different taxa spread across the watershed. Individual taxa groups including chironomidae, elmidae, oligcheata and simuliidae were by far the most abundant taxa groups encountered and were collected at almost all of the stations sampled, although sensitive taxa groups and families were still present at many stations. In total, 11 stations were considered unimpaired, 12 potentially impaired and 4 impaired. Figure 5 illustrates the distribution of stations and their associated water quality classifications across the watershed and Table 10 illustrates the distribution across the watershed. A list of species captured at each station can be found in Appendix 3.

Analysis of the benthic data illustrated some interesting findings. BRO-151, located in the Indian Creek subwatershed was considered one of the most impaired stations in the watershed as it had an impaired Hilsenhoff score (7.52) and low numbers of EPT (3). This station is located close to the edge of the watershed and has been straightened as it runs through a corn field. Instream habitat was lacking in this section of the stream and the substrate consisted mainly of silt and clay. Directly upstream, the channel had been reconfigured as a result of increased residential development in Milton near Derry Road and Tremaine Road. In contrast, the most unimpaired station, BRO-172, is located in the Headwaters of the Limestone Creek subwatershed within a relatively undisturbed and dense cedar forest with numerous groundwater upwellings. This station exceeded others with the best taxa richness (37), Hilsenhoff score (3.17) and the most EPT species found at a single site in 2007. This station has the attributes to be a good

Conservation Halton Long Term Environmental Monitoring Program 10 Bronte Creek and Supplemental Monitoring reference site for the future when the reference condition approach is used to analyze the benthic data. Interestingly, the water quality results for these two stations directly conflicted with the IBI and fish community assessments in the same locations. BRO-172 was considered the most unimpaired water quality wise, but from a fisheries perspective it was considered poor as no fish were observed or captured within the site. Similarily, BRO-151 was considered to be one of the most impaired sites from a water quality perspective however it had one of the highest IBI scores and largest fish catches of the study.

The most consistent section of stream was along the main branch of Bronte Creek. The majority of the six stations sampled were found to be unimpaired. Of those stations, two fell within the lower range of impaired. One of them (BRO-244) was in a section that mimicked wetland habitat rather than a defined creek channel which may have resulted in the poor water quality scores.

Overall the benthic community for the Bronte Creek watershed is generally healthy. The majority of the stream reaches flow through natural areas with A variety of benthic invertebrates under a minimal development or intensive landuse, microscope. resulting in relatively undisturbed streams. Moderate amounts of forest cover are found throughout the watershed which aid in providing extensive riparian buffers. In areas where environmental stressors are minimal, the wide array of cobble, rock and organic matter in the creek provide suitable conditions for benthic invertebrates to thrive. Unimpaired stations were sampled typically in areas with naturalized floodplains and intact valleys. The stations found to be impaired were usually found in urbanized sub-watersheds near development areas and where the creeks had been altered to some degree.

Conservation Halton Long Term Environmental Monitoring Program 11 Bronte Creek and Supplemental Monitoring Figure 5: Benthic Sampling Stations and Associated Water Quality Associations.

Conservation Halton Long Term Environmental Monitoring Program 12 Bronte Creek and Supplemental Monitoring Results for Annual Stations

Benthic monitoring is completed at the same stations as both the annual fisheries and PWQMN sites in order to gain a more detailed assessment of conditions at these stations on an annual basis. It should be noted that sampling at these stations is site specific and does not reflect overall watershed health. Figure 6 displays the location of the annual sampling stations and associated water quality classifications and Table 10 illustrates the distribution across the watersheds sampled. Lists of species captured at the annual monitoring stations are found in Appendix 4. The sampling methodology used here is identical to that presented in Section 2.1.2. Results of the monitoring are presented below.

Sixteen Mile Creek (SXM)

Four stations are monitored annually within the Sixteen Mile Creek watershed (Lower Baseline East (SXM-205), Lower Baseline West (SXM-216), 5th Line and Steeles Avenue (SXM-349) and No .3 Sideroad and Walkers Line (SXM-63). In 2007, all of the Sixteen Mile stations were found to be potentially impaired, which showed a decrease in water quality from 2006 where two stations (SXM-63 and SXM-216) were unimpaired, one (SXM-205) was potentially impaired and one (SXM-349) was impaired. Decreases in the water quality classification at No. 3 Sideraod (SXM-63) could be attributed to a loss in species richness from 26 to 23 species whereas a large decrease in EPT species was the contributing factor at Lower Baseline West (SXM-216). In contrast, SXM-349 improved from 2006 due to an increase in EPT species from five to nine and an increase in taxa richness from 17 to 20. Unfortunately, water quality at this site was still considered to be potentially impaired.

Bronte Creek (BRO)

The Bronte Creek benthic community was monitored at three annual stations located in the middle/upper and eastern reaches of the watershed. Analysis of the benthic community indicated that both stations in Carlisle (BRO-8 and BRO-154) were considered to be unimpaired. Mountsberg creek (BRO-154) was considered to be potentially impaired in 2006, however an increase in the amount of EPT species (jumped from 12 to 16 species) and an increase in species richness indicated an improvement in water quality. In contrast, Indian Creek at Appleby Line (BRO-16) was considered to be in an impaired state as it had low numbers of EPT and a high percentage of chironomidae, isopods and diptera species. Water quality and quantity issues upstream of this location are often an issue resulting in excessive algal growth and dry stream conditions during periods of the summer. In addition to this, intensive agriculture and residential development is increasing in the upstream reaches. These landuse stressors are likely having an adverse impact on the benthic communities downstream.

Fourteen Mile Creek (FOR)

Benthic sampling took place for the second year on Fourteen Mile Creek, however due to poor sampling conditions the station was moved upstream of the QEW. This station was considered to be potentially impaired largely due to a low EPT count, a high percentage of chironimidae and

Conservation Halton Long Term Environmental Monitoring Program 13 Bronte Creek and Supplemental Monitoring isopods. A large proportion of this station was comprised of riffles of broken shale over top of bedrock. These habitat conditions make accurate assessment of the benthic community difficult.

Grindstone Creek (GNR)

Two stations were sampled on Grindstone Creek, one upstream of 5th Concession East (GRN- 27) and the second, at the bottom of Hidden Valley Park downstream of Lemonville Road. Both stations were found to be potentially impaired. This was consistent with numerous stations sampled on Grindstone Creek in 2006. No samples within Grindstone Creek were found to be unimpaired in 2006.

Sheldon Creek (SHL)

Annual benthic sampling began in 2007 on Sheldon Creek in order to add additional stream sampling in largely urbanized conditions. The station is located at the lower end of the creek, within Shell Park in Oakville and just upstream of Lakeshore Road. The benthic analysis showed this station to be impaired. The EPT value was very low with only four species and the Hilsenhoff index was the poorest of all the annual stations at 6.91. This section of creek has been altered with concrete blocks and has a large amount of garbage and debris throughout the creek. The station substrate is mostly bedrock, which makes it difficult for benthic invertebrates to find suitable habitat. During time of sampling, a substantial fish kill was observed however after investigation by the Ministry of Environments Spills Action Centre no source of the kill was identified. The potential source may have had a short term impact on the biological communities within this reach. Further sampling in subsequent years will help provide a better assessment of long term trends in this location.

Table 10: Distribution of Water Quality Classifications at Stations Sampled in 2008.

Watershed Impaired Potentially Unimpaired Impaired Sixteen Mile Creek 4 (100%) Fourteen Mile Creek 1 (100%) Bronte Creek* 13 (43%) 12 (40%) 5 (17%) Sheldon Creek 1 (100%) Grindstone Creek 2 (100%) Overall watershed 6 (34%) 19 (50%) 13 (34%)

*Indicates both watershed focus and annual stations incorporated.

Conservation Halton Long Term Environmental Monitoring Program 14 Bronte Creek and Supplemental Monitoring Figure 6: Annual Benthic Sampling Stations and Associated Water Quality Classifications.

Conservation Halton Long Term Environmental Monitoring Program 15 Bronte Creek and Supplemental Monitoring 2.1.3 Channel Morphology

Channel morphology measurements were taken according to the Ontario Stream Assessment Protocols (OSAP) Point Transect Sampling for Channel Structure, Substrate and Bank Conditions (section 2 module 4). As part of this module, specific physical characteristics of stream channels are documented including, water depth, velocity, substrate type and size, cover types and amount, instream vegetation, woody debris, undercut banks and bank composition, riparian vegetation and bank angle. All these characteristics can provide insight into the physical conditions of streams on both a spatial and temporal level and may also identify the limiting features of a stream’s physical habitat (Stanfield 2005).

Channel morphology measurements were taken at 48 stations within the Bronte Creek watershed and at another 20 stations as part of the LEMP’s annual monitoring and Redside Dace (Clinostomus elongatus) monitoring. Information collected was input into the provincial HabProgs database so that it can be used for analysis on both a local and provincial scale. Detailed information on the streams channel width, width/depth ratio, proportion of stable banks, particle size, D16, D50 and D84 and transect channel profiles were all developed.

In the 2007 field season, baseline information to document existing habitat conditions was collected for the Bronte Creek watershed. As a result, widespread inter-year comparisons of the channel morphology could not be made. Geomorphic indices for the Bronte Creek watershed can be seen in Appendix 5.

Annual monitoring stations illustrated few significant changes in channel morphology and structure across the jurisidiction. No significant changes in average width/depth ratio, mean max particle size, D16, D50 and D84 points Conservation Halton staff member measuring stream were observed. This indicates that stream particle size as part of channel morphology measurements. channels in these locations are physically stable. It is possible that comparisons from year to year will not indicate change (unless there is a significant driving force), however continued long term monitoring of these sites has the potential to document significant change as landuse in the surrounding watershed continues to change. Geomorphic indices for the annual monitoring stations can be found in Appendix 6.

2.1.4 Surface Water Quality Monitoring

Surface water quality was assessed in 2007 as part of Conservation Halton’s Long Term Environmental Monitoring Program. Conservation Halton has been monitoring surface water quality in partnership with the Ministry of Environment’s (MOE) Provincial Water Quality Monitoring Network (PWQMN) at a total of 58 different stations for over 40 years. Provincial

Conservation Halton Long Term Environmental Monitoring Program 16 Bronte Creek and Supplemental Monitoring Water Quality Objectives (PWQO) outlined by the Ministry of the Environment are used to assess surface water quality parameters to ensure the protection of the fresh water aquatic environment. By meeting these objectives (outlined in Table 11), all other objectives, except the most stringent relating to drinking water, are met. Where applicable, federal guidelines may also be considered.

Table 11: Provincial Water Quality Objectives (PWQO) and/or desired objectives. Parameter PWQO Desired Objective Chloride N/A <250 mg/L Nitrate N/A <2.93 mg/L Total Phosphorous (TP) N/A <0.03 mg/L Total Suspended Solids (TSS) N/A <25mg/L Copper <5 μg/L N/A Lead <25 μg/L N/A Zinc <30 μg/L N/A

In 2007, surface water samples covering 37 parameters were taken at 10 stations throughout the watershed over a seven-month period between April and October. The PWQMN sampling Stations are shown in Figure 8. Results indicate that while most water quality parameters measured meet MOE objectives most of the time, some are a source of concern. The best water quality is usually found in relatively undisturbed headwater areas while the poorest is associated with the more urbanized or altered reaches of the lower watershed. Of all samples collected in 2007 where there is an MOE objective for the protection of the fresh water aquatic environment, about 7% exceeded the relevant objective, based on non-random subsampling. For the purpose of this report, detailed analysis of the 2007 results was conducted on six parameters: chloride, nitrogen, total phosphorus, copper, lead and zinc. “Box plot” charts have been created to represent the maximum, seventy-fifth quartile, median, twenty-fifth quartile and minimum values for each parameter concentration at the sampling stations across the watershed. Figure 7 represents a sample box plot chart where 100 is the maximum, 75 is the seventy-fifth quartile, 50 is the average, 25 is the twenty-fifth quartile and 10 is the minimum. Figure 7: Sample “Box Plot” Chart.

Sample "Box Plot" Chart

120 100 100.00

80 75.00 60 50.00 40 Concentration 20 25.00 10.00 0 Sampling Station

Conservation Halton Long Term Environmental Monitoring Program 17 Bronte Creek and Supplemental Monitoring Figure 8: Surface Water Quality Monitoring Stations.

Conservation Halton Long Term Environmental Monitoring Program 18 Bronte Creek and Supplemental Monitoring

A brief discussion of each parameter is provided below.

Chloride

Chloride is an important anion in domestic wastes and in some natural waters. Chloride ions are conservative and highly mobile, tending to remain in solution once dissolved. Nearly all chloride added to the environment will eventually migrate to surface or groundwater. Winter application of road salt can produce high salt concentrations in water after runoff. Most chloride concentrations at all stations in the Conservation Halton watershed were well below the MOE objectives. However, one sample taken at Sheldon Creek (SHL-48), three samples taken in Fourteen Mile Creek (FOR-58) and two samples taken in West Sixteen Mile Creek at Lower Base Line (SXM-216) exceeded the provincial maximum desirable concentration of 250 mg/L (Figure 9). These exceedences represent 8 percent of all samples collected in 2007. This is indicative of a troubling pattern that continues in the watershed. Based on Conservation Halton’s data collected for the PWQMN, trend analysis indicates a steady increase in chloride concentrations over time. This is likely due to road salting, water softeners, wastewater treatment plants and other human sources. Figure 9: Chloride concentrations (mg/L) at Conservation Halton’s annual (PWQMN) Monitoring Stations.

Conservation Halton Watershed Chloride Data

400 350 300

)

/L 250 g PWQO m ( 200 150 100 Chloride 50 0 SXM-53 SXM-205 SXM-216 SXM-349 SXM-63 FOR-58 BRO-119 BRO-16 BRO-2 SHL-48 GRN-5

16 Mi Cr 14 Mi Cr Bronte Cr Sheldon Grindstone Cr Cr Watersheds - PWQMN Sampling Stations

Conservation Halton Long Term Environmental Monitoring Program 19 Bronte Creek and Supplemental Monitoring Nitrogen and Phosphorus

Nitrogen can occur in various forms. The nitrate ion is soluble and highly mobile in the aquatic environment. It plays a major role in biological processes and is a significant nutrient for plant growth. However, high concentrations of nitrogen can lead to excessive plant and algae growth and ultimately, in eutrophication and oxygen depletion, thus degrading the aquatic habitat. High concentrations of nitrogen can also be toxic to some juvenile fish species. Nitrogen sources include atmospheric deposition, agricultural wastes, municipal wastewater and septic systems. Nitrogen concentrations are highest in areas of intensive farming and downstream of municipal wastewater discharges. While there is no PWQO for nitrogen, interim guidelines suggest concentrations of less than 2.93 mg/L are considered desirable to prevent excessive plant growth (MOE 1984).

Nitrate + Nitrite concentrations are consistently elevated at one station in the Sixteen Mile Creek watershed and one station in the Grindstone Creek watershed. Two-thirds of the samples taken in the western tributary of Sixteen Mile Creek at Lower Base Line (SXM-216) and Grindstone Creek at Unsworth Avenue (GRN-5) exceeded the maximum desirable concentration of 2.93 mg/L (Figure 10). Both of these stations are located downstream of wastewater treatment discharges, which are likely causing the high readings. Figure 10: Nitrate + Nitrite concentrations (mg/L) at Conservation Halton’s annual (PWQMN) Monitoring Stations.

Conservation Halton Watershed Nitrate + Nitrite Data

8 7

)

/L 6 g m

( 5 PWQO 4 3 2

Nitrate + Nitrite 1 0 SXM-53 SXM-205 SXM-216 SXM-349 SXM-63 FOR-58 BRO-119 BRO-16 BRO-2 SHL-48 GRN-5

16 Mi Cr 14 Mi Cr Bronte Cr Sheldon Grindstone Cr Watersheds - PWQMN Sampling Stations

Total Phosphorus

Phosphorus can occur in numerous organic and inorganic forms. It plays a major role in biological processes and is generally the limiting nutrient for plant growth. Phosphorus is not directly toxic to aquatic life; however, high concentrations of phosphorus can result in excessive

Conservation Halton Long Term Environmental Monitoring Program 20 Bronte Creek and Supplemental Monitoring plant and algae growth and ultimately, in eutrophication. As this over-abundance of plant material dies, oxygen is consumed in the process. The resulting oxygen depletion can reduce biodiversity. Phosphorus sources include commercial fertilizers, animal wastes and municipal and industrial wastewater. There is also a close relationship between phosphorus concentrations and suspended sediments. Areas with high levels of erosion usually have increased suspended sediments and phosphorus concentrations. Elevated levels of sediments can also adversely affect the aquatic habitat.

There is no final PWQO for total phosphorus: however, an interim objective recommends concentrations of less than 0.03 mg/L to be desirable in order to prevent excessive plant growth. In the Conservation Halton watershed, excess growth of Cladophora or nuisance algae is a problem in many creeks within the watershed. These streams also deliver elevated concentrations of nutrients to the Lake Ontario near-shore area. Excess growth of Cladophora and blooms of Cyanobacteria or toxic blue-green algae are serious problems in the Lake Ontario near-shore environment. Figure 11: Total Phosphorous concentrations (mg/L) at Conservation Halton’s annual (PWQMN) Monitoring Stations.

Conservation Halton Watershed Total Phosphorus Data

0.6

0.5

0.4 PWQO 0.3

T.P. (mg/L) 0.2

0.1

0 SXM-53 SXM-205 SXM-216 SXM-349 SXM-63 FOR-58 BRO-119 BRO-16 BRO-2 SHL-48 GRN-5

16 Mi Cr 14 Mi Cr Bronte Cr Sheldon Grindstone Cr Watersheds - PWQMN Sampling Stations

Total phosphorus concentrations are usually elevated throughout the watershed. About 42% of all total phosphorus samples exceeded the desired objective of 0.03 mg/L in 2007 (Figure 11). The maximum concentration in Sheldon Creek at Lakeshore Road (SHL-48) was 0.394 mg/L, while Indian Creek (Bronte Creek) (BRO-16) was 0.555 mg/L, East Sixteen Mile Creek at Sixteen Valley (SXM-205) recorded a maximum concentration of 0.378 mg/L and Grindstone Creek at Unsworth Avenue (GRN-5) recorded a maximum of 0.147 mg/L. One hundred percent of the samples collected from Sheldon Creek exceeded the PWQO, while 88% in Grindstone Creek, 38% in Fourteen Mile Creek, 35% in Bronte Creek and 28% in Sixteen Mile Creek exceeded the desired objective. However, on a positive note, trend analysis of Conservation

Conservation Halton Long Term Environmental Monitoring Program 21 Bronte Creek and Supplemental Monitoring Halton’s data indicates the slight decline in total phosphorus concentrations continues. Efforts should continue to reduce phosphorus sources from reaching streams.

Lead

Lead is ubiquitous in the natural environment and may be found in both soluble and suspended forms in water. Generally low concentrations of lead are found in water owing to its low solubility. The concentration of lead and its relative toxicity depends on its hardness, pH, alkalinity, and dissolved oxygen content of water. Lead is strongly absorbed by soils and therefore, does not affect most plants. The principle natural source of lead is weathering.

Man’s input of lead to the environment clearly outweighs all natural sources. The burning of leaded fuels, particularly automobile fuels was a major source. Other sources include ore smelting and refining, production of storage batteries, lead pipes, and recycling lead products and motor oils. Lead is a toxic substance that accumulates in the skeletal structure of man and animals (McNeely et al. 1979). In order to protect the freshwater environment, MOE objective concentrations are 1 μg/L (hardness as CaCO3 <30), 3 μg/L (hardness as CaCO3 30 - 80) and 25 μg/L (hardness as CaCO3 >80) (MOE 1984). Figure 12: Lead concentrations (µg/L) at Conservation Halton’s annual (PWQMN) Monitoring Stations.

Conservation Halton Watershed Lead Data

30

25

20 PWQO 15

10

Lead (µg/L) 5

0 Stn 0102 Stn 1102 Stn 1202 Stn 1402 Stn 1002 Stn 0102 Stn 0702 Stn 0802 Stn 0402 Stn 0102 Stn 0402 16 Mi Cr 14 Mi Cr Bronte Cr Sheldon Cr Grindstone Watersheds - PWQMN Sampling Stations

Lead samples collected during 2007 were well below the PWQO. Caution should be exercised in the interpretation of the lead data since many of the samples were at the minimum detection limits.

Conservation Halton Long Term Environmental Monitoring Program 22 Bronte Creek and Supplemental Monitoring Copper

Copper is a common heavy metal constituent of natural water. It is essential for all plants and animal nutrition. Copper is generally present in trace amounts resulting from weathering. Like many metals, copper binds readily to dissolved substances (e.g. dissolved organic carbon) and adsorb to suspended solids (i.e. clay particles). Human input of copper to waters can be significant. Contact with brass and copper plumbing and equipment is but one source. Others include household products, industrial byproducts, mine tailings, and building or construction materials (McNeely et al. 1979). The MOE objective is 5.0 μg/L (MOE 1984). Figure 13: Copper concentrations (µg/L) at Conservation Halton’s annual (PWQMN) Monitoring Stations.

Conservation Halton Watershed Copper Data

14 12 10 8 PWQO 6 4 Copper (µg/L) 2 0 SXM-53 SXM-205 SXM-216 SXM-349 SXM-63 FOR-58 BRO-119 BRO-16 BRO-2 SHL-48 GRN-5

16 Mi Cr 14 Mi Cr Bronte Cr Sheldon Grindstone Cr Watersheds - PWQMN Sampling Stations

Zinc

Zinc is commonly found in nature as zinc sulfide and zinc carbonate. Zinc has many industrial applications and can enter the aquatic environment as industrial discharge. On the other hand, in plants, zinc is an essential nutrient for growth, and plants in zinc deficient soil are severely stunted. In animals, zinc (a constituent in enzymes) is vital for normal respiration (McNeely et al. 1979). Like many metals, zinc binds readily to dissolved substances (e.g. dissolved organic carbon) and adsorb to suspended solids (i.e. clay particles). MOE guidelines suggest that concentrations of zinc should not exceed 30 micrograms per litre (MOE 1984).

Conservation Halton Long Term Environmental Monitoring Program 23 Bronte Creek and Supplemental Monitoring Figure 14: Zinc concentrations (µg/L) at Conservation Halton’s annual (PWQMN) Monitoring Stations.

Conservation Halton Watershed Zinc Data

60

50

40 PWQO 30 g/l) µ 20 Zinc ( 10

0 SXM-53 SXM-205 SXM-216 SXM-349 SXM-63 FOR-58 BRO-119 BRO-16 BRO-2 SHL-48 GRN-5 16 Mi Cr 14 Mi Cr Bronte Cr Sheldon Cr Grindstone Watersheds - PWQMN Sampling Stations

Zinc concentrations are occasionally elevated at some stations in the watershed. Eight percent of all samples collected exceeded the PWQO. These exceedences occurred primarily during the spring freshet and are believed to be a result of surface wash-off from roads, parking areas and other man-made sources.

2.1.5 Groundwater Monitoring

Groundwater quantity and quality was assessed in 2007 at twelve wells across the Conservation Halton watershed. Conservation Halton has been monitoring groundwater elevations and water quality in partnership with the Ministry of Environment’s (MOE) Provincial Groundwater Monitoring Network (PGMN) at these wells for the past seven years. The location of the PGMN wells in the Conservation Halton watershed is shown in Figure 15.

Groundwater levels are recorded hourly and the data are archived in an MOE central database. MOE objectives (PWQO) related to groundwater are used for water quality parameters.

Groundwater samples covering 45 parameters were taken at 12 wells throughout the watershed over several days in September 2007. Results indicate that all ground water quality parameters measured meet MOE objectives. Only two wells showed any evidence of bacterial contamination.

Conservation Halton Long Term Environmental Monitoring Program 24 Bronte Creek and Supplemental Monitoring Figure 15: Groundwater Quality Monitoring Stations.

Conservation Halton Long Term Environmental Monitoring Program 25 Bronte Creek and Supplemental Monitoring 2.1.6 Water Temperature Monitoring

Water temperature monitoring was conducted at 30 sites in the Bronte Creek watershed in 2007. Fifteen temperature monitoring locations were located at existing LEMP sites while the remaining monitoring locations were distributed throughout the Bronte Creek watershed in order to fill existing temperature data gaps.

Data was collected using Hobo Water Temp Pro V2 dataloggers installed at each monitoring location in early spring and left in place for the duration of the monitoring season (removed in September). No dataloggers were lost over the monitoring season however usable data could not be retrieved from one of the loggers.

Data was assessed using the nomogram developed by Stoneman and Jones (1996) to classify stream sites based on their thermal stability. The nomogram uses point in time data and considers both water temperature and ambient air temperature in determining thermal stability. Conditions for the protocol are met between the months of July and August when the air temperature is above 24.5 °C and after days of similar weather conditions. Water temperature readings are then recorded between the hours of 4:00pm and 4:30pm, the times typically representative of the maximum daily water temperature of a stream. Once the thermal stability of a stream is known, it can be classified as a cold, cool or warmwater system. In order to obtain an accurate assessment of thermal stability, all temperature values that met protocol conditions were considered and graphed against the Stoneman and Jones (1996) nomogram. Streams were then classified based on the overall proportion of values within each representative classification.

Water temperature data was also input into a relatively new online database for water temperature analysis called STATE (Stream Temperature Analysis Tool and Exchange). STATE is being developed by the River and Stream Ecology Unit at the Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources (OMNR) and allows for the analysis of the entire logger file, rather than a point in time. The tool automates calculations for: the number of days a site was in the cold (>19 oC), cool (19 oC- 25 oC) and warmwater (>25 oC) temperature ranges; the minimum, maximum, and average monthly temperatures; the number of days the site exceeded upper lethal temperatures for a variety of sportfish species, and; several other parameters. Unfortunately, the STATE database does not currently consider water temperature in relation to air temperature and as such true thermal classifications can not be made based on this tool.

For the 29 sites with available data, 9 sites were classified as coldwater, 19 were coolwater and 1 was considered to be warmwater. The single warmwater station was located at the gauging station directly downstream of the Mountsberg Reservoir, illustrating the warming effects the reservoir has on Mountsberg Creek. It should be noted however that stream temperatures return to coolwater conditions at a considerable distance downstream of the reservoir. With little fluctuation in temperature across the watershed, Bronte Creek is likely thermally stable through the majority of the watershed with the exception of isolated areas where reservoirs and on-line ponds may affect temperatures. Figure 16 illustrates temperature monitoring locations and associated water temperature classifications. Water temperature graphs can be seen in Appendix 7.

Conservation Halton Long Term Environmental Monitoring Program 26 Bronte Creek and Supplemental Monitoring Figure 16: Water Temperature Sampling Stations and Associated Classifications.

Conservation Halton Long Term Environmental Monitoring Program 27 Bronte Creek and Supplemental Monitoring 2.2 Terrestrial Monitoring

2.2.1 Ecological Land Classification

Ecological Land Classification uses a hierarchical approach to identify recurring ecological patterns on the landscape in order to compartmentalize complex natural variation into a reasonable number of meaningful ecosystem units (Bailey et al. 1978). This facilitates a comprehensive and consistent approach for ecosystem description, inventory and interpretation (Lee et al. 1998).

Ecological Land Classification was initiated within the Conservation Halton jurisdiction in 2001 and continued in 2007 in order to document vegetative communities to vegetation type at various Conservation Halton owned properties. Initially ELC is done through air photo interpretation, which identifies and groups Terrestrial ecologists identifying vegetation types within vegetative communities according to an ELC site. Community Series. Community Series is a fairly broad descriptor distinguishing between the types of communities based on whether the community has open, shrub or treed vegetation cover as well as whether the plant form is deciduous, coniferous or mixed (Lee et al. 1998). To get more detailed information a site visit is required. Once a site visit is performed the data collected is used to determine the Vegetation Type (e.g. Dry-Fresh-Maple-Oak Deciduous Forest Type). Vegetation Type is the finest level of resolution in the ELC and includes specific species occurrence within the site. Locations of properties surveyed in 2007 to Vegetation Type are found in Figure 17 and a brief description of each property is provided below

McLean Resource Management Area - Completed

McLean Resource Management area is located just north of Highway 401 and just east of Watson Road South. Eight community types were classified within this 67 hectare property. McLean is primarily dominated by a mature Silver Maple swamp but also has smaller patches of other wetland types as well as some plantations.

McCrodan Resource Management Area – Completed

McCrodan Resource Management Area is located between Watson Road South and Concession 11 just north of Wellington Road 36. Twenty community types were classified within this 77 hectare property. Much of this property is dominated by wetlands, but there are sections of the property with varying topography leading to some sections of upland fields and plantations. This

Conservation Halton Long Term Environmental Monitoring Program 28 Bronte Creek and Supplemental Monitoring varying topography and habitat led to an abundant butterfly population and some interesting dragonfly species being observed.

Rattlesnake Point Conservation Area – Partially complete

Rattlesnake Point Conservation Area is located north of Derry Road and west of Appleby Line. This Conservation Area was partially inventoried during 2007 but due to time commitments in other projects the entire land holdings were not completed. Five community types were classified within the south western portion of this 295 hectare Conservation Area. This area holds many interesting and rare community types. The largest community type was an Oak-Maple community which dominates the areas above the escarpment. Some of the rare community types that occur with the Conservation Area include the Niagara Escarpment cliff face, talus, crevice and the beautiful Nassagaweya Canyon with its rich mixed forest slope communities and swamp at the heart of the valley. The cliff face and talus consist of harsh and dry communities, whereas the valley slopes are dominated by cool Hemlock-Maple forests and the canyon valley has wetland habitats such as mixed White Cedar Swamp. Numerous seeps are also located along the cliff talus and valley slopes.

Community Series Interpretation

Computer digitizing of the Community Series air photo interpretation also continued in 2007 but due to staffing shortage and changes no significant headway was made.

Conservation Halton Long Term Environmental Monitoring Program 29 Bronte Creek and Supplemental Monitoring Figure 17: Ecological Land Classification Sites

Conservation Halton Long Term Environmental Monitoring Program 30 Bronte Creek and Supplemental Monitoring 2.2.2 Ecological Monitoring and Assessment Network (EMAN)

The Ecological Monitoring and Assessment Network (EMAN) is made up of linked organizations and individuals involved in ecological monitoring in Canada to better detect, describe, and report on ecosystem changes. The network is a cooperative partnership of federal, provincial and municipal governments, academic institutions, aboriginal communities and organizations, industry, environmental non-government organizations, volunteer community groups, elementary and secondary schools and other groups/individuals involved in ecological monitoring (EMAN 2006).

When formally established in 1994, the mandate was to coordinate integrated ecosystem monitoring and research to provide an understanding and explanation of observed changes in ecosystems (EMAN 2006). EMAN was established with the following four objectives: • to provide a national perspective on how Canadian ecosystems are being affected by a multitude of stresses on the environment; • to provide scientifically defensible rationales for pollution control and resource management policies; • to evaluate and report to Canadians on the effectiveness of resource management policies; and, • to identify new environmental issues at the earliest possible stage.

Conservation Halton is involved in this partnership and to date has set up two EMAN plots. The first plot was within the Grindstone Creek watershed (Waterdown Woods) and consisted of 10 20x20 m plots. In 2007, Conservation Halton set up its first one hectare plot in the Bronte Creek watershed at Rattlesnake Point Conservation Area. All data collected have been input into the EMAN monitoring database. Conservation Halton plans to monitor tree health/condition, understory biodiversity, sapling regeneration, woody debris decomposition rates and plethodontid salamander abundances at these two locations. These components of the overall EMAN monitoring framework will be described as they are added to the program. For site locations see Figure 20.

Waterdown Woods (Grindstone Creek)

In 2007, tree health/condition, understory biodiversity, woody debris decomposition rates and plethodontid salamander abundance components of the EMAN program were monitored. Tree health/condition includes, tree height, measurement of the diameter at breast height, tree status (alive or dead), stem defects (i.e. fungus, open wounds, closed wounds, blights or cankers), crown class (place in the canopy, dominant, co-dominate, intermediate or suppressed) and crown rating (fullness of the crown).

The average diameter at breast height for trees within all ten plots was 19.02 cm and the average height was 16.90 m. There was little change in tree status and stem defects from 2006 – 2007. Crown class and crown rating remained the same.

Groundcover biodiversity monitoring began this year. Groundcover under the EMAN program is defined as comprising mosses, lichens and fungi growing on the ground, together with small

Conservation Halton Long Term Environmental Monitoring Program 31 Bronte Creek and Supplemental Monitoring trailing and rosette plants, all herbaceous vegetation regardless of height, and all woody plants under 1 m in height. This type of monitoring was introduced because groundcover species are finely tuned to their environment. Shifts in the concentration of airborne pollutants, increases in UV-B radiation, and the variability of temperature and moisture regimes are among the environmental changes that may impact the species. Long term monitoring of ground vegetation species should help differentiate between short term natural cyclic population variation, and longer term vegetation shifts driven by environmental change. The quadrat size for monitoring ground vegetation is 1x1 m. Four 1x1m quadrats were placed along the inside edge of plots 2, 3, 4, 6, 7, 9 and 10, for a total of twenty-eight quadrates. Small wooden markers were placed at the corner of each 1x1m quadrate in order for its re-location in future years. Pictures were also taken of each 1x1m quadrate to replace the EMAN mapping protocol. Conservation Halton decided that mapping selected 1x1m quadrates by drawing them was time consuming and more difficult than taking a picture of each one. Sampling was completed twice in the growing season, over three days in May (17, 18 and 22) and one in July17, 2007. A two season sampling period is used in order to capture spring flowering plants within the 1x1m plots. The majority of these species finish blooming and go dormant by early summer. Within all of the plots 30 plant species were recorded in total. Of those 30 species the most common species was Garlic Mustard (Alliaria petiolata) and Maple (Acer sp.) seedlings.

Woody debris decomposition rates were also recorded at all 10 plots. This protocol is important in forest ecosystems as it can influence the nutrient cycle, soil erosion and formation and water retention (Bellhouse & Naylor 1996). Woody debris can also act as habitat and provide a seedbed for forest vegetation. Monitoring downed woody material will give a representation of the balance between the rate of recruitment and the rate of decay in a forest. Monitoring the stage of decay, size of debris and species will contribute to the understanding of relationships in forest growth and development.

The forty double-decker Artificial Cover Boards (ACO) placed around Plot 6 at Waterdown Woods in fall 2006 were monitored this spring. The boards were monitored on March 28, April 11, May 2, May 16, May 30, June 13, June 28 and July 11. A total of 489 salamanders were recorded. Of these 478 were Eastern Red-backed Salamander (RESA) (Plethodon cinereus) and 11 were Yellow-spotted Salamander (YESA) (Ambystoma maculatum). The average snout to vent length of the RESA was 33.12 mm and 34.82 mm for the YESA, while the average vent to tail length for the RESA was 31.81 mm and 27.73 mm for the YESA.

Rattlesnake Point (Bronte Creek)

In 2007, Conservation Halton’s first one hectare Ecological Monitoring and Assessment Network (EMAN) monitoring plot was installed within the Bronte Creek watershed at Rattlesnake Point Conservation Area. This instillation generally includes a square one hectare monitoring plot that contains 25, 20x20 m monitoring plots and is 100x100 m. The monitoring plot at Rattlesnake Point is a linear structure (not square) with plots 1-10 on the upslope, plots 11-19 in the middle and 20-25 on the downslope. This EMAN plot is located adjacent to the Bruce Trail and occurs on a slight slope below the Niagara Escarpment. This location was chosen to act as a reference site for theWaterdown Woods EMAN plots, since no development will be occurring near the Rattlesnake Point plot in the future. In addition, it will also be used for

Conservation Halton Long Term Environmental Monitoring Program 32 Bronte Creek and Supplemental Monitoring general monitoring of the upper Bronte Creek watershed. The following figure depicts the layout of the Rattlesnake Point EMAN plot.

Figure 18: Rattlesnake Point EMAN plot setup

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25

Within the 25monitoring plots tree health/condition, size and canopy class information was collected in 2007. This information was collected from 357 trees (of 15 different species). Sugar Maple (Acer saccharum) was the most abundant, had the highest relative density, relative dominance, relative frequency and importance value. A summary of these values for all species recorded is located in Appendix 8

Twenty double-decker and twenty single layer Artificial Cover Boards (ACO) were constructed and deployed around this one hectare plot in order to monitor plethodontid salamanders. These were placed in accordance with the EMAN plethodontid salamander monitoring protocol (Zorn et al. 2004). The boards are placed 10 m from the edge of the 1 ha plot and five meters apart. The double-decker ACOs are wooden boards that are approximately 20 x 75 cm in size. Small bridging pieces are nailed to the lower board and two 10 x 75 cm cover boards are placed on the bridge supports. This Searching for salamanders under an Artificial Cover creates a small space between the lower Board. board and the cover board. This double- decker construction helps to mimic the natural habitat for plethodontid salamanders of rotting logs and other woody debris found on the forest floor. The single layer boards are wooden boards 20 x 75 cm with no bridging pieces or boards on top. In the fall the boards are placed on the forest floor in direct contact with the soil. This allows the boards to weather over one winter before the first field visit is conducted. Throughout an eight – twelve week period beginning in the spring the ACOs are checked for salamanders. Salamanders are recorded from both between the top cover boards and under the lower board. Each visit is completed at the same time of day and the number, age class, and length of each individual is recorded.

Plethodontid salamanders are particularly easy to monitor with Artificial Cover Boards. These salamanders have long life spans (10+ years), low birth rates, have small home ranges and are very common component of the forest ecosystem. They are lung-less and complete their entire life cycle on the forest floor. Being lung-less, they respire mainly through their skin, making

Conservation Halton Long Term Environmental Monitoring Program 33 Bronte Creek and Supplemental Monitoring them sensitive to pollutants and changes in forest floor moisture levels. Other stressors that will alter the quality of the soil, or the amount of direct sunlight onto their habitat (the ACO) can also impact the population. Therefore once ACOs are established around a plot the population of salamanders inhabiting them will be fairly stable through time. As a result changes to their environment that are detrimental to the population should be evident over the short term. Artificial Cover Boards were installed in 2007 at Rattlesnake Point Conservation Area and monitoring of these boards will begin in 2008.

2.2.3 Marsh Monitoring (Amphibians and Marsh Birds)

For amphibian monitoring, the Marsh Monitoring Program (MMP) was used (BSC 2006). This protocol uses an "unlimited distance" semi-circular sampling area. Each amphibian station was visited on three nights, no less than fifteen days apart, during the spring and early summer. Stations were surveyed in sequence, starting about the same time on all visits. The visits were dictated by ambient air temperature as follows:

• The first visit was with a minimum night- time air temperature of at least 5 0C and after the warm rains of spring had begun Green Frog (Rana clamitans) • The second visit the night-time air temperature was at least 100C and • The third visit the night-time air temperature was at least 17 0C.

Each station was surveyed for three minutes and the surveys started one half hour after sunset and ended before midnight. All surveys were conducted in weather conducive to monitoring amphibians (i.e. on a warm, moist night with little or no wind). All amphibians heard and their associated calling codes are documented to provide a general index of abundance. This records the number of individual frogs calling of each species. The call codes (CC) are as follows: • Code 1 – Individuals can be counted; calls not simultaneous. This number is assigned when individual males can be counted and when the calls of individuals of the same species do not start at the same time. • Code 2 – Calls distinguishable; some simultaneous calling. This code is assigned when there are a few males of the same species calling simultaneously. A reliable estimate of the abundance (rough number or range of individuals heard) should be made. • Code 3 – Full chorus; calls continuous and overlapping. This value is assigned when a full chorus is encountered. A full chorus is when there are so many males of one species calling that all the calls sound like they are overlapping and continuous. There are too many for a reasonable count or estimate, therefore no abundance is recorded.

The marsh bird monitoring also followed the MMP Protocol (BSC 2006). This program used a "fixed distance" semi-circular sampling area. Surveys were conducted from a central point located on the edge of a 100 metre radius semi-circle sample area. Each marsh bird monitoring

Conservation Halton Long Term Environmental Monitoring Program 34 Bronte Creek and Supplemental Monitoring station was surveyed twice each year between May 20 and July 5, no less than 10 days apart. Routes were surveyed in their entirety, in the same station sequence, at about the same time on all visits. All surveys began after 6 p.m. and ended at or before sunset. Each station was surveyed for 10 minutes. A five-minute broadcast tape is played during the first half of the survey in order to ensure that data are collected on some important, but shy marsh birds.

In addition to the collection of amphibian and marsh bird population information, habitat information is also collected. The vegetation surrounding each station is recorded and a general map drawn of the station location and vegetation structure.

Marsh monitoring for both amphibians and marsh birds was conducted at three sites, with each site generally containing more than one station. Figure 20 displays these three sites, found within the Sixteen Mile Creek (Hilton Falls Conservation Area), Bronte Creek (Mountsberg Conservation Area) and Grindstone Creek (Fuciarelli Property) watersheds respectively. The monitoring conducted in the Grindstone Creek watershed was by a local volunteer. All data collected is submitted yearly to Bird Studies Canada as part of their ongoing Marsh Monitoring Program. A brief summary of monitoring efforts is provided below.

Hilton Falls Conservation Area (Sixteen Mile Creek)

This site contains two stations and has been monitored since 2001. Monitoring of amphibian populations in 2007 was completed on April 19, May 22 and June 27 between a half hour after sunset and midnight, under suitable weather conditions. Monitoring of marsh bird populations was conducted at these stations on June 29 and July 25, 2007. The visits were completed between 6:00 and 7:00 p.m. Four amphibian and 15 bird species were recorded over the two stations. A summary of the species seen and heard at both the amphibian and bird marsh monitoring stations is available in Appendix 9 and 10.

Mountsberg Conservation Area (Bronte Creek)

This site contains three stations and has been monitored since 2004. Monitoring of amphibian populations in 2007 was completed on April 19, May 22 and June 27 between a half hour after sunset and midnight, under suitable weather conditions. Monitoring of the marsh birds was conducted on June 29 and July 25, 2007, between 7:00 and 8:30 p.m. Six amphibian and 11 bird species were recorded over the three stations. A summary of the species seen and heard at both the amphibian and bird marsh monitoring stations is available in Appendix 11 and 12.

Fuciarelli (Grindstone Creek)

This site was completed by a volunteer in 2007. Information collected at this site is available through Bird Studies Canada.

Conservation Halton Long Term Environmental Monitoring Program 35 Bronte Creek and Supplemental Monitoring Figure 19: Terrestrial Monitoring Locations.

Conservation Halton Long Term Environmental Monitoring Program 36 Bronte Creek and Supplemental Monitoring 2.2.4 Forest Bird Monitoring

The Forest Bird Monitoring Program (FBMP) is administered by the Ontario Region of the Canadian Wildlife Service, Environment Canada (Environment Canada, 2006). The FBMP began in Ontario in 1987 to provide information on population trends and habitat associations of birds that breed in the forest interior. Carried out throughout the province, volunteers perform 10 minute point counts at stations twice between late May and early July, identifying all birds by song or sight. Specifically the first visit is made between May 24 and June 17, and the second visit between June 13 and July 10, with at least 6 days between visits. The stations are visited in the early morning between 5 and 10 a.m. and within a half an hour of the previous year’s visit. Surveys are conducted in calm to light winds (< 15kph) and in clear or slightly damp conditions. Surveys are not conducted in the rain. All stations within a site are completed on the same day. Stations are 100 m circular “fixed distance" sampling areas. In 2007, Conservation Halton staff surveyed three sites, Hilton Falls, Bronte-Burloak Woods and Waterdown Woods, within the Sixteen Mile Creek, Bronte Creek and Grindstone Creek watersheds respectively. The Waterdown Woods site is an addition to the sites surveyed in 2006. Between these three sites there were a total of ten stations. The location of these stations is presented on Figure 20 and the list of all birds observed through the FBMP is found in Appendix 13.

Hilton Falls Central (Sixteen Mile Creek)

The Hilton Falls Central site (#362) was previously established through the FBMP program by the Canadian Wildlife Service. This site had been abandoned by the previous surveyor and Conservation Halton staff have, as a result, taken over the monitoring of this site. All data collected is submitted to Environment Canada under the FBMP program. There are five stations within this site all of which are within the Robertson Tract owned by the Region of Halton.

The five stations were surveyed on June 1 and June 14 both between 7:00 and 9:00 a.m., in appropriate weather conditions. Twenty species were recorded at the five stations over the survey dates. Of these six are considered area sensitive according to the Significant Wildlife Habitat Technical Guide (OMNR, 2000): • Ovenbird (Seiurus aurocapillus) o Requires approximately 70 ha of contiguous forest • American Redstart (Setophaga ruticilla) o Requires approximately 100 ha of contiguous forest • Scarlet Tanager (Piranga olivacea) o Requires approximately 20 ha of contiguous forest • Veery (Catharus fuscescens) o Requires approximately 10 ha of contiguous forest • Hairy Woodpecker (Picoides villosus) o Dequires trees >25 cm dbh; requires approximately 4-8 ha of contiguous forest • Yellow-bellied Sapsucker (Sphyrapicus varius) o Deciduous or mixed birch, hemlock, maple forest with tall trees; requires contiguous habitat from 2-5 ha in size

Conservation Halton Long Term Environmental Monitoring Program 37 Bronte Creek and Supplemental Monitoring In addition to area sensitivity the Yellow-bellied Sapsucker is generally more commonly found on the Canadian Shield (OBBA 1985). It is also considered uncommon in the Region of Halton (Dwyer 2006).

Bronte-Burloak Woods (Bronte Creek)

The Bronte-Burloak Woods stations are located on the former Shell property in Oakville, east of Burloak and south of Rebecca Street (Figure 20). The locations of the FBMP stations are within two remnant woodlots. These remnant woodlots are two of five areas that were surveyed during an intensive migration study in the spring of 2005 (Barrett and Watson 2005). This study confirmed that these woodlots represent one of the best migrant stopover areas in the greater Hamilton Area (Dobos 2006). A 2006 Ontario Municipal Board decision interpreted that this complex of woodlots constituted significant wildlife habitat for this migratory function. The extent of natural habitat in the area was formerly much larger. Much of the area surrounding these two woodlots has already been urbanized, with the remainder to follow. The size of Bronte and Burloak Woods does not meet the minimum size criterion for the FBMP at 25 ha. These two woodlots are 19 ha and 10.4 ha respectively. Conservation Halton decided to establish breeding bird surveys in these woodlots using the FBMP protocol. The purpose was to determine whether any changes were detectable with the ongoing development of the area in relation to breeding bird composition. As of 2006, a well-established, gravel walking trail was in use throughout Burloak Woods, whereas Bronte Woods was limited to a few informal footpaths.

Construction is ongoing and noise from machinery was noted during both surveys. They took place on June 11 (between 7:30 and 8:30 am) and July 5 (between 7:30 and 8:00 am), in appropriate weather conditions. Nineteen species were recorded between the two stations and the two survey dates. Of these three are considered area sensitive according to the Significant Wildlife Habitat Technical Guide (OMNR 2000): • Blue-gray Gnatcatcher (Parus bicolour) o Requires approximately 30 ha of contiguous forest to complete its lifecycle • White-breasted Nuthatch (Sitta carolinensis) o Requires approximately 10 ha of contiguous forest to complete its lifecycle • Hairy Woodpecker (Picoides villosus) o Requires trees >25 cm dbh; requires approximately 4-8 ha of contiguous forest

Waterdown Woods (Grindstone Creek)

The three stations were surveyed on June 13 and June 26 both between 7:00 and 8:30 a.m., in appropriate weather conditions. Sixteen species were recorded at three stations over the survey dates. Of these one is considered area sensitive according to the Significant Wildlife Habitat Technical Guide (OMNR 2000): • Hairy Woodpecker (Picoides villosus) o Requires trees >25 cm dbh; requires approximately 4-8 ha of contiguous forest

None of the species noted at Waterdown Woods are considered regionally rare. The monitoring stations are not shown on figure 20 since they overlap with the EMAN plots. The FBMP stations occur at EMAN plots 1, 3 and 6.

Conservation Halton Long Term Environmental Monitoring Program 38 Bronte Creek and Supplemental Monitoring 2.2.5 Forest Pest Monitoring

The forest health monitoring program was established in 1992 in an effort to monitor gypsy moth populations on Conservation Authority lands. The monitoring is completed using two methods. The first is to establish a Modified Kaladar Plot (MKP). This becomes the permanent sample plot for the monitoring. Seventeen plots have been established for this monitoring program. The MKP represents an area of 0.01 hectares (measured at 10 m x10 m) and should be located away from open areas such as roads or trails to avoid inflated counts caused by the "edge effect". Above ground and on ground egg masses are counted and then a formula is used to determine egg masses/hectare. Egg mass surveys are completed in the fall of the year. The second method is to conduct pheromone trapping of the male gypsy moths. Pheromone traps are baited with a bio-lure of the female, to attract the males into the plastic traps. The traps are set out in the permanent sample plots prior to July 1, and remain in the plots until just after Labour Day. The moths are counted twice weekly and recorded. The monitoring provides Conservation Halton with details of potential outbreaks of gypsy moth and an annual record of trapped male moths in the permanent sample plots.

Other forest health issues have caused concern for forestry staff over the last 5 years. These include the potential occurrence of the Asian Long-horned beetle and Emerald Ash Borer, neither of which has been observed in our watershed. Currently ash decline, oak decline, Beech bark disease and Butternut canker are being observed in both private and public forested lands in Halton. Two-lined Chestnut Borer has recently been observed in Mount Nemo Conservation Area. These episodes are documented in the perpetual forestry files located at the administration office of Conservation Halton.

Although outside our watershed, the City of Mississauga experienced heavy infestations of gypsy moth causing heavy defoliation in 2005, prompting the city to conduct an aerial spray program for 2006 and 2007. It was very successful in controlling the gypsy moth insect population as well as protecting the health of the valuable urban forest canopy. The monitoring carried out in Conservation Halton properties reflected a similar build up of population for gypsy moth as compared with studies in the Town of Oakville, and Cities of Burlington and Mississauga. Moderate to severe defoliation of oak, birch and poplar species were identified at Mount Nemo, Rattlesnake Point and Sixteen Valley Conservation Areas, as well as Kerncliffe, Waterdown Woods, Clappison Woods and Grindstone Creek Resource Management Areas and finally the Stewart Flood Plain land. It was projected that with high population counts in these areas for 2006, that moderate to severe infestation and defoliation would likely occur again in 2007.

The Ministry of Natural Resources, in a jointly funded project with Natural Resources Canada, established a monitoring plot at Hilton Falls C.A. for the most recent invasive pest to Ontario, the European Wood Wasp (Sirex noctilio). The Canadian Food Inspection Agency has rated the European Wood Wasp as "very high risk" for North America because it is a serious pest of pine plantations. It was successfully collected and identified in upper New York State in 2004 and in Prince Edward County in Ontario in 2005. A Lindgren funnel trap is used to monitor for this insect and one was established in the Scots pine plantation on the north side of Regional Road No. 5, just east of the Appleby Line intersection. The trap was monitored bi-weekly throughout

Conservation Halton Long Term Environmental Monitoring Program 39 Bronte Creek and Supplemental Monitoring the summer by the Canadian Forest Service staff, and it was reported that there were no adults of the European Wood Wasp collected.

In addition, there were no reports of Asian Long-horn Beetle and/or Emerald Ash Borer within the jurisdiction in 2007.

2.3 Landscape Analysis for the Bronte Creek Watershed

Habitat loss and fragmentation is widely recognized as the most significant factor contributing to declining biodiversity; therefore in order to explain changes in species or vegetation community composition within a given area, changes to the habitat should be examined first (Environment Canada 2004). In doing so, the LEMP has incorporated a Geographic Information System (GIS)-based landscape examination. The GIS assesses certain metrics related to landscape configuration that have been used to assess ecosystem integrity. The seven metrics used in this analysis are derived from the set of guidelines developed for Environment Canada’s How Much Habitat is Enough? (2004) document. Metrics included in the analysis are percent forest cover, patch size and distribution, interior forest patch size and percent wetland habitat. These are science- based guidelines for various attributes related to wetland, riparian and forest habitats.

An essential part of the landscape Lush wetland and forest habitat within the Bronte Creek watershed at the Calcium Pits ESA. analysis is the Ecological Land Classification (ELC) (Lee et al. 1998). This is a system whereby vegetative communities are classified to vegetation type using air photo interpretation. This was completed for the watershed using 2002 air photos. This delineation of vegetation communities is then digitized into the GIS and analyzed for the seven metrics outlined below (Table 12 – 17). It should be noted that the analysis included in this report is based on the 2002 air photos and may not reflect the conditions present in 2007. For calculation purposes the watershed area used for Bronte Creek was 306.8 square kms.

Conservation Halton Long Term Environmental Monitoring Program 40 Bronte Creek and Supplemental Monitoring Table 12: Bronte Creek, Percent Forest Cover.

Background In a highly modified, densely populated area like southern Ontario, most forest patches are likely to be fragmented and small; however, the overall amount of forest cover also plays a key role in determining the species complement. Bronte Creek Watershed Within the Bronte Creek watershed, overall percent forest cover is at 34.5%, just slightly above the target of 30%. This target should be closely monitored to ensure that forest cover remains above or at the watershed target. Similarly, initiatives to increase forest cover throughout the watershed should continue in order to increase and/or maintain existing forest cover. Subwatersheds with a lower percentage of cover should be targeted for additional forest restoration. Environment Canada Guideline At least 30% of the watershed should be in forest cover Total Forest cover 10,579 ha Percentage of forest cover in the watershed 34.5% Difference +4.5%

Table 13: Bronte Creek, Patch Size and Distribution.

Background A watershed or other land unit should have at least one 200 ha forest patch that is a minimum 500 m in width. Wetlands of a variety of sizes, types and hydroperiods should be maintained across a landscape; swamps and marshes of sufficient size to support habitat heterogeneity are particularly important. Large patch sizes of a variety of habitat types are required to support the full suite of expected species, including those that are most area-sensitive. Bronte Creek Watershed Within the Bronte Creek watershed, the largest patch size is 493.5 ha, which is over double the target of 200 ha. Environment Canada Guideline 200 ha Largest Patch 493.5 ha Difference +293 ha

Conservation Halton Long Term Environmental Monitoring Program 41 Bronte Creek and Supplemental Monitoring Table 14: Bronte Creek, Interior Forest Patch Habitat.

Background Area-sensitive species simply will not persist in a landscape lacking patches that meet or exceed their minimum size requirements. A certain ‘critical mass’ of areas providing interior habitat (be it forest or grassland ‘interior’) is required to allow for life-history requirements such as juvenile dispersal and metapopulation dynamics. Bronte Creek Watershed Within the Bronte Creek watershed, the largest portion of interior forest habitat (100 m or more from the edge) is 28% of the watershed area, almost three times the target of 10%. Similarly, the largest amount of deep interior forest habitat (200 m or more from the forest edge) is 1.7 %, significantly less then the target of 5%. Efforts to increase deep interior forest habitat throughout the watershed should be continued. Environment Canada Guideline • The proportion of the watersheds forest cover 100 m or more from the forest edge should be greater than 10 percent of the watershed area. • The proportion of the watersheds forest cover 200 m or more from the forest edge should be greater than five percent of the watershed area. Total Forest Cover 100m or more from the Total Forest Cover 200m or more from the edge edge 8,583.78 ha 79.81 ha Percentage of interior forest habitat Percentage of deep interior forest habitat 28% 1.7% Difference Difference +18% -3.3% Table 15: Bronte Creek, Percent Wetland.

Background Changes in the proportion of wetlands on the landscape can have a dramatic influence on both terrestrial and aquatic systems within a watershed. Fewer wetlands generally result in lower overall species diversity, increased flooding, lower base flows, poorer water quality and so on. Bronte Creek Watershed Within the Bronte Creek watershed total wetland cover is at approximately 9.5%, which is just below the target of 10%. Maintaining existing wetland cover in this watershed is essential in maintaining the integrity and species diversity within the watershed. Environment Canada Guideline Greater than 10% of each major watershed in wetland habitat; greater than six percent of each subwatershed in wetland habitat; or restore to original percentage of wetlands in the watershed. Total wetland cover 2293.36 ha Percentage of wetland cover 9.5% Difference -0.5%

Conservation Halton Long Term Environmental Monitoring Program 42 Bronte Creek and Supplemental Monitoring 3.0 Supplemental Monitoring

3.1 Bronte Creek Atlantic Salmon Program The Atlantic Salmon is a top predatory fish that once inhabited the Bronte Creek watershed and similar tributaries across the Lake Ontario basin. In early settlement times, Atlantic Salmon were extremely abundant throughout the basin with Bronte Creek likely being an active area for spawning and rearing. Habitat destruction and over harvest quickly led to the demise of the Atlantic Salmon within the watershed by the mid 1800s and its eventual extirpation from Lake Ontario and its tributaries by the late 1800s. In recognizing this species as an indicator species and a top predator, attempts to reintroduce Atlantic Salmon to Lake Ontario have been ongoing since the late 1980s. In southern Ontario, stocking efforts have previously been focused on the Credit River and Wilmot Creek. To better understand the habitat and competition requirements for juvenile Atlantic Salmon survival (i.e. to ensure that Atlantic Salmon are stocked at sites which optimize survival), the Ministry of Natural Resources completed a four year study on Lake Ontario tributaries in the early 1990’s. Bronte Creek was included as part of that study with Atlantic Salmon fry being stocked in Main Bronte Creek and the Willoughby Creek subwatershed, both above the Lowville Dam. Results of the study indicated that additional efforts and larger numbers of fish may result in a successful reintroduction of Atlantic Salmon within the Bronte Creek watershed. The result of a successful stocking program in Bronte Creek would not only benefit the creek by re-establishing populations of a natural and cultural heritage fish but, would also increase awareness of the importance of a healthy watershed with the general public and increase recreational fishing opportunities throughout the watershed. The Atlantic Salmon Recovery Team has identified Bronte Creek as a candidate watershed for the second phase of the reintroduction of Atlantic Salmon to the Lake Ontario basin. Re- introductions have already taken place as part of this project in the Credit River, Duffins Creek and Cobourg Creek. The Atlantic Salmon Restoration initiative, spearheaded by the Ontario Federation of Anglers and Hunters (OFAH), will ideally see Atlantic Salmon restocking commence in the Bronte Creek watershed in or around 2010. In order to move this stocking initiative forward, a partnership between the Ontario A young Atlantic Salmon smolt finding refuge amongst some rocks. Federation of Anglers and Hunters (OFAH) and Conservation Halton was established to conduct an extensive monitoring project, administered by Conservation Halton and funded through OFAH, to document existing conditions and identify priority restoration projects in order to prepare the creek for the release of Atlantic Salmon. Ongoing monitoring and habitat restoration, completed through partnerships between Conservation Halton, the Ontario

Conservation Halton Long Term Environmental Monitoring Program 43 Bronte Creek and Supplemental Monitoring Federation of Anglers and Hunters and the Hamilton-Halton Watershed Stewardship Program, will also be required in order to ensure the long term sustainability of this species. As part of the Atlantic Salmon stocking project, predicted migratory, spawning and rearing habitats were first identified based on the presence and spawning habitats of similar migratory and resident salmonids (Rainbow Trout, Brown Trout and Chinook Salmon). A total of 22 sites were subjectively selected to fall within these areas with site access and historical information a driving force in site selection. Sites selected for the Atlantic Salmon monitoring were located within the main branch of Bronte Creek as well as within the Limestone Creek, Kilbride Creek, Mount Nemo Creek and Indian Creek subwatersheds, as these areas are typically available to migratory salmonids. Sampling at each site focused on determining the habitat suitability of Atlantic Salmon, with respect to both spawning and rearing requirements. To do so, staff completed detailed channel morphology measurements through the use of the Ontario Stream Assessment Protocol. The priority modules used for the monitoring included the fish community and channel morphology monitoring modules (modules 3 and 4). This was done to determine existing habitat conditions throughout the creek and to determine the resident fish community.

As a result of both the Atlantic Salmon Monitoring Project and Conservation Haltons Long Term Environmental Monitoring Program, a total of 41 sites were surveyed to document the instream channel morphology. An additional 11 sites could not be surveyed either due to restricted property access or dry stream conditions. All sites sampled for channel morphology were also electrofished to document the fish community at each site, where suitable conditions were present (i.e. available water). A list of fish species captured through the Atlantic Salmon monitoring can be found in Appendix 1.

3.2 Redside Dace (Clinostomus elongatus) Monitoring

The draft Recovery Strategy for Reside Dace in Ontario identifies the need to develop long term monitoring programs for Redside Dace in Ontario populations. Given the natural occurrence of Redside Dace within the Conservation Halton watershed, staff felt the need to direct a significant amount of effort in documenting existing conditions for Redside Dace within the Conservation Halton watershed. As a result habitat and fish community monitoring was completed at select sites during the months of July and August of the 2007 field season. Sampling focused on three main efforts including:

1) Re-sampling of historical Redside Dace streams: The purpose of this monitoring was to document any potential occurrences of Redside Dace at historical locations. This sampling technique also addressed current habitat conditions for comparison with existing conditions at known Redside Dace locations.

2) Habitat monitoring of recent/present Redside Dace streams: The purpose of this monitoring was to document habitat conditions within stream reaches where Redside Dace have been known to occur in recent years or are currently present. This monitoring focused solely on habitat conditions in order to minimize stress on existing populations due to over sampling.

Conservation Halton Long Term Environmental Monitoring Program 44 Bronte Creek and Supplemental Monitoring 3) Intensive monitoring: The purpose of the intensive monitoring is to determine Redside Dace population trends through time at specific index sites. This sampling technique also addressed trends in the fish community and habitat at these sites. Sites sampled in 2007 were reviewed by the Redside Dace Recovery Team for suitability.

Results of each sampling are documented below.

Re-sampling of Historical Redside Dace Streams

The re-sampling of historical Redside Dace streams focused mainly on the Bronte Creek watershed. Sites were selected based on the last known occurrence of Redside Dace in the area along with site access and suitability.

Redside dace have been known to occur in approximately seventeen specific locations within the Bronte Creek watershed. The majority of occurrence reports for this species have occurred within the Mountsberg Creek subwatershed, however isolated records have also been identified within the Main Branch of Bronte Creek, Willoughby Creek and in the Strabane Creek subwatershed. Of the seventeen reported occurrences, Redside Dace have not been captured at two of the locations since the 1950’s, twelve of the locations since the 1970’s and only three of the locations since the late 1990’s. As a result, re- A number of Redside Dace captured within the Sixteen Mile Creek watershed. sampling of these areas was a priority in order to document any new occurrences of Redside Dace in the Bronte Creek watershed. In order to do so, sites were sampled within the same general location of the original occurrence report or within a representative reach either upstream of downstream of the known historical locations. Fish community sampling and habitat/channel morphology monitoring was completed using the Ontario Stream Assessment protocol within a defined reach of a minimum of 40 m and starting and ending at a stream crossover. Electrofishing of each site was also standardized at the screening level assessment (2-5 electrofishing seconds/m²) with all habitats within the defined stations sampled. Ten locations were sampled for both the fish community and habitat/channel morphology. One additional site was monitored only for the fish community while another single site had only habitat/channel morphology monitoring completed. Of the remaining five sites that were not sampled, two were dry (without any isolated pools) while the remaining three could not be accessed, as landowner permission could not be obtained. Unfortunately, no Redside Dace were captured on Bronte Creek in 2007 through this monitoring.

Conservation Halton Long Term Environmental Monitoring Program 45 Bronte Creek and Supplemental Monitoring Habitat Monitoring of Recent/Present Redside Dace Streams

Habitat monitoring, using the Ontario Stream Assessment Protocol has been used by Conservation Halton staff since 2006 in order to document existing habitat conditions at known Redside Dace locations (both recent and historical). Information collected through the monitoring is being provided to members of the Redside Dace Recovery Team in order to aid their efforts in identifying critical habitats and requirements for this unique species.

In the 2007 field season, it was decided to focus efforts on the Fourteen Mile Creek watershed in order to obtain habitat information at locations where Redside Dace are known to occur, while also moving Conservation Haltons Long Term Environmental Monitoring Program into the next year of sampling. In doing so, staff focused their efforts on monitoring and documenting habitat conditions at sites with the most recent records of Redside Dace. As a result, eleven stations were monitored to document existing habitat conditions throughout the watershed. This information can aid in determining habitat requirements for Redside Dace while also documenting ongoing changes to the creek as a result of the ongoing residential development throughout the watershed. No electrofishing was completed as part of this monitoring in order to reduce stress on existing populations.

Intensive Monitoring of Redside Dace Populations

Intensive monitoring of Redside Dace populations was completed at four sites within the Conservation Halton watershed, two within the Fourteen Mile Creek watershed and two within the Sixteen Mile Creek watershed. Sites selected for monitoring were based on known population densities (ranging from low to high density) along with site access. Sampling for all sites included monitoring of the stream habitat/channel morphology and the fish community using a multi-pass sampling methodology. Both types of monitoring were completed using the Ontario Stream Assessment Protocol.

Sites selected on Fourteen Mile Creek were located downstream of Upper Middle Road and Upstream of the North Service Road. Sites were considered to have low to moderate and low density populations respectively with occurrences reported between 2000-2005. Sites were monitored both for the resident fish community as well as stream habitat and channel morphology. The site upstream of the North Service Road also had benthic invertebrate sampling completed as it is a part of Conservation Halton’s Long Term Environmental Monitoring Program and is monitored annually. This site is the largest and widest of the sites sampled as part of the intensive monitoring program with a unique substrate, which consists largely of shale bedrock and small rocks and gravels. One large refuge pool was found on the upper end of the site. Riparian vegetation consisted mainly of deciduous trees with little overhead cover. Multi-pass electrofishing at this site resulted in no Redside Dace captured. The second site monitored on Fourteen Mile Creek is located ~90m downstream of Upper Middle Road. A portion of the stream banks within the site on the lower end of the station had been rehabilitated with cabled log jams, however additional modifications to these structures may be required in order to obtain the maximum benefit. The site substrate consisted largely of small rocks and gravels with a limited amount of fines and silts. One large refuge pool and undercut banks provided limited habitat within the channel. Multi-pass electrofishing at this site yielded

Conservation Halton Long Term Environmental Monitoring Program 46 Bronte Creek and Supplemental Monitoring only two Redside Dace, measuring in at 43mm and 34mm respectively. These two fish were caught within the first run of a three run sampling event with no further Redside Dace captured at this site.

On Sixteen Mile Creek, two sites were sampled as part of the intensive monitoring program. One site, monitored on the Modatek Facility on the West Branch of Sixteen Mile Creek had both fish community and stream habitat monitoring completed. This site was unique within the group of selected sites as it fell within a recently reconstructed stream channel. Although the instream habitat was limited within the channel, dense riparian grasses and overhanging willow shrubs provided ideal riparian conditions for Redside Dace. Unfortunately, no Redside Dace were captured through the multi-pass electrofishing. In contrast, the second intensive monitoring site on Sixteen Mile Creek was a natural channel with fine gravels, rocks, undercut banks, woody debris and large refuge pools. Overhanging grasses and small tree branches provided excellent overhead cover in the narrow sections of the channel. Fish community monitoring at this site yielded a total catch of 51 Redside Dace (31 in run 1, 14 in run 2, and 6 in run 3). Numerous fish were still observed within the channel after the last run, so it is possible that additional Redside Dace still could have inhabited the site. All Redside Dace captured were measured individually with their total lengths ranging from 34mm-104mm. Numbers of Redside Dace captured and size ranges observed indicate a healthy and diverse age class at this particular site. Since this site has been known to support larger numbers of Redside Dace, it is recommended that this reach be protected and that monitoring be minimized in order to reduce stress on this population. Further monitoring of this site should continue to follow the intensive monitoring protocol at a schedule outlined by the Redside Dace Recovery Team.

3.3 Check Your Watershed Day – Bronte Creek

The Check Your Watershed Day protocol was developed by the Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources as an additional module to be added to the Ontario Stream Assessment Protocol (OSAP) manual. While the protocol is still in the draft stages, it has been applied in several watersheds across Ontario including; Cobourg Creek, Ganaraska River, Wilmot Creek, Duffins Creek, Oshawa Creek and Bronte Creek.

The first annual Check Your Watershed Day (CYWD) was held for the Bronte Creek watershed on July 21, 2007. Conservation Halton hosted CYWD in partnership with the Ted Knott Chapter of Trout Unlimited and the event took place with the support of 15 staff members and 29 volunteers. The watershed was broken into geographic zones using a geographic information system (GIS) and crews were sent to collect flow data at specific road crossings within their assigned zone. Sites up to three metres in wetted width were sampled using the protocol outlined in the CYWD draft module of the Ontario Stream Assessment Protocol. Crews recorded whether streams were wet, dry or flowing, and used a variety of techniques to determine stream discharge. If the culvert was perched, a volume over time method was used wherever possible. Where substantial flow was present, discharge was measured using hydraulic head and a cross- sectional area/velocity method. Streams with minimal flow were sampled using a floating object and distance over time velocity/cross-sectional area. Streams greater than three metres in width were sampled using velocity meters in 22 panel sections.

Conservation Halton Long Term Environmental Monitoring Program 47 Bronte Creek and Supplemental Monitoring Of 172 sites selected for sampling during the event, 141 sites were successfully visited and assessed. Those that were not visited and assessed were either not located by volunteers or were inaccessible due to safety or property ownership concerns. Sixty-seven of the sites visited were dry at the time of the event and no discharge data was collected. Discharge data was collected at the remaining sites using hydraulic head (32 sites), distance over time (18 sites), volume over time (9 sites) or a flow meter (14 sites). Of the sites visited, 14 were found to have perched culverts. Quality control/assurance data was also collected at A Check Your Watershed Day volunteer using the seven sites however, only four of these sites volume over time method to aid in determining stream were suitable for comparison due to errors in discharge. data collection. As a result of the data collected, information on the streams discharge/ha (flux) could be calculated as well as the proportion of flow and the flow category for each subwatershed. Please see Figures 21-23 for associated mapping values.

High variability in discharge data was observed between sub-watersheds, within sub-watersheds, and in some cases, at flow sites themselves. Some of the variability may be explained by the degree of error present in the discharge collection methods as well as the degree to which crew leaders were trained in advance of the event. Another explanation is that this protocol captures the true variability of these small stream systems. Some improvements to the protocol have been made for future events in order to reduce the amount of variability due to protocol and training. As the CYWD event took place in a Low Water Level 1 drought condition, many streams were suffering from reduced flow conditions and the hydraulic head values were low as a result (often between 0 and 10 mm). The accuracy range of hydraulic head measurements may have had an effect on the accuracy of discharge values due to the small values being measured. Additionally, depth measurements are only considered accurate to the nearest 5 mm (Stanfield, 2007). This may have caused differences in discharge measurements, particularly in shallow streams under low flow conditions.

Conservation Halton Long Term Environmental Monitoring Program 48 Bronte Creek and Supplemental Monitoring Figure 20: Flux – Bronte Catchments.

Conservation Halton Long Term Environmental Monitoring Program 49 Bronte Creek and Supplemental Monitoring Figure 21: Proportion of Flow – Bronte Catchments.

Conservation Halton Long Term Environmental Monitoring Program 50 Bronte Creek and Supplemental Monitoring Figure 22: Proportion of Flow Category – Bronte Catchments.

Conservation Halton Long Term Environmental Monitoring Program 51 Bronte Creek and Supplemental Monitoring 3.4 Fisheries Data Gap Sampling

In addition to the sites sampled for channel morphology, extensive electrofishing was completed throughout the watershed in order to document the fish community, fill data gaps and sample areas not sampled since the 1950’s-1970’s. Through all the fisheries monitoring completed across the Conservation Halton jurisdiction in 2007, a total of 41 different species were observed including three species of salmonids (brook trout, brown trout and rainbow trout) as well as numerous species of cyprinids (minnows), warmwater sportfish (smallmouth bass, largemouth bass, yellow perch and black crappie) and exotic invasive species (round goby and common carp). No species at risk were captured during the 2007 monitoring, with the exception of those caught during specific Redside Dace (Clinostomus elongates) sampling. Data gap sampling should continue annually to cover remaining gaps and ensure that sites are continually updated.

3.5 Waterdown Woods Jefferson Salamander Radio Telemetry

In 2007, Conservation Halton partnered with the MNR to perform a radio telemetry study of a population of Jefferson Complex Salamanders in the Waterdown Woods area. This study included the capture of adult salamanders, fitting the salamanders with radio transmitters and releasing them at the site they were captured. The movements of the salamanders were then tracked for the following two months and their movement patterns, habitat use and travel distances were observed and recorded. At the end of the study transmitters were retrieved if possible and 5 of the salamanders were recaptured, fitted with new transmitters and continued to be tracked for an additional 2 months. This study was labour intensive but yielded valuable data on the movements and habitat use of these elusive creatures. This increased understanding will greatly assist in the protections of this species and their habitats.

Conservation Halton Long Term Environmental Monitoring Program 52 Bronte Creek and Supplemental Monitoring 4.0 Conclusion and Recommendations

In 2007, Conservation Halton staff and volunteers were successful in monitoring numerous environmental indicators as part of the Long Term Environmental Monitoring Program as well as other supplemental monitoring programs. With the LEMP program only in its third year, the information collected plays an important role in documenting baseline conditions for Bronte Creek as well as the entire Conservation Halton watershed. The information gathered will assist staff in assessing the long term health of the watershed to ensure that Conservation Halton’s mission to “help protect the natural environment from lake to escarpment for the benefit and enjoyment of future generations” is being fulfilled (HRCA 2005).

Highlights of the 2007 field season include:

ƒ For the 29 sites measured, 9 sites were classified as coldwater, 19 were cool water and 1 was considered to be warm water. ƒ Total phosphorus concentrations are usually elevated throughout the watershed. About 42% of all total phosphorus samples exceeded the desired provincial objective of 0.03 mg/L in 2007). ƒ Aquatic invertebrate community monitoring indicates that 34% of the sites sampled were impaired, 50% of the sites sampled were possibly impaired and 16% of sites sampled were unimpaired. ƒ Of 48 fish community sampling sites, 20% were found to be in poor health, 64% were found to be in fair health, 16% were found to be in good health and 0% were found to be in very good health. ƒ Based on Conservation Halton’s data collected for the PWQMN, trend analysis indicates a steady increase in chloride concentrations over time. This is likely due to road salting, water softeners, wastewater treatment plants and other human sources. ƒ Terrestrial monitoring included data collection using the following protocols Ecological Land Classification, Marsh Monitoring program and the Ecological Monitoring and Assessment Network.

Through the Long Term Environmental Monitoring Program, numerous recommendations have been identified to ensure the continued protection and enhancement of the natural environment. These recommendations include:

• Conservation Halton and its staff should continue to play an important role in the planning process to ensure the further protection of natural and hazard lands. • Environmental stewardship, education and outreach should be increased in order to protect natural areas and reduce environmental degradation throughout the watershed. • Efforts to increase awareness of the health of the Conservation Halton Watershed through communication publications i.e. Watershed Report Cards and Focus articles should continue. • Further efforts to maintain (and expand where possible) forest cover and interior forest habitat throughout the watershed should continue. • Efforts to increase riparian buffers and wetland habitats throughout the watershed should be a focus in order to reach the targets for a healthy watershed.

Conservation Halton Long Term Environmental Monitoring Program 53 Bronte Creek and Supplemental Monitoring • Increased trail maintenance and wise use of public natural areas should be encouraged and monitored. • Water conservation, appropriate water taking and best management practices should be encouraged, especially in areas of dense agriculture. • Efforts to improve in-stream habitat should be undertaken for present species and to increase the potential of restocking endemic extirpated species (i.e. Atlantic Salmon) • A revisit to both the Bronte Creek Fisheries Management Plan and the Bronte Creek Watershed Study should be completed in the coming years. • Add additional Ecological Monitoring and Assessment Network (EMAN) and Marsh Monitoring Program sites within the watershed for a more comprehensive terrestrial monitoring program. • Long term environmental monitoring should continue in the future in order to document further changes throughout the Conservation Halton watershed.

Conservation Halton Long Term Environmental Monitoring Program 54 Bronte Creek and Supplemental Monitoring 5.0 Glossary of Terms

Aerobic – Requires oxygen.

Anthropogenic - Processes or materials are those that are derived from human activities, as opposed to those occurring in natural environments without human influence.

Bankfull – The point at which the channel is completely full just prior to flows overtopping the banks and occupying the floodplain.

Benthic- The bottom substrate in a body of water

Benthic Macroinvertebrates – Animals without backbones that live on the bottom substrate of a watercourse or waterbody and are visible to the naked eye.

Benthos – Benthic macroinvertebrates.

Crossover – The location in a stream where the thalweg is in the centre of the channel during bankfull discharge.

Diurnal – Day and night.

HFI - Hilsenhoff Family Index.

Median – The middle data point.

Parameter- An index or metric to measure the biological condition. It can be an abundance measure, a percentage, or multivariate index.

Parametric Indices – Using multiple metrics to summarize and emphasize particular features of raw data.

Point Source contamination – A known location of contaminants.

Quartile - Any of the three values which divide the sorted data set into four equal parts.

SDI – Shannon-Weiner Diversity Index.

Taxa – A name designating an organism or a group of organisms.

Thalweg - Main concentration of flow, normally the deepest part of the channel.

Watershed – A drainage basin which has water flowing into one body of water.

Conservation Halton Long Term Environmental Monitoring Program 55 Bronte Creek and Supplemental Monitoring 6.0 References

Bailey, R.G., R.D. Pfister and J.A. Henderson. 1978. Nature of land and resource classification: A review. Journal of Forestry 76: 650-655.

Barrett, K. and K. Watson. 2005. Migration Study Terms of Reference, Palm Place- 3506 Lakeshore Road West, Oakville. Unpublished Conservation Halton report, 18 p.

Bird Studies Canada (BSC). 2006. Marsh Monitoring Program Guide to Amphibian Monitoring

Bird Studies Canada (BSC). 2006. Marsh Monitoring Program Guide to Bird Monitoring

Borisko, J. 2002. Water Quality Monitoring with Benthic Macroinvertebrates. Citizen’s Environment Watch. Toronto.

Dwyer, J. 2006. Halton Natural Areas Inventory. Volume 1 Site Summary

Dwyer, J. 2006. Halton Natural Areas Inventory. Volume 2 Species Checklists

Conservation Halton. 2002. Bronte Creek Watershed Study.

Dobos, R.Z. 2006. Birding hotspots in Hamilton and surrounding areas. In Birds of Hamilton and Surrounding Areas, R. Curry. Hamilton Naturalists Club, 647 pp.

Environment Canada. 2004. How Much Habitat is Enough? A Framework for Guiding Habitat rehabilitation in Great Lakes Areas of Concern (Second Edition).

Environment Canada. 2006. Ecological Monitoring and Assessment Network. http://www.eman- rese.ca/eman/ [Accessed October 1, 2006]

Environment Canada. 2006. Ontario Forest Bird Monitoring Program (FBMP). Ontario Region of the Canadian Wildlife Service. http://www.on.ec.gc.ca/wildlife/newsletters/fbmp06-e.html [Accessed October 1, 2006]

Halton Region Conservation Authority (HRCA). 1998. Grindstone Creek Watershed Study, Our Legacy to Value: The Grindstone Creek.

Halton Region Conservation Authority (HRCA). 2005. Toward a Healthy Watershed, Strategic Conservation Plan 2005-2007.

Halton Region Conservation Authority (HRCA). 2006. Long Term Environmental Monitoring Program. March 2006. Jones, C., K. Somers, B.Craig and T. Reynoldson, 2005. Ontario Benthos Biomonitoring Network Protocol Manual v. 1.0. Ontario Ministry of Environment, Environmental Monitoring and Reporting Branch, Dorset, Ontario.

Conservation Halton Long Term Environmental Monitoring Program 56 Bronte Creek and Supplemental Monitoring Lee, H.T., W.D. Bakowsky, J. Riley, J. Bowles, M. Puddister, P. Uhlig and S. McMurray. 1998. Ecological Land Classification for Southern Ontario: First Approximation and Its Application. Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources, Southcentral Science Section Field Guide FG-02. 225 pp.

M. Cadman et al. 1987. Atlas of the Breeding Birds of Ontario. Waterloo: University of Waterloo Press

McNeely, R.N., Neimanis, V.P., Dwyer, L. 1979 Environment Canada Water Quality Sourcebook: A Guide to Water Quality Parameters.

Ministry of the Environment 1984 Water Management:Goals, Policies, Objectives and Implementation Procedures of the Ministry of the Environment.

Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources (OMNR) and the Royal Botanical Gardens (RBG). 2006. Hamilton Harbour Fisheries Management Plan-DRAFT. Hamilton, Ontario.

Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources (OMNR) and the Toronto and Region Conservation Authority (TRCA). 2005. Humber River Fisheries Management Plan. Published by the Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources and the Toronto and Region Conservation Authority. Queens Printer for Ontario.

Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources (OMNR). 2001. A Sampling Protocol for Red-backed Salamander (Plethodon cinereus) Populations in Ontario: 2nd Pilot Study. Queens Printer for Ontario

Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources (OMNR). 2000. Significant Wildlife Habitat Technical Guide. 151 p.

Stanfield, L. (Editor) 2005. Ontario Stream Assessment Protocol. Version 7, Fish and Wildlife Branch. Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources. Peterborough, Ontario. 256 pages.

Stanfield, L.W., S.F. Gibson, and J.A. Borwick, 2004. In review. Using a Landscape approach to Identify the Distribution and Production of Tributary Habitats for Juvenile Salmonines in Lake Ontario Tributaries.

Stankowski, S.J. 1972. Population Density as an Indirect Indicator of Urban and Sub-Urban Land surface Modifications. U.S. Geological Society Professional Paper 800-B:B219-B224.

Steedman, R.J. 1988. Modification and Assessment of an Index of Biotic Integrity to Quantify Stream Quality in Southern Ontario. Canadian Journal of Fisheries and aquatic Sciences 45:492- 495.

Zorn, P., V. Blazeski and B. Craig. 2004. Joint EMAN/Parks Canada National Monitoring Protocol for Plethodontid Salamanders. Version 1.

Conservation Halton Long Term Environmental Monitoring Program 57 Bronte Creek and Supplemental Monitoring

Conservation Halton Long Term Environmental Monitoring Program 58 Bronte Creek and Supplemental Monitoring

Appendices

Conservation Halton Long Term Environmental Monitoring Program 59 Bronte Creek and Supplemental Monitoring

Appendix 1: Fish Species observed in the Bronte Creek Watershed. Long Term Environmental Monitoring Sites Redside Dace Sites

COMMON NAME SCIENTIFIC NAME BRO-10 BRO-118 BRO-129 BRO-135 BR0-142 BRO-149 BRO-151 BRO-154 BRO-156 BRO-16 BRO-171 BRO-172 BRO-196 BRO-197 BRO-209 BRO-21 BRO-219 BRO-22 BRO-225 BRO-238 BRO-243 BRO-244 BRO-245 BRO-284 BRO-42 BRO-57 BRO-8 BRO-250 BRO-251 BRO-252 BRO-2 BRO-193 Black Crappie Pomoxis nigromaculatus 1 Blacknose Dace Rhinichthys atratulus 43 5 2 2 5 8 5 14 46 1 6 23 22 1 40 6 47 4 Blacknose Shiner Notropis heterolepis 1 Blackside Darter Percina maculata 1 1 6 5 1 Bluegill Lepomis macrochirus Bluntnose Minnow Pimephales notatus 2 4 9 3 8 2 15 Brassy Minnow Hybognathus hankinsoni 6 1 Brook Stickleback Culaea inconstans 11 19 1 16 10 15 Brook Trout Salvelinus fontinalis 2 4 20 50 Brown Bullhead Ameiurus nebulosus 1 BrownTrout Salmo trutta 1 Central Mudminnow Umbra limi 1 1 2 2 3 7 4 1 Common Carp Cyprinus carpio 1 Common Shiner Luxilus cornutus 1 2 2 1 13 10 7 10 Creek Chub Semotilus atromaculatus 6 32 80 11 48 17 12 59 7 69 45 16 6 1 45 69 22 14 7 Emerald Shiner Notrois athernoides Fantail Darter Etheostoma flabellare 2 25 9 52 56 9 11 2 36 Gizzard Shad Dorosoma cepededianum Fathead Minnow Pimephales promelas 1 Golden Shiner Notemigonus crysoleucas Green Sunfish Lepomis cyanellus 1 Horneyhead Chub Nocomis biguttatus 6 2 2 Johnny Darter Etheostoma nigrum 3 2 10 21 1 22 30 20 42 10 6 Largemouth Bass Micropterus salmoides 43 5 1 Longnose Dace Rhinichthys cataractae 8 2 60 52 8 4 21 15 Northern Hog Sucker Hypentelium nigricans 2 1 6 1 1 5 1 Northern Pike Esox lucius 1 Northern Redbelly Dace Phoxinus eos 1 Pearl Dace Margariscus margarita 1 Pumpkinseed Lepomis gibbosus 1 1 1 2 3 12 8 Rainbow Darter Etheostoma caeruleum 1 5 16 80 4 11 Rainbow Trout Oncorhynchus mykiss 14 12 4 10 1 3 River Chub Nocomis micropogon 3 41 5 Rock Bass Ambloplites rubestris 1 7 3 3 3 1 2 Round goby Neogobius melanostomus Smallmouth Bass Micropterus dolomieu 1 Spottail Shiner Notropis hudsonius Stonecat Noturus flavus 9 1 3 White Sucker Catostomus commersoni 1 17 6 37 11 8 14 23 16 6 1 46 3 Yellow Perch Perca flavescens 1 yoy cyprinid Cyprinidae 1 15 128 Not Fished * * * * * * * Total 55 62 - 77 114 48 244 55 - - 102 15 176 - 47 282 162 - - - 38 114 46 70 43 53 176 101 147 92 13 24

Conservation Halton Long Term Environmental Monitoring Program 61 Bronte Creek and Supplemental Monitoring

Atlantic Salmon Monitoring Program Sites Data Gap Sites

COMMON NAME SCIENTIFIC NAME Bronte BRO-191 BRO-221 BRO-231 BRO-246 BRO--234 BRO-232 BRO-297 BRO-241 BRO-242 BRO-240 BRO--230 BRO-408 BRO-233 BRO-66 BRO-272 BRO-271 BRO--152 BRO-145 BRO-115 BRO-1 BRO-25 BRO-206 BRO-247 BRO-248 BRO-249 BRO-257 BRO-258 BRO-259 BRO-263 BRO-269 BRO-275 BRO-3 BRO-47 BRO-6 Total Black Crappie Pomoxis nigromaculatus 1 Blacknose Dace Rhinichthys atratulus 6 11 12 1 5 79 14 28 4 11 26 19 6 9 1 6 478 Blacknose Shiner Notropis heterolepis 41 Blackside Darter Percina maculata 14 Bluegill Lepomis macrochirus 1 1 2 Bluntnose Minnow Pimephales notatus 1 6 2 2 54 Brassy Minnow Hybognathus hankinsoni 1 8 Brook Stickleback Culaea inconstans 1 9 4 20 1 107 Brook Trout Salvelinus fontinalis 1 4 1 8 4 2 6 102 Brown Bullhead Ameiurus nebulosus 1 68 70 BrownTrout Salmo trutta 10 1 4 16 Central Mudminnow Umbra limi 3 7 24 8 177 2 31 273 Common Carp Cyprinus carpio 1 11 13 Common Shiner Luxilus cornutus 7 2 5 1 1 9 2 2 1 2 2 1 81 Creek Chub Semotilus atromaculatus 1 2 4 4 43 4 5 18 1 4 122 13 6 2 7 1 2 2 8 815 Emerald Shiner Notrois athernoides 1 169 170 Fantail Darter Etheostoma flabellare 2 11 30 5 40 34 1 6 33 10 17 4 78 8 4 42 6 533 Gizzard Shad Dorosoma cepededianum 2 1 3 Fathead Minnow Pimephales promelas 1 Golden Shiner Notemigonus crysoleucas 4 4 Green Sunfish Lepomis cyanellus 1 Horneyhead Chub Nocomis biguttatus 5 15 Johnny Darter Etheostoma nigrum 10 1 1 17 1 22 5 3 2 2 1 2 2 1 3 1 241 Largemouth Bass Micropterus salmoides 2 1 6 3 4 3 3 71 Longnose Dace Rhinichthys cataractae 20 6 13 6 8 39 14 103 1 19 6 18 7 6 24 1 461 Northern Hog Sucker Hypentelium nigricans 1 10 6 1 2 3 4 44 Northern Pike Esox lucius 1 4 6 Northern Redbelly Dace Phoxinus eos 1 Pearl Dace Margariscus margarita 1 Pumpkinseed Lepomis gibbosus 1 11 1 35 76 Rainbow Darter Etheostoma caeruleum 19 11 34 2 14 77 197 31 90 8 50 6 29 37 47 769 Rainbow Trout Oncorhynchus mykiss 2 5 7 1 8 2 1 5 22 2 6 1 30 12 1 2 151 River Chub Nocomis micropogon 2 1 8 8 2 36 1 32 139 Rock Bass Ambloplites rubestris 2 1 4 15 1 43 Round goby Neogobius melanostomus 37 4 23 64 Smallmouth Bass Micropterus dolomieu 1 2 Spottail Shiner Notropis hudsonius 6 6 Stonecat Noturus flavus 7 1 5 2 5 2 35 White Sucker Catostomus commersoni 3 2 7 3 3 6 1 1 4 5 10 2 3 13 1 2 5 5 2 1 6 274 Yellow Perch Perca flavescens 3 1 1 6 yoy cyprinid Cyprinidae 7 66 28 47 5 297 Not Fished 0 Total 60 67 67 76 84 81 178 350 26 176 179 190 96 34 104 19 154 5 94 15 20 17 33 12 197 256 6 238 206 14 6 17 24 32 5489

Conservation Halton Long Term Environmental Monitoring Program 62 Bronte Creek and Supplemental Monitoring Appendix 2: Fish species observed at Annual Monitoring Sites.

COMMON NAME SCIENTIFIC NAME BRO-154 BRO-16 BRO-8 FOR-2 GRN-101 GRN-27 SHL-48 SXM-205 SXM-216 SXM-349 SXM-63 Total Blacknose Dace Rhinichthys atratulus 5 156 4 7 3 175 Blacknose Shiner Notropis heterolepis 40 40 Blackside Darter Percina maculata 1 6 7 Bluegill Lepomis macrochirus 1 1 Bluntnose Minnow Pimephales notatus 3 15 203 1 4 2 4 232 Brook Stickleback Culaea inconstans 9 9 Brown Trout Salmo trutta 1 2 3 Central Stoneroller Campostoma anomalum 9 9 Common Shiner Luxilus cornutus 2 7 1 2 1 13 Creek Chub Semotilus atromaculatus 17 45 155 9 8 5 17 11 13 280 Fantail Darter Etheostoma flabellare 9 22 17 4 52 Fathead Minnow Pimephales promelas 1 1 Johnny Darter Etheostoma nigrum 10 30 1 28 1 9 79 Largemouth Bass Micropterus salmoides 9 4 13 Longnose Dace Rhinichthys cataractae 21 85 3 5 17 1 7 139 Northern Hog Sucker Hypentelium nigricans 2 5 3 5 2 17 Pumpkinseed Lepomis gibbosus 1 1 Rainbow Darter Etheostoma caeruleum 281 31 27 11 34 3 387 Rainbow Trout Oncorhynchus mykiss 1 1 2 River Chub Nocomis micropogon 3 19 22 Rock Bass Ambloplites rubestris 3 1 16 4 24 Smallmouth Bass Micropterus dolomieu 1 2 3 Stonecat Noturus flavus 1 4 8 1 2 16 White Sucker Catostomus commersoni 11 6 51 21 6 20 7 4 11 137 yoy cyprinid Cyprinidae 56 56 Not Fished * 0 Total 55 0 176 869 140 48 33 104 145 104 44 1542

Conservation Halton Long Term Environmental Monitoring Program 63 Bronte Creek and Supplemental Monitoring Appendix 3: Benthic Invertebrates Observed in Bronte Creek.

Order Family Genus BRO-10 BRO-118 BRO-129 BRO-135 BRO-142 BRO-149 BRO-151 BRO-154 BRO-156 BRO-16 BRO-171 BRO-172 BRO-196 BRO-197 BRO-209 BRO-21 BRO-219 BRO-22 BRO-225 BRO-238 BRO-243 BRO-244 BRO-245 BRO-284 BRO-42 BRO-57 BRO-8 TOTAL Nemata 0 1 2 2 3 20000000202100501 0 0 1 0 1 23 Oligocheata 0 26 36 1 28 2 243 22 6 6 61 18 1 12 5 4 30 10 9 4 66 4 109 79 1 1 13 797 Rhynchobdellida Erpobdellidae 0 0 0 0 1 000000 00000000000 0 0 0 0 0 1 Rhynchobdellida Erpobdellidae Erpobdella punctata 0 0 0 0 0 010010 00000000000 0 0 0 0 0 2 Rhynchobdellida Glossiphoniidae 0 0 0 0 0 000000 00000000000 0 0 0 0 0 0 Rhynchobdellida Glossiphoniidae Glossiphonia complan 0 0 0 0 0 000000 00000000100 0 0 0 0 0 1 Turbellaria 0 0 1 0 1 10041000100000000 0 0 0 0 0 9 Coleoptera Dytiscidae 0 0 3 0 1 000000001160014000 0 0 0 0 0 26 Coleoptera Dytiscidae Hydroporus 0 0 0 0 0 00000000000000000 0 0 0 0 0 0 Coleoptera Elmidae 27 51 23 5 5 44 1 109 0 66 49 8 73 14 68 24 45 15 15 5 13 32 0 58 10 2 73 835 Coleoptera Haliplidae Peltodytes 0 0 0 0 0 01000000000000000 0 0 0 0 0 1 Coleoptera Hydrophilidae 0 0 0 0 0 010000 00000000000 0 0 0 0 0 1 Coleoptera Psephenidae Ectopria 0 0 0 0 0 00000030000000000 0 0 4 0 0 7 Coleoptera Psephenidae Psephenus 0 0 0 0 0 00500019001010000 0 0 0 0 1 18 Diptera Chironomidae 70 110 213 103 299 223 51 116 158 151 79 32 87 90 78 68 396 108 197 103 135 96 99 63 178 93 102 3498 Diptera Ceratopogonidae 0 1 2 0 9 105111000410671211 0 3 1 1 0 58 Diptera Empididae Chelifera 0 0 0 0 0 00000000000100000 0 0 0 4 1 6 Diptera Empididae Hemerodromia 7 3 0 0 0 3060616150352300134 0 6 0 0 3 86 Diptera Simuliidae 82 2 8 13 7 70 1 0 54 45 3 6 1 5 1 6 11 0 29 96 1 2 3 0 13 142 2 603 Diptera Stratiomyidae 0 0 0 0 0 00010110000000001 0 0 0 0 0 4 Diptera Tabanidae 0 0 3 1 1 00010020020110000 0 0 0 1 0 13 Diptera Tipulidae 3 0 0 1 0 00110103001000000 0 0 1 1 0 13 Diptera Tipulidae Antocha 0 7 0 0 0 00600415000310000 0 3 0 0 6 36 Diptera Tipulidae Dicranota 1 0 0 0 0 00000030000000000 1 0 1 0 0 6 Diptera Tipulidae Hexatoma 0 0 0 0 0 00000000000000000 0 0 2 0 0 2 Diptera Tipulidae Pilaria 3 0 0 0 0 01000040000030300 2 0 7 1 1 25 Diptera Tipulidae Tipula 0 0 2 0 1 00000020003022110 0 0 1 3 0 18 Diptera Athericidae Atherix 0 0 0 0 0 00000000000000000 0 1 0 0 0 1 Diptera Dolichopodidae 0 0 0 0 0 00000000001000000 0 0 0 0 0 1 Ephemeroptera Baetidae 46 0 4 0 0 0008015133263132210136 36 14 33 11 1 286 Ephemeroptera Caenidae Caenis 0 1 0 57 0 51702900031210507071 0 2 0 0 0 210 Ephemeroptera Ephemerellidae 58 33 0 0 0 0 0 15 0 0 11 12 22 0 0 64 0 0 0 0 2 0 5 27 65 6 12 332 Ephemeroptera Ephemeridae Ephemera 0 0 0 0 0 00200000002000002 1 0 0 0 1 8 Ephemeroptera Ephemeridae Hexagenia 0 0 0 0 0 01000000000000000 0 0 0 0 0 1 Ephemeroptera Heptageniidae 2 0 0 0 0 00601003351002000 0 0 0 1 0 24 Ephemeroptera Heptageniidae Stenonema 1 6 0 1 0 002013020470330009 2 9 1 4 6 91 Ephemeroptera Isonychiidae Isonychia 0 0 0 2 0 00000200020020101 1 0 0 0 0 11 Ephemeroptera Leptohyphidae Tricorythodes 0 0 0 0 0 000000000031000000 0 26 0 0 0 57 Ephemeroptera Leptophlebiidae 11 1 0 0 0 002800511064050011 3 0 15 0 13 95 Ephemeroptera Leptophlebiidae Paraleptophlebia 0 0 0 0 0 00000000300000000 3 0 0 0 0 6

Conservation Halton Long Term Environmental Monitoring Program 64 Bronte Creek and Supplemental Monitoring Order Family Genus BRO-10 BRO-118 BRO-129 BRO-135 BRO-142 BRO-149 BRO-151 BRO-154 BRO-156 BRO-16 BRO-171 BRO-172 BRO-196 BRO-197 BRO-209 BRO-21 BRO-219 BRO-22 BRO-225 BRO-238 BRO-243 BRO-244 BRO-245 BRO-284 BRO-42 BRO-57 BRO-8 TOTAL Ephemeroptera Siphlonuridae 0 0 0 0 0 00000010000000000 0 0 0 0 0 1 Plecoptera Capniidae 0 0 0 1 0 00000000000000300 46 0 0 1 0 51 Plecoptera Chloroperlidae 0 0 0 0 0 000000150000000000 0 0 23 0 0 38 Plecoptera Leuctridae 0 0 0 0 0 000000110000000000 0 0 0 0 0 11 Plecoptera Nemouridae 0 0 0 68 0 000140000010003700 0 0 0 33 0 144 Plecoptera Nemouridae Amphinemura 79 2 4 0 0 001006112030051530223 43 0 5 0 2 305 Plecoptera Nemouridae Nemoura 12 1 0 0 0 00000000000000000 0 0 10 0 0 23 Plecoptera Perlidae 4 1 6 0 0 00100301016002003 0 0 3 0 0 31 Plecoptera Perlidae Acroneuria 0 0 0 0 0 00000070000034000 0 0 0 0 0 14 Plecoptera Perlidae Agnetina 0 0 0 0 0 00000000024000004 0 0 0 0 0 10 Plecoptera Perlidae Attaneuria 0 0 0 0 0 00000001000000000 0 0 0 0 0 1 Plecoptera Perlidae Neoperla 0 0 0 0 0 00000000001000000 0 0 0 0 0 1 Plecoptera Perlidae Paragnetina 0 0 0 0 0 00100401000000000 0 1 0 0 0 7 Plecoptera Perlidae Perlesta 0 1 0 0 0 00000003001000000 0 0 0 0 0 5 Plecoptera Perlodidae 0 0 0 7 4 4 2 0 173 4 2 0 0 6 0 0 0 19 0 20 0 0 1 1 7 10 2 262 Plecoptera Taeniopterygidae 0 0 0 1 0 00000000000000000 0 0 0 4 0 5 Plecoptera Pteronarcyidae Pteronarcys 0 1 0 0 0 00000200000000000 0 0 0 0 0 3 Trichoptera 0 0 0 0 0 00100000000000000 0 0 0 0 0 1 Trichoptera Brachycentridae 0 4 0 0 0 00000002000000020 0 0 1 0 0 9 Trichoptera Glossosomatidae 1 1 0 0 0 00200000000000000 0 0 1 2 3 10 Trichoptera Helicopsychidae Helicopsyche 0 66 0 0 0 00600004057000000 0 19 0 0 2 109 Trichoptera Hydropsychidae 12 63 3 2 3 0 0 16 0 3 7 9 29 10 25 53 12 17 0 2 21 4 13 9 9 6 30 358 Trichoptera Hydroptilidae 0 0 0 0 0 00000151126100500410 1 1 0 0 0 92 Trichoptera Lepidostomatidae 0 0 0 0 0 00000000000000000 1 0 0 0 0 1 Trichoptera Lepidostomatidae Lepidostoma 0 0 0 0 0 00000080000000000 1 0 0 4 0 13 Trichoptera Leptoceridae 0 10 0 2 0 00000031061130003 0 5 1 3 0 39 Trichoptera Limnephilidae 0 0 0 7 1 009300 622800008119 3 0 2 5 3 79 Trichoptera Philopotamidae 0 0 0 0 0 00000000000000010 0 0 0 0 0 1 Trichoptera Philopotamidae Chimarra 1 1 0 0 0 001000040100210001 1 0 0 0 12 43 Trichoptera Philopotamidae Wormaldia 0 0 39 0 0 000000000000021000 0 0 0 0 0 60 Trichoptera Phryganeidae 0 0 0 0 0 00000010000000000 0 0 0 0 0 1 Trichoptera Phryganeidae Ptilostomis 0 0 0 0 0 000100 00000000000 0 0 0 0 0 1 Trichoptera Polycentropodidae 2 1 0 1 0 00000020210000001 1 0 2 4 0 17 Trichoptera Psychomyiidae 0 0 0 1 0 00000000000000000 0 0 0 0 0 1 Trichoptera Psychomyiidae Lype 0 0 0 0 0 00100000000000000 0 0 0 0 0 1 Trichoptera Psychomyiidae Pericoma 0 0 0 0 0 00000000000000010 0 0 0 0 0 1 Trichoptera Rhyacophilidae Rhyacophila 2 0 0 0 0 001700 51000000110 1 0 3 6 0 28 Trichoptera Uenoidae 0 0 0 1 0 101131090020100011 0 0 2 9 5 47 Megaloptera Corydalidae 1 1 0 0 0 000009480120110504 0 4 1 0 2 53 Megaloptera Sialidae Sialis 0 0 0 2 0 00000010020000000 0 1 0 1 0 7 Odonata Aeshnidae 0 0 0 0 0 00000001030000001 0 0 1 0 0 6

Conservation Halton Long Term Environmental Monitoring Program 65 Bronte Creek and Supplemental Monitoring Order Family Genus BRO-10 BRO-118 BRO-129 BRO-135 BRO-142 BRO-149 BRO-151 BRO-154 BRO-156 BRO-16 BRO-171 BRO-172 BRO-196 BRO-197 BRO-209 BRO-21 BRO-219 BRO-22 BRO-225 BRO-238 BRO-243 BRO-244 BRO-245 BRO-284 BRO-42 BRO-57 BRO-8 TOTAL Odonata Calopterygidae 0 0 0 0 0 00000101010000001 1 0 0 0 0 5 Odonata Calopterygidae Calopteryx 0 0 0 0 0 00000000000020000 0 0 0 0 0 2 Odonata Coenagrionidae 0 0 0 0 0 00000000100000000 0 0 0 0 0 1 Odonata Cordulegastridae 0 0 0 0 0 00000000010000000 2 0 0 0 0 3 Odonata Gomphidae 0 0 0 0 0 00000000100000003 0 2 0 0 0 6 Heteroptera Gerridae 0 0 0 0 0 00000000000001000 0 0 0 0 0 1 Heteroptera Hebridae 0 0 0 0 0 00000000010000000 0 0 0 0 0 1 Amphipoda Crangonyctidae 0 0 0 0 0 02000000000000000 0 0 0 2 0 4 Amphipoda Gammaridae 0 0 0 0 0 00000000200000000 0 0 0 0 0 2 Amphipoda Hyalellidae Hyalella 0 0 0 0 0 1 2 0 18 0 0 0 0 0 110000102 0 0 0 4 0 39 Isopoda Asellidae Caecidotea 0 0 31 1 1 20291801010201525140018 0 1 0 0 0 231 Decapoda 0 0 0 0 0 00000010000000000 0 0 0 0 0 1 Decapoda Cambaridae Cambarus robustus 0 0 0 0 0 00000010001000010 0 1 0 0 0 4 Decapoda Cambaridae Orconectes 0 0 0 0 0 00000000000000000 0 0 0 0 0 0 Veneroida Sphaeriidae 0 0 1 0 0 200011741320680000 1 2 2 0 3 71 Bosommatophora Lymnaeidae 0 0 0 0 0 00000010010000000 0 0 0 0 0 2 Bosommatophora Physidae 0 0 0 0 0 01000001220000000 0 0 0 0 0 6 TOTAL 425 395 381 280 365 370 314 369 459 339 300 302 310 308 306 324 528 348 325 305 338 299 381 338 407 365 300 9481

Conservation Halton Long Term Environmental Monitoring Program 66 Bronte Creek and Supplemental Monitoring Appendix 4: Benthic Species observed at Annual Monitoring Sites.

Order Family Genus BRO-154 BRO-16 BRO-8 FOR-2 GRN-101 GRN-27 SHL-48 SXM-205 SXM-349 SXM-63 SXM-216 TOTAL Nemata 0 0 10600 0 1 1 09 Oligocheata 22 6 13 6 15 80 177 0 21 2 0 342 Rhynchobdellida Erpobdellidae 0 0 00000 0 0 0 00 Erpobdella Rhynchobdellida Erpobdellidae punctata 0 1 00001 0 0 0 02 Rhynchobdellida Glossiphoniidae 0 0 00200 0 0 0 02 Glossiphonia Rhynchobdellida Glossiphoniidae complan 0 0 00000 0 0 0 00 Turbellaria 0 1 00001 2 0 0 04 Coleoptera Dytiscidae 0 0 00000 0 0 0 00 Coleoptera Dytiscidae Hydroporus 0 0 00000 1 0 0 01 Coleoptera Elmidae 109 66 73 9 11 49 20 53 97 24 2 513 Coleoptera Haliplidae Peltodytes 0 0 01000 0 0 0 01 Coleoptera Hydrophilidae 0 0 00000 0 0 0 00 Coleoptera Psephenidae Ectopria 0 0 00000 0 0 0 00 Coleoptera Psephenidae Psephenus 5 0 10100 7 0 0 014 Diptera Chironomidae 116 151 102 187 87 134 149 109 102 108 12 1257 Diptera Ceratopogonidae 1 1 00020 1 0 2 07 Diptera Empididae Chelifera 0 0 10000 0 0 0 01 Diptera Empididae Hemerodromia 6 6 30121 0 3 2 024 Diptera Simuliidae 0 45 26471 6 1 14 086 Diptera Stratiomyidae 0 0 00000 0 0 0 00 Diptera Tabanidae 0 0 01120 0 0 0 04 Diptera Tipulidae 1 0 00200 0 0 16 019 Diptera Tipulidae Antocha 6 0 60210 0 0 42 057 Diptera Tipulidae Dicranota 0 0 00000 0 0 0 00 Diptera Tipulidae Hexatoma 0 0 00000 0 0 0 00 Diptera Tipulidae Pilaria 0 0 10000 0 1 0 02 Diptera Tipulidae Tipula 0 0 00500 1 0 0 06 Diptera Athericidae Atherix 0 0 00000 0 0 0 00 Diptera Dolichopodidae 0 0 00000 0 0 0 00 Ephemeroptera Baetidae 0 0 1 2 53 0 0 89 0 18 5 168 Ephemeroptera Caenidae Caenis 729029041 30 0 0 8108 Ephemeroptera Ephemerellidae 15 0 120020 17 9 52 0107 Ephemeroptera Ephemeridae Ephemera 2 0 10000 1 0 0 04 Ephemeroptera Ephemeridae Hexagenia 0 0 00000 0 0 0 00 Ephemeroptera Heptageniidae 6 1 06150 0 0 0 4665 Ephemeroptera Heptageniidae Stenonema 2 1 612400 2 6 0 033 Ephemeroptera Isonychiidae Isonychia 0 0 00000 0 0 2 02 Ephemeroptera Leptohyphidae Tricorythodes 0 0 00000 1 0 35 036

Conservation Halton Long Term Environmental Monitoring Program 67 Bronte Creek and Supplemental Monitoring Order Family Genus BRO-154 BRO-16 BRO-8 FOR-2 GRN-101 GRN-27 SHL-48 SXM-205 SXM-349 SXM-63 SXM-216 TOTAL Ephemeroptera Leptophlebiidae 280130000 0 0 0 041 Ephemeroptera Leptophlebiidae Paraleptophlebia0 0 00000 0 0 0 00 Ephemeroptera Siphlonuridae 0 0 00000 0 0 0 00 Plecoptera Capniidae 0 0 00200 0 0 0 02 Plecoptera Chloroperlidae 0 0 00100 0 0 0 01 Plecoptera Leuctridae 0 0 00000 0 0 0 00 Plecoptera Nemouridae 0 4 01000 0 0 0 05 Plecoptera Nemouridae Amphinemura 1 0 20000 0 1 33 037 Plecoptera Nemouridae Nemoura 0 0 00000 0 0 0 00 Plecoptera Perlidae 1 0 00000 0 0 1 02 Plecoptera Perlidae Acroneuria 0 0 00000 4 0 0 04 Plecoptera Perlidae Agnetina 0 0 00000 0 0 0 00 Plecoptera Perlidae Attaneuria 0 0 00000 0 0 0 00 Plecoptera Perlidae Neoperla 0 0 00000 0 0 0 00 Plecoptera Perlidae Paragnetina 1 0 00000 0 1 0 02 Plecoptera Perlidae Perlesta 0 0 00000 4 0 0 04 Plecoptera Perlodidae 0 4 21100 0 0 0 08 Plecoptera Taeniopterygidae 0 0 00000 0 0 0 11 Plecoptera Pteronarcyidae Pteronarcys 0 0 00000 0 0 0 00 Trichoptera 1 0 00003 0 0 0 04 Trichoptera Brachycentridae 0 0 00000 0 0 0 00 Trichoptera Glossosomatidae 2 0 30000 0 1 0 06 Trichoptera Helicopsychidae Helicopsyche 6 0 21000 0 27 2 038 Trichoptera Hydropsychidae 16 3 30 14 108 4 5 6 13 25 0 224 Trichoptera Hydroptilidae 0 0 00000 3 0 3 06 Trichoptera Lepidostomatidae 0 0 00000 0 0 0 00 Trichoptera Lepidostomatidae Lepidostoma 0 0 00000 0 0 0 00 Trichoptera Leptoceridae 0 0 00000 0 3 1 15 Trichoptera Limnephilidae 9 0 30010 0 2 0 015 Trichoptera Philopotamidae 0 0 01000 0 0 0 01 Trichoptera Philopotamidae Chimarra 1 0121000 0 0 3 017 Trichoptera Philopotamidae Wormaldia 0 0 00000 0 0 0 00 Trichoptera Phryganeidae 0 0 00000 0 0 0 00 Trichoptera Phryganeidae Ptilostomis 0 0 00000 0 0 0 00 Trichoptera Polycentropodidae 0 0 00001 0 0 0 01 Trichoptera Psychomyiidae 0 0 00000 0 0 0 00 Trichoptera Psychomyiidae Lype 1 0 00000 0 0 0 01 Trichoptera Psychomyiidae Pericoma 0 0 00000 0 0 0 00 Trichoptera Rhyacophilidae Rhyacophila 1 0 00000 0 0 3 04 Trichoptera Uenoidae 1 1 50000 0 4 0 011 Megaloptera Corydalidae 0 0 21310 0 2 3 719

Conservation Halton Long Term Environmental Monitoring Program 68 Bronte Creek and Supplemental Monitoring Order Family Genus BRO-154 BRO-16 BRO-8 FOR-2 GRN-101 GRN-27 SHL-48 SXM-205 SXM-349 SXM-63 SXM-216 TOTAL Megaloptera Sialidae Sialis 0 0 00000 0 0 0 00 Odonata Aeshnidae 0 0 00000 0 0 1 12 Trichoptera Phryganeidae Ptilostomis 0 0 00000 0 0 0 00 Odonata Calopterygidae 0 0 01000 0 0 0 01 Odonata Calopterygidae Calopteryx 0 0 00000 0 0 0 11 Odonata Coenagrionidae 0 0 00000 2 0 0 68 Odonata Cordulegastridae 0 0 00000 0 0 0 00 Odonata Gomphidae 0 0 00000 0 0 0 00 Heteroptera Gerridae 0 0 00000 0 0 0 00 Heteroptera Hebridae 0 0 00000 0 0 0 00 Amphipoda Crangonyctidae 0 0 00000 0 0 0 00 Amphipoda Gammaridae 0 0 00406 0 0 0 010 Amphipoda Hyalellidae Hyalella 0 0 00000 0 0 0 00 Isopoda Asellidae Caecidotea 2 18 0 37 0 5 45 1 3 0 11 122 Decapoda 0 0 00000 0 0 0 00 Cambarus Decapoda Cambaridae robustus 0 0 00001 0 0 0 01 Decapoda Cambaridae Orconectes 0 0 00010 0 0 0 34 Veneroida Sphaeriidae 0 1 3 0 1 15 0 1 8 0 0 29 Bosommatophora Lymnaeidae 0 0 00000 0 0 0 00 Bosommatophora Physidae 0 0 00000 0 0 0 11 TOTAL 369 339 300 317 315 315 412 341 306 393 105 3512

Conservation Halton Long Term Environmental Monitoring Program 69 Bronte Creek and Supplemental Monitoring Appendix 5: Bronte Creek Geomorphic Indices

Proportion Average Average Width/ Count Mean SD Count Mean Sorting Sorting Stream Stable Width Depth Depth Of Point Point Point of Max Max SD Max D16 D50 D84 D16 D50 D84 Index Index Code Site Code Year Sample Banks (m) (cm) Ratio Particles Particles Particles Particles Particles Particles Point Point Point Max Max Max Point Max BN1 BRO-10 2007 1 0.737 4.340 62.269 69.697 60 100.457 107.329 60 225.417 124.557 4.6 67 178 128 190 394 8.611 1.779 BN1 BRO-115 2007 1 0.737 11.188 197.333 56.696 60 123.282 170.102 60 229.017 216.025 0.1 78 202 111 145 329 391.295 1.788 BN1 BRO-118 2007 1 0.500 11.590 208.932 55.473 60 55.673 100.421 60 164.867 102.777 0.1 18 110.8 84.6 140 217 93.078 1.602 BN1 BRO-129 2007 1 0.775 1.398 56.872 24.573 40 11.881 13.774 40 54.358 24.599 0.05 9 23.6 34.4 52 75 91.311 1.477 BN1 BRO-135 2007 1 0.700 5.320 243.917 21.811 60 17.974 50.735 60 87.898 224.060 0.05 0.05 3 0.05 0.05 144 30.500 1440.500 BN1 BRO-142 2007 1 0.667 2.739 137.250 19.957 60 30.547 54.008 60 71.361 56.754 0.05 6 57.4 14 65 112.2 64.783 3.185 BN1 BRO-145 2007 1 1.000 3.393 62.309 54.460 60 160.309 255.359 60 247.550 228.562 6 80 224 120 180 348 8.067 1.717 BN1 BRO-149 2007 1 0.633 1.487 84.419 17.611 45 10.010 17.524 45 55.050 50.999 0.05 0.1 17 10 42.5 105 86.000 3.360 BN1 BRO-151 2007 1 0.487 1.318 110.081 11.968 40 1.296 4.495 40 32.259 42.292 0.01 0.01 0.08 1.26 25 42.6 4.500 10.773 BN1 BRO-152 2007 1 0.500 4.367 125.672 34.749 60 26.027 35.541 60 91.870 39.819 0.1 9 47 46.4 100 128.2 47.611 1.719 BN1 BRO-154 2007 1 0.350 5.517 267.250 20.644 60 13.346 19.582 60 26.120 26.126 0.05 9 27 0.05 25 45 91.500 250.900 BN1 BRO-16 2007 1 0.783 4.802 188.750 25.439 60 73.538 141.962 60 157.168 196.232 8 45 110 65 105 184 4.035 1.684 BN1 BRO-171 2007 1 0.739 3.725 159.867 23.301 60 25.013 39.408 60 109.250 46.756 0.1 7 57.6 55.2 111 141.2 39.114 1.641 BN1 BRO-172 2007 1 0.833 2.348 54.600 43.010 60 19.130 32.660 60 106.690 68.049 0.1 6 35.4 52.4 95 159.4 32.950 1.745 BN1 BRO-191 2007 1 0.600 13.106 197.763 66.271 60 41.256 46.877 60 96.150 48.764 5 21 82.2 39.4 97 140 4.057 1.953 BN1 BRO-193 2007 1 0.800 5.474 70.362 77.798 60 17.458 28.241 60 54.955 38.610 0.1 8 28 20 45 85 41.750 2.069 BN1 BRO-196 2007 1 0.895 6.785 140.672 48.233 60 187.503 345.931 60 350.067 391.243 7.6 55 220.8 99.2 152 1111 5.626 4.421 BN1 BRO-2 2007 1 0.647 5.256 232.190 22.637 56 14.737 31.826 56 69.369 65.972 0.05 0.05 38.2 0.1 70 133.32 382.500 350.952 BN1 BRO-209 2007 1 0.950 4.913 146.283 33.586 60 46.959 51.969 60 121.933 59.679 5 23 98.2 69.2 105 182 4.435 1.625 BN1 BRO-21 2007 1 0.950 20.209 190.939 105.840 60 156.439 325.198 60 269.850 338.465 2 42 136 73 145 256 12.119 1.876 BN1 BRO-219 2007 1 0.792 3.419 172.200 19.856 60 35.192 122.037 60 111.008 178.301 0.05 0.1 17 3.6 20 200 86.000 7.778 BN1 BRO-221 2007 1 0.750 9.711 243.633 39.859 60 106.969 128.626 60 230.000 176.402 0.1 70 191 121 182 294 351.364 1.560 BN1 BRO-231 2007 1 0.632 8.282 217.407 38.094 60 98.519 110.142 60 223.718 137.234 7.6 50 194 115 175 330 5.229 1.704 BN1 BRO-232 2007 1 0.900 9.068 209.912 43.199 60 75.277 91.940 60 169.135 115.929 2 40 136.2 73 145 232 11.703 1.793 BN1 BRO-233 2007 1 0.700 11.524 235.300 48.976 60 28.822 32.280 60 116.452 56.165 0.1 17 54 68 100 176 86.588 1.615 BN1 BRO-234 2007 1 0.667 2.297 102.556 22.394 45 18.692 40.595 45 68.580 43.242 0.1 6.5 23.8 24.6 65.5 99.6 34.331 2.092 BN1 BRO-240 2007 1 0.850 8.466 134.246 63.064 60 125.618 131.820 60 264.983 340.280 18.8 96 189 134.6 195 277 3.538 1.435 BN1 BRO-241 2007 1 0.850 12.352 157.254 78.548 60 77.010 132.171 60 173.951 134.046 6.6 58 112 107 145 206 5.359 1.388 BN1 BRO-242 2007 1 0.913 2.701 58.018 46.551 60 56.454 53.748 60 147.367 35.290 8 38 104 113.2 138 186.8 3.743 1.286 BN1 BRO-243 2007 1 0.583 3.803 161.617 23.533 60 34.159 51.621 60 101.213 79.055 0.05 0.1 77.4 0.1 103 165 388.000 515.801 BN1 BRO-244 2007 1 0.471 4.605 240.627 19.137 60 9.707 44.394 60 29.199 79.736 0.05 0.1 4.4 0.05 0.1 12.6 23.000 64.000 BN1 BRO-245 2007 1 0.708 3.444 51.130 67.361 60 38.531 76.474 60 161.117 101.161 0.1 12 62 76.2 130 237 62.583 1.765 BN1 BRO-246 2007 1 0.889 13.664 344.117 39.707 60 166.160 348.889 60 313.886 389.294 2.44 31 137 53 140 1111 8.562 5.289 BN1 BRO-250 2007 1 0.526 3.824 86.517 44.200 60 5.120 9.325 60 46.293 34.736 0.05 0.1 10.4 12 44 75.2 53.000 2.688 BN1 BRO-251 2007 1 0.722 7.856 260.797 30.123 60 95.684 133.289 60 207.119 140.022 0.1 47 183.8 101.2 180 300 236.955 1.723 BN1 BRO-252 2007 1 0.200 9.060 277.414 32.659 60 48.146 92.973 60 129.320 141.404 0.05 0.05 112 0.05 70 302 1120.500 702.157 BN1 BRO-268 2007 1 0.850 10.631 159.862 66.501 60 51.261 128.915 60 158.683 112.535 0.1 13 76.6 102.4 150 184 67.946 1.346 BN1 BRO-271 2007 1 0.667 8.867 70.842 125.173 60 45.011 67.879 60 150.383 81.246 3.6 21 79.8 100.4 130 185 4.817 1.359 BN1 BRO-272 2007 1 0.850 6.955 158.373 43.915 60 72.702 74.152 60 176.500 47.140 0.1 50 147 120 178 222.8 251.470 1.368 BN1 BRO-284 2007 1 0.750 13.784 290.867 47.389 60 36.789 53.781 60 118.718 78.376 0.1 18 62 52.8 100 172 91.722 1.807 BN1 BRO-297 2007 1 0.950 18.482 206.017 89.711 60 130.152 196.844 60 201.450 216.192 21.2 90 171.6 101.2 142 214 3.076 1.455 BN1 BRO-3 2007 1 0.850 5.199 246.116 21.124 60 16.556 43.563 60 89.627 88.522 0.05 0.05 22.8 0.05 98 159.2 228.500 980.812 BN1 BRO-408 2007 1 0.750 15.324 229.804 66.683 60 62.806 120.712 60 152.163 140.253 0.1 14 115 25.2 120 204 74.107 3.231 BN1 BRO-42 2007 1 0.650 4.895 141.754 34.532 59 45.370 66.173 59 148.937 83.475 0.1 13 105 60.72 142.5 230 69.038 1.980

Conservation Halton Long Term Environmental Monitoring Program 70 Bronte Creek and Supplemental Monitoring Proportion Average Average Width/ Count Mean SD Count Mean Sorting Sorting Stream Stable Width Depth Depth Of Point Point Point of Max Max SD Max D16 D50 D84 D16 D50 D84 Index Index Code Site Code Year Sample Banks (m) (cm) Ratio Particles Particles Particles Particles Particles Particles Point Point Point Max Max Max Point Max BN1 BRO-57 2007 1 0.700 2.127 145.444 14.622 45 19.524 29.258 45 88.830 65.329 0.05 2.55 40 10 80 138 33.343 4.863 BN1 BRO-66 2007 1 0.458 3.203 87.322 36.675 60 50.641 78.952 60 177.550 150.208 0.1 15 98.2 70 130 275 78.273 1.986 BN1 BRO-8 2007 1 0.550 7.589 209.509 36.223 60 47.188 115.424 60 119.685 136.211 8.6 24 51.2 27.2 85 194 2.462 2.704 BN1 USR1 2007 1 0.750 13.257 209.800 63.189 60 49.814 59.454 60 111.937 60.942 0.1 19 103.2 43 110 165 97.716 2.029 WATERSHED AVERAGE 7.160 167.629 44.516 141.854 121.522 2.4896 25.599 91.181 57.059 108.08 226.6 102.641 91.787

* The d16, d50 and d84 particle size measures represent the bed particle size corresponding to the various percents in the particle size distributions. They generally correspond to the distributions of fines (d16), median (d50) and course (d84) materials (Kilgour and Stanfield 2003) * SD Max particle is the standard deviation of maximum particle sizes (Kilgour and Stanfield 2003) * Sorting index measures the range in particle sizes present at a site. It will calculate where it is poorly sorted (diverse substrate sizes) verses well-sorted (similar sized particles) (Kilgour and Stanfield 2003)

Conservation Halton Long Term Environmental Monitoring Program 71 Bronte Creek and Supplemental Monitoring Appendix 6: Annual Monitoring Stations Geomorphic Indices

Proportion Average Average Width/ Count Mean Count of Mean Sorting Sorting Stable Width Depth Depth Of Point Point SD Point Max Max SD Max D16 D50 D84 D16 D50 D84 Index Index Stream Code Site Code Year Sample Banks (m) (cm) Ratio Particles Particles Particles Particles Particles Particles Point Point Point Max Max Max Point Max BN1 BRO-8 2007 1 0.55 7.59 209.51 36.22 60.00 47.19 115.42 60.00 119.69 136.21 8.60 24.00 51.20 27.20 85.00 194.00 2.46 2.70 BN1 BRO-154 2007 1 0.35 5.52 267.25 20.64 60.00 13.35 19.58 60.00 26.12 26.13 0.05 9.00 27.00 0.05 25.00 45.00 91.50 250.90 BN1 BRO-16 2007 1 0.78 4.80 188.75 25.44 60.00 73.54 141.96 60.00 157.17 196.23 8.00 45.00 110.00 65.00 105.00 184.00 4.03 1.68 WATERSHED AVERAGE 5.97 221.84 27.44 5.55 26.00 62.73 30.75 71.67 141.00 32.67 85.10

GRN GRN-101 2007 1 0.79 7.55 142.88 52.83 60.00 83.01 244.25 60.00 415.60 426.52 0.05 0.10 100.00 116.00 170.00 1111.00 501.00 4.00 GRN GRN-27 2007 1 0.39 5.30 165.88 31.95 60.00 157.46 462.09 59.00 208.76 459.24 0.05 0.10 162.00 0.05 100.00 300.00 811.00 1001.50 WATERSHED AVERAGE 6.42 154.38 42.39 0.05 0.10 131.00 58.03 135.00 705.50 656.00 502.75

SHD SHL-48 2007 1 0.95 4.77 108.72 43.87 60.00 149.79 296.19 60.00 261.52 340.76 20.60 55.00 124.00 75.00 130.00 272.00 2.46 1.91 WATERSHED AVERAGE 4.77 108.72 43.87 20.60 55.00 124.00 75.00 130.00 272.00 2.46 1.91

SX1 SXM-205 2007 1 0.79 10.97 308.47 35.55 60.00 54.20 102.06 60.00 339.18 380.01 0.05 30.00 100.00 100.00 165.00 1111.00 301.67 4.19 SX1 SXM-216 2007 1 -99.00 11.13 203.76 54.62 60.00 128.14 305.42 60.00 624.74 494.34 0.05 10.00 134.00 103.00 300.00 1111.00 106.70 3.31 SX1 SXM-349 2007 1 0.26 4.84 268.64 18.02 60.00 53.30 149.15 60.00 110.70 160.09 0.05 20.00 74.00 0.05 80.00 180.00 201.85 801.13 SX1 SXM-63 2007 1 0.55 5.59 242.47 23.06 60.00 55.89 110.93 60.00 228.50 131.27 0.10 5.00 104.00 126.00 190.00 338.00 35.40 1.64 WATERSHED AVERAGE 8.13 255.84 32.81 0.06 16.25 103.00 82.26 183.75 685.00 161.40 202.57

* The d16, d50 and d84 particle size measures represent the bed particle size corresponding to the various percents in the particle size distributions. They generally correspond to the distributions of fines (d16), median (d50) and course (d84) materials (Kilgour and Stanfield 2003) * SD Max particle is the standard deviation of maximum particle sizes (Kilgour and Stanfield 2003) * Sorting index measures the range in particle sizes present at a site. It will calculate where it is poorly sorted (diverse substrate sizes) verses well-sorted (similar sized particles) (Kilgour and Stanfield 2003)

Conservation Halton Long Term Environmental Monitoring Program 72 Bronte Creek and Supplemental Monitoring Appendix 7: Bronte Creek Water Temperature Graphs

Main Branch downstream of Lowville Dam Cedar Springs Road (BROTEMP-03) Carlise Road, west of Centre Road (BROTEMP-04) (BROTEMP-02) 26 26 26 24 24 24 22 22 22 20 20 Coldwater Limit 20 Coldwater Limit Coldwater Limit Coolwater Limit 18 Coolwater Limit 18 18 Coolwater Limit BROTEMP-04 BROTEMP-03 16 16 16 Temp (C) 14:00 at BROTEMP-02 Temp (C) 14:00 at Temp (C) 14:00 at 14 14 14

12 12 12

10 10 10 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 Max Daily Air Temp (C) Max Daily Air Temp (C) Max Daily Air Temp (C)

Willoughby Creek at Waterfall (BROTEMP-05) Kilbride Creek at CNR railway (BROTEMP-06) Downstream of Burns Reservoir (BROTEMP-07)

26 26 26 24 24 24 22 22 22 20 20 Coldwater Limit 20 Coldwater Limit Coldwater Limit 18 18 Coolwater Limit 18 Coolwater Limit Coolwater Limit 16 16 16 Temp at 14:00 (C) Temp (C) 14:00 at BROTEMP-05 BROTEMP-07

Temp (C) 14:00 at BROTEMP-06 14 14 14

12 12 12

10 10 10 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 Max Daily Air Temp (C) Max Daily Air Temp (C) Max Daily Air Temp (C)

Conservation Halton Long Term Environmental Monitoring Program 73 Bronte Creek and Supplemental Monitoring Upstream of Burns Reservoir (BROTEMP-08) Leslie Upstream of Mountsberg Reservoir (BROTEMP- Downstream of Mountsberg Reservoir (BROTEMP- 09) 10)

26 26 28

24 24 26 24 22 22 22 20 20 Coldwater Limit Coldwater Limit Coldwater Limit 20 18 18 Coolwater Limit Coolwater Limit Coolwater Limit 18 16 16 16 BROTEMP-10 Temp 14:00 (C) at BROTEMP-08

Temp (C) 14:00 at BROTEMP-09 Temp 14:00 (C) at 14 14 14

12 12 12

10 10 10 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 Max Daily Air Temp (C) Max Daily Air Temp (C) Max Daily Air Temp (C)

Moffat Park (BROTEMP-11) Concession 11 east of Centre Road at Lawson Park Downstream of Dundas Road Bridge (BROTEMP-13) (BROTEMP-12)

26 26 26 24 24 24 22 22 22 20 20 20 Coldwater Limit Coldwater Limit Coldwater Limit 18 18 18 Coolwater Limit Coolwater Limit Coolwater Limit 16 16 16

Temp14:00 at (C) BROTEMP-13

Temp at 14:00 (C) BROTEMP-11

Temp (C) 14:00 at BROTEMP-12 14 14 14

12 12 12

10 10 10 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 Max Daily Air Temp (C) Max Daily Air Temp (C) Max Daily Air Temp (C)

Conservation Halton Long Term Environmental Monitoring Program 74 Bronte Creek and Supplemental Monitoring Mount Nemo Creek at Scout camp (BROTEMP-14) Main Bronte at #4 Sideroad (BROTEMP-15) 10th Concession and Highway 6 (BRO-244)

26 26 26 24 24 24 22 22 22 20 20 20 Coldwater Limit Coldwater Limit Coldwater Limit 18 18 18 Coolwater Limit Coolwater Limit Coolwater Limit 16 16 16 BRO-244 Temp (C) 14:00 at Temp 14:00 at (C) BROTEMP-14 Temp(C) 14:00 at BROTEMP-15 14 14 14

12 12 12

10 10 10 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 Max Daily Air Temp (C) Max Daily Air Temp (C) Max Daily Air Temp (C)

Flamboro Creek upstream of Confluence with Main Indian Creek upstream of Appleby Line (BRO-16) Kilbride Creek at #8 Sideraod (BRO-10) Bronte (BRO-245)

26 26 26

24 24 24

22 22 22

20 20 20 Coldwater Limit Coldwater Limit Coldwater Limit 18 18 18 Coolwater Limit Coolwater Limit Coolwater Limit 16 16 16

Temp (C) 14:00 at BRO-10 Temp (C) 14:00 at Temp (C) 14:00 at BRO-245 BRO-16 14 14 14

12 12 12

10 10 10 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 Max Daily Air Temp (C) Max Daily Air Temp (C) Max Daily Air Temp (C)

Conservation Halton Long Term Environmental Monitoring Program 75 Bronte Creek and Supplemental Monitoring Limestone Creek at Derry Road (BRO-243) Willoughby Creek downstream of Cedar Springs Road Limestone Creek at Britannia Road (BRO-171) (BRO-219)

26 26 26

24 24 24

22 22 22

20 20 20 Coldwater Limit Coldwater Limit Coldwater Limit 18 18 18 Coolwater Limit Coolwater Limit Coolwater Limit 16 16 16

Temp (C) 14:00 at BRO-243

Temp (C) 14:00 at BRO-171 Temp14:00 at (C) BRO-219 14 14 14

12 12 12

10 10 10 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 Max Daily Air Temp (C) Max Daily Air Temp (C) Max Daily Air Temp (C)

Limestone Creek at Twiss Road (BRO-172) Lowville Creek at Britannia Road (BRO-142) Maddaugh Road Bridge (BRO-57)

26 26 26

24 24 24

22 22 22

20 20 20 Coldwater Limit Coldwater Limit Coldwater Limit 18 18 18 Coolwater Limit Coolwater Limit Coolwater Limit 16 16 16 Temp(C) 14:00 at Temp (C) 14:00 at Temp (C) 14:00 at BRO-172 BRO-142 BRO-57 14 14 14

12 12 12

10 10 10 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 Max Daily Air Temp (C) Max Daily Air Temp (C) Max Daily Air Temp (C)

Conservation Halton Long Term Environmental Monitoring Program 76 Bronte Creek and Supplemental Monitoring Main Bronte Upstream of Lowville Dam (BRO-230) Mountsberg Creek at Centre Road (BRO-252) Steeles west of 1st Line (BRO-135)

26 26 26

24 24 24

22 22 22

20 20 20 Coldwater Limit Coldwater Limit Coldwater Limit 18 18 18 Coolwater Limit Coolwater Limit Coolwater Limit 16 16 16 Temp (C) 14:00 at

Temp (C) 14:00 at BRO-252 BRO-135 Temp (C) 14:00 at BRO-230 14 14 14

12 12 12

10 10 10 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 Max Daily Air Temp (C) Max Daily Air Temp (C) Max Daily Air Temp (C)

Strabane Creek at Brock Road (BRO-22) Willoughby Creek Upstream of Britannia Road (BRO-42)

26 26

24 24

22 22

20 20 Coldwater Limit Coldwater Limit 18 18 Coolwater Limit Coolwater Limit 16 16 Temp (C) 14:00 at Temp (C) 14:00 at BRO-22 BRO-42" 14 14

12 12

10 10 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 Max Daily Air Temp (C) Max Daily Air Temp (C)

Conservation Halton Long Term Environmental Monitoring Program 77 Bronte Creek and Supplemental Monitoring Appendix 8: EMAN Initial Analysis of Rattlesnake Point Tree Canopy Composition

Common Name Scientific Abundance Total Relative Relative Relative Importance Name Basal Dominance Frequency Value 2 Density Area (m ) (%) (%) (%) Acer Sugar Maple saccharum 160 11.90 44.82 40.83 6.67 92.32 Fagus American Beech grandifolia 102 8.98 28.57 30.79 6.67 66.03 Acer nigrum Black Maple 26 3.12 7.28 10.69 6.67 24.64 Tsuga Hemlock canadensis 22 1.11 6.16 3.82 6.67 16.65 Tilia Basswood Americana 9 0.72 2.52 2.48 6.67 11.66 Quercus rubra Red Oak 7 1.10 1.96 3.79 6.67 12.41 Betula White Birch papyrifera 7 0.22 1.96 0.76 6.67 9.39 Acer rubrum Red Maple. 6 0.34 1.68 1.15 6.67 9.50 Fraxinus White Ash Americana 4 0.43 1.12 1.48 6.67 9.27 Juglans Butternut cinerea 3 0.32 0.84 1.09 6.67 8.59 Carya Bitternut Hickory cordiformis 3 0.31 0.84 1.08 6.67 8.59 Ostrya Ironwood virginiana 3 0.17 0.84 0.58 6.67 8.09 Prunus Black Cherry serotina 3 0.15 0.84 0.53 6.67 8.04 Aesculus Horse Chestnut hippocastanum 1 0.22 0.28 0.74 6.67 7.69 Thuja Eastern White Cedar occidentalis 1 0.06 0.28 0.19 6.67 7.14

Total 357 29.17 100 100 100 300

*Basal areas calculated from dbh measurements. Relative density of a species is the percentage of the total abundance for that species. Relative dominance of a species is the percentage of the total basal area for that species. The importance value is a summation of relative density, relative dominance, and relative frequency, and describes the importance of each species to the structure and function of the forest.

Conservation Halton Long Term Environmental Monitoring Program 78 Bronte Creek and Supplemental Monitoring Appendix 9: Amphibian abundance Hilton Falls

Station A Station B Visit 1 Visit 2 Visit 3 Visit 1 Visit 2 Visit 3 Common Scientific CC Ab. CC Ab. CC Ab. CC Ab. CC Ab. CC Ab. Name Name Spring Peeper Pseudacris 3 --- 1 2 ------3 --- 1 3 ------crucifer Gray Treefrog Hyla ------1 1 ------1 1 ------versicolor Chorus Frog Pseudacris 1 1 ------1 1 ------triseriata Green Frog Rana ------1 7 clamitans CC – Call code, Ab. - Abundance Spring Peepers were the only species heard on more than one occasion. In addition only green frogs were heard during the June 27th visit.

Surveys dates: April 19, May 22 and June 27, 2007.

Conservation Halton Long Term Environmental Monitoring Program 79 Bronte Creek and Supplemental Monitoring Appendix 10: Bird species recorded within 100 m fixed distance at Stations A and B, Hilton Falls Conservation Area, 2007.

Common Name Scientific Name Station A Station B Visit 1 Visit 2 Visit 1 Visit 2 Great Crested Flycatcher Myiarchus crinitus 2 ------Song Sparrow Melospiza melodia 1 1 ------Swamp Sparrow Melospiza georgiana --- 1 ------Common Yellowthroat Geothlypis trichas 2 1 --- 1 Yellow Warbler Dendroica petechia 1 --- 1 2 Pied-billed Grebe Podilymbus podiceps ------1 --- American Bittern Botaurus lentiginosus ------1 Red-eyed Vireo Vireo olivaceus 1 ------Northern Cardinal Cardinalis cardinalis ------2 Veery Catharus fuscescens ------1 Pileated Woodpecker Dryocopus pileatus ------1 Red-winged Blackbird Agelaius phoeniceus 2 1 3 3 Common Moorhen Gallinula chloropus ------2 Northern Flicker Colaptes auratus --- 1 ------Grey Catbird Dumetella carolinensis ------1

In addition an Indigo Bunting (Passerina cyanea) was also seen in relation (but not within the 100m fixed distance) to these stations during the first visit.

Survey dates: June 29 and July 25, 2007.

Conservation Halton Long Term Environmental Monitoring Program 80 Bronte Creek and Supplemental Monitoring Appendix 11: Amphibian abundance Mountsberg Conservation Area.

Station A Station B Station C Visit 1 Visit 2 Visit 3 Visit 1 Visit 2 Visit 3 Visit 1 Visit 2 Visit 3 Common Scientific CC Ab. CC Ab. CC Ab. CC Ab. CC Ab. CC Ab. CC Ab. CC Ab. CC Ab Name Name Spring Peeper Pseudacris 3 --- 1 1 ------3 --- 1 1 ------3 --- 1 2 ------crucifer Wood Frog Rana sylvatica ------1 1 ------2 7 ------Chorus Frog Pseudacris 1 7 ------2 12 ------2 13 ------triseriata Gray Treefrog 1 2 ------2 9 ------3 ------Green Frog Rana clamitans ------1 4 1 4 ------American Toad Bufo 1 3 1 1 ------americanus

CC – Call code, Ab. - Abundance Spring Peeper (Pseudacris crucifer), American Toad (Bufo americanus) and Green Frogs (Rana clamitans) were the only species heard on more then one occasion. In addition only green frogs were heard during the June 27th visit.

Survey dates: April 19, May 22 and June 27, 2007.

Conservation Halton Long Term Environmental Monitoring Program 81 Bronte Creek and Supplemental Monitoring Appendix 12: Bird species recorded with the 100 m fixed distance at Stations A, B and C Mountsberg Conservation Area.

Common Name Scientific Name Station A Station B Station C Visit 1 Visit 2 Visit 1 Visit 2 Visit 1 Visit 2 Virginia Rail Rallus limicola --- 2 2 3 --- 1 Tree Swallow Tachycineta bicolor 1 ------Song Sparrow Melospiza melodia 1 ------Swamp Sparrow Melospiza georgiana 1 1 ------1 Common Grackle Quiscalus quiscula 1 1 3 4 --- 1 Marsh Wren Cistothorus palustris 1 1 Great-crested Myiarchus crinitus ------1 Flycatcher Yellow Warbler Dendroica petechia ------1 --- 1 Red-winged Agelaius phoeniceus 4 3 6 2 2 --- blackbird Warbling Vireo Vireo gilvus --- 1 --- 1 ------

In addition the following species were also seen in relation to these stations (but not within the 100m fixed distance): Canada Goose (Branta canadensis), Baltimore Oriole (Icterus galbula), Veery (Catharus fuscescens), American Crow (Corvus brachyrhynchos), American Goldfinch (Carduelis tristis), Black-capped Chickadee (Poecile atricapillus), Blue-grey Gnatcatcher (Polioptila caerulea) and Blue Jay (Cyanocitta cristata).

Survey dates: June 29 and July 25, 2007.

Conservation Halton Long Term Environmental Monitoring Program 82 Bronte Creek and Supplemental Monitoring Appendix 13: Birds observed through the Forest Bird Monitoring Program.

Date Site Station Easting Northing Visit Common Name Scientific Name Number 6/11/2007 Bronte-Burloak Woods A 1 Red-eyed Vireo Vireo olivaceus 3 6/11/2007 Bronte-Burloak Woods A 1 Eastern Wood-Pewee Contopus virens 1 6/11/2007 Bronte-Burloak Woods A 1 Great Crested Flycatcher Myiarchus crinitus 1 6/11/2007 Bronte-Burloak Woods A 1 White-breasted Nuthatch Sitta carolinensis 1 6/11/2007 Bronte-Burloak Woods A 1 Northern Cardinal Cardinalis cardinalis 1 6/11/2007 Bronte-Burloak Woods A 1 Cedar Waxwing Bombycilla cedrorum 1 6/11/2007 Bronte-Burloak Woods A 1 Common Grackle Quiscalus quiscula 1 6/11/2007 Bronte-Burloak Woods A 1 American Robin Turdus migratorius 3 6/11/2007 Bronte-Burloak Woods A 1 American Crow Corvus brachyrhynchos 1 6/11/2007 Bronte-Burloak Woods B 1 American Goldfinch Carduelis tristis 1 6/11/2007 Bronte-Burloak Woods B 1 Hairy Woodpecker Picoides villosus 1 6/11/2007 Bronte-Burloak Woods B 1 Eastern Wood-Pewee Contopus virens 1 6/11/2007 Bronte-Burloak Woods B 1 Black-capped Chickadee Poecile atricapillus 1 6/11/2007 Bronte-Burloak Woods B 1 Red-eyed Vireo Vireo olivaceus 2 6/11/2007 Bronte-Burloak Woods B 1 Northern Cardinal Cardinalis cardinalis 2 6/11/2007 Bronte-Burloak Woods B 1 Blue-gray Gnatcatcher Polioptila caerulea 1 6/11/2007 Bronte-Burloak Woods B 1 American Goldfinch Carduelis tristis 1 7/5/2007 Bronte-Burloak Woods A 2 American Goldfinch Carduelis tristis 1 7/5/2007 Bronte-Burloak Woods A 2 Red-eyed Vireo Vireo olivaceus 2 7/5/2007 Bronte-Burloak Woods A 2 Northern Flicker Colaptes auratus 1 7/5/2007 Bronte-Burloak Woods A 2 Downy Woodpecker Picoides pubescens 2 7/5/2007 Bronte-Burloak Woods A 2 Eastern Wood-Pewee Contopus virens 2 7/5/2007 Bronte-Burloak Woods A 2 Blue Jay Cyanocitta cristata 1 7/5/2007 Bronte-Burloak Woods B 2 Downy Woodpecker Picoides pubescens 1 7/5/2007 Bronte-Burloak Woods B 2 Great Crested Flycatcher Myiarchus crinitus 1 7/5/2007 Bronte-Burloak Woods B 2 Cedar Waxwing Bombycilla cedrorum 1 7/5/2007 Bronte-Burloak Woods B 2 Eastern Wood-Pewee Contopus virens 1 7/5/2007 Bronte-Burloak Woods B 2 Red-eyed Vireo Vireo olivaceus 3 7/5/2007 Bronte-Burloak Woods B 2 Wood Thrush Hylocichla mustelina 1

Conservation Halton Long Term Environmental Monitoring Program 83 Bronte Creek and Supplemental Monitoring Date Site Station Easting Northing Visit Common Name Scientific Name Number 7/5/2007 Bronte-Burloak Woods B 2 American Goldfinch Carduelis tristis 1 7/5/2007 Bronte-Burloak Woods B 2 White-throated Sparrow Zonotrichia albicollis 1 7/5/2007 Bronte-Burloak Woods B 2 Black-capped Chickadee Poecile atricapillus 3 6/6/2007 Hilton Falls A 581138 4819304 1 Ovenbird Seiurus aurocapilla 1 6/6/2007 Hilton Falls A 581138 4819304 1 American Redstart Setophaga ruticilla 1 6/6/2007 Hilton Falls A 581138 4819304 1 Eastern Wood-Pewee Contopus virens 1 6/6/2007 Hilton Falls A 581138 4819304 1 Wood Thrush Hylocichla mustelina 1 6/6/2007 Hilton Falls A 581138 4819304 1 Red-eyed Vireo Vireo olivaceus 2 6/6/2007 Hilton Falls A 581138 4819304 1 American Crow Corvus brachyrhynchos 1 6/6/2007 Hilton Falls A 581138 4819304 1 Red-eyed Vireo Vireo olivaceus 1 6/6/2007 Hilton Falls B 581405 4819346 1 American Redstart Setophaga ruticilla 1 6/6/2007 Hilton Falls B 581405 4819346 1 Red-eyed Vireo Vireo olivaceus 1 6/6/2007 Hilton Falls B 581405 4819346 1 Black-capped Chickadee Poecile atricapillus 1 6/6/2007 Hilton Falls B 581405 4819346 1 Eastern Wood-Pewee Contopus virens 2 6/6/2007 Hilton Falls B 581405 4819346 1 American Robin Turdus migratorius 2 6/6/2007 Hilton Falls B 581405 4819346 1 Rose-breasted Grosbeak Pheucticus ludovicianus 1 6/6/2007 Hilton Falls B 581405 4819346 1 Ovenbird Seiurus aurocapilla 1 6/6/2007 Hilton Falls B 581405 4819346 1 Red-bellied Woodpecker Melanerpes carolinus 1 6/6/2007 Hilton Falls B 581405 4819346 1 Hairy Woodpecker Picoides villosus 2 6/6/2007 Hilton Falls C 581682 4819363 1 Red-eyed Vireo Vireo olivaceus 1 6/6/2007 Hilton Falls C 581682 4819363 1 Eastern Wood-Pewee Contopus virens 1 6/6/2007 Hilton Falls D 581837 4819564 1 American Redstart Setophaga ruticilla 1 6/6/2007 Hilton Falls D 581837 4819564 1 Blue Jay Cyanocitta cristata 1 6/6/2007 Hilton Falls D 581837 4819564 1 Ovenbird Seiurus aurocapilla 1 6/6/2007 Hilton Falls D 581837 4819564 1 Red-eyed Vireo Vireo olivaceus 1 6/6/2007 Hilton Falls D 581837 4819564 1 Eastern Wood-Pewee Contopus virens 1 6/6/2007 Hilton Falls D 581837 4819564 1 American Robin Turdus migratorius 1 6/6/2007 Hilton Falls E 582061 4819549 1 Hairy Woodpecker Picoides villosus 1 6/6/2007 Hilton Falls E 582061 4819549 1 Red-eyed Vireo Vireo olivaceus 2 6/6/2007 Hilton Falls E 582061 4819549 1 Scarlet Tanager Piranga olivacea 1 6/6/2007 Hilton Falls E 582061 4819549 1 American Robin Turdus migratorius 1 6/6/2007 Hilton Falls E 582061 4819549 1 Eastern Wood-Pewee Contopus virens 1

Conservation Halton Long Term Environmental Monitoring Program 84 Bronte Creek and Supplemental Monitoring Date Site Station Easting Northing Visit Common Name Scientific Name Number 6/6/2007 Hilton Falls E 582061 4819549 1 Blue Jay Cyanocitta cristata 1 7/6/2007 Hilton Falls A 581138 4819304 2 Red-eyed Vireo Vireo olivaceus 3 7/6/2007 Hilton Falls A 581138 4819304 2 American Goldfinch Carduelis tristis 1 7/6/2007 Hilton Falls A 581138 4819304 2 Eastern Wood-Pewee Contopus virens 1 7/6/2007 Hilton Falls A 581138 4819304 2 Northern Flicker Colaptes auratus 1 7/6/2007 Hilton Falls A 581138 4819304 2 Red-tailed Hawk Buteo jamaicensis 1 7/6/2007 Hilton Falls B 581405 4819346 2 Rose-breasted Grosbeak Pheucticus ludovicianus 1 7/6/2007 Hilton Falls B 581405 4819346 2 Hairy Woodpecker Picoides villosus 1 7/6/2007 Hilton Falls B 581405 4819346 2 Ovenbird Seiurus aurocapilla 2 7/6/2007 Hilton Falls B 581405 4819346 2 Wood Thrush Hylocichla mustelina 2 7/6/2007 Hilton Falls B 581405 4819346 2 Downy Woodpecker Picoides pubescens 1 7/6/2007 Hilton Falls B 581405 4819346 2 Red-eyed Vireo Vireo olivaceus 2 7/6/2007 Hilton Falls C 581682 4819363 2 Rose-breasted Grosbeak Pheucticus ludovicianus 1 7/6/2007 Hilton Falls C 581682 4819363 2 Northern Flicker Colaptes auratus 1 7/6/2007 Hilton Falls C 581682 4819363 2 Eastern Wood-Pewee Contopus virens 1 7/6/2007 Hilton Falls C 581682 4819363 2 American Crow Corvus brachyrhynchos 1 7/6/2007 Hilton Falls C 581682 4819363 2 Wood Thrush Hylocichla mustelina 1 7/6/2007 Hilton Falls C 581682 4819363 2 Red-eyed Vireo Vireo olivaceus 2 7/6/2007 Hilton Falls D 581837 4819564 2 Red-eyed Vireo Vireo olivaceus 2 7/6/2007 Hilton Falls D 581837 4819564 2 American Robin Turdus migratorius 1 7/6/2007 Hilton Falls D 581837 4819564 2 Ovenbird Seiurus aurocapilla 1 7/6/2007 Hilton Falls D 581837 4819564 2 Rose-breasted Grosbeak Pheucticus ludovicianus 1 7/6/2007 Hilton Falls D 581837 4819564 2 Yellow-bellied Sapsucker Sphyrapicus varius 1 7/7/2006 Hilton Falls E 582061 4819549 2 Red-eyed Vireo Vireo olivaceus 3 7/7/2006 Hilton Falls E 582061 4819549 2 Yellow-bellied Sapsucker Sphyrapicus varius 1 6/13/2007 Waterdown woods A 1 Red-eyed Vireo Vireo olivaceus 2 6/13/2007 Waterdown woods A 1 Eastern Wood-Pewee Contopus virens 1 6/13/2007 Waterdown woods B 1 Great Crested Flycatcher Myiarchus crinitus 1 6/13/2007 Waterdown woods B 1 Rose-breasted Grosbeak Pheucticus ludovicianus 1 6/13/2007 Waterdown woods B 1 Blue Jay Cyanocitta cristata 1 6/13/2007 Waterdown woods C 1 Red-eyed Vireo Vireo olivaceus 2 6/13/2007 Waterdown woods C 1 Northern Flicker Colaptes auratus 1

Conservation Halton Long Term Environmental Monitoring Program 85 Bronte Creek and Supplemental Monitoring Date Site Station Easting Northing Visit Common Name Scientific Name Number 6/13/2007 Waterdown woods C 1 Eastern Phoebe Sayornis phoebe 1 6/13/2007 Waterdown woods C 1 Rose-breasted Grosbeak Pheucticus ludovicianus 1 6/13/2007 Waterdown woods C 1 House Wren Troglodytes aedon 1 6/26/2007 Waterdown woods A 2 Red-eyed Vireo Vireo olivaceus 2 6/26/2007 Waterdown woods A 2 House Wren Troglodytes aedon 1 6/26/2007 Waterdown woods A 2 Mourning Dove Zenaida macroura 1 6/26/2007 Waterdown woods A 2 Black-capped Chickadee Poecile atricapillus 1 6/26/2007 Waterdown woods A 2 American Goldfinch Carduelis tristis 1 6/26/2007 Waterdown woods A 2 Eastern Wood-Pewee Contopus virens 1 6/26/2007 Waterdown woods B 2 Song Sparrow Melospiza melodia 1 6/26/2007 Waterdown woods B 2 Northern Cardinal Cardinalis cardinalis 1 6/26/2007 Waterdown woods B 2 Rose-breasted Grosbeak Pheucticus ludovicianus 1 6/26/2007 Waterdown woods B 2 Northern Flicker Colaptes auratus 1 6/26/2007 Waterdown woods B 2 Red-winged Blackbird Agelaius phoeniceus 1 6/26/2007 Waterdown woods B 2 Blue Jay Cyanocitta cristata 1 6/26/2007 Waterdown woods C 2 Red-eyed Vireo Vireo olivaceus 1 6/26/2007 Waterdown woods C 2 Blue Jay Cyanocitta cristata 1 6/26/2007 Waterdown woods C 2 American Crow Corvus brachyrhynchos 2 6/26/2007 Waterdown woods C 2 House Wren Troglodytes aedon 1 6/26/2007 Waterdown woods C 2 American Robin Turdus migratorius 1 6/26/2007 Waterdown woods C 2 Great Crested Flycatcher Myiarchus crinitus 1 6/26/2007 Waterdown woods C 2 American Goldfinch Carduelis tristis 2

Conservation Halton Long Term Environmental Monitoring Program 86 Bronte Creek and Supplemental Monitoring