DOCSLIB.ORG

Of the Natural Streamflow of Venison Creek

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Of the Natural Streamflow of Venison Creek A MODEL FOR THE DETERMINATION OF THE NATURAL STREAMFLOW OF VENISON CREEK R.W. Irwin W.T. Dickinson W. Lammers Member CSAE School of Engineering Hydrologist School of Engineering University of Guelph Water Resources Division University of Guelph Guelph, Ontario Ministry of the Environment Guelph, Ontario Toronto, Ontario INTRODUCTION model, the basin characteristics being model that the effects of groundwater suitable for the study, and hydrometric takings on streamflow, observed at an Water takings for the irrigation of and observation well data being available inventory point at a downstream gauge, tobacco in Ontario reduce streamflow (3). will lag the actual takings by several days. during the months of July and August in Initially, there will be local adjustments most years. Yakutchik and Lammers (5) in the water table. Additional takings at estimated streamflow reduction for Big MODEL DEVELOPMENT the same or nearby sites will result in Creek at Delhi in the order of 70% for the additional water-table adjustments. The period July 30 to August 1, 1964, due to For this study, the natural discharge of effects of these takings are cumulative, irrigation takings in that basin. These a stream is defined as the discharge because each additional groundwater reductions affect the natural functions of generated in the basin under existing land taking will add to the existing effects of streams, and cause water use conflicts use. A large number of man-made ponds previous takings. Therefore, the effects of between stream users. are part of the existing land-use pattern groundwater takings on streamflow will of Venison Creek and have increased the be of little significance during the start of For the management of water total free water surface of the basin. the irrigation period but will increase resources in such basins, knowledge is Their effects are incorporated in the steadily as the irrigation period progresses required regarding (i) the amount of natural discharge as defined. until groundwater takings cease. water available during peak water demand periods; (ii) the amount of water likely to The model is based on three assump A basic relationship for natural stream- be used from various sources; and (hi) the tions regarding the effects of various flow determination may be expressed: relative effects of water takings from types of water takings on streamflow different sources on streamflow. Informa reduction: (1) tion regarding the natural flows available (i) Takings from streamflow have a for use is often scarce, since streamflow direct effect on streamflow reduc where records for many of the streams in tion, Southern Ontario began after the practice (ii) Takings from surface-water storage Q = natural streamflow; of tobacco irrigation was established in areas not located on the stream (i.e. M = measured streamflow; D = direct streamflow losses due to stream- the early 1950's. Therefore, there is a farm ponds) do not affect stream- flow takings; and need for a method to estimate natural flow, / = indirect streamflow losses due to ground streamflow patterns in order to evaluate (hi) Takings from groundwater resources water takings. the effect of water takings. Such have an indirect effect on streamflow information is important to the develop reduction. For a consideration of mean daily ment of improved water management streamflow values, the D and / terms may systems in the region. Assumption (i) is readily apparent. be expressed as: Assumption (ii) is valid for the case A streamflow determination model has involving intermittent streams, but is not (2) been developed for the generation of strictly true for permanent streams. ^L-(r-i)5' estimates of natural mean daily stream- Assumption (hi) considers that ground flow. Input for the model includes water takings, whether from wells or and records of existing daily streamflow, and ponds dug to below the water table, n - b water takings from ground and surface reduce the rate of groundwater discharge U =AR2 Gtfoin<m+b, .... (3) water sources. Venison Creek basin has to the streams, due to locally reduced n t = 1 been used as a verification site for the hydraulic heads and gradients of the water table to the streams. Such reduc or tions remain until the aquifers from which the water has been withdrawn have Presented July 7, 1971 CSAE Conference, It =ARcln-(m+b)]x Gtfom>m+b been recharged to their capacity. This n t = 1 Lethbridge, Alberta. normally occurs only during the spring (4) recharge period, about 200 days after the water taking occurs. where RECEIVED FOR PUBLICATION JULY 4, 1972 It has further been assumed in the Dm =mean daily streamflow loss due to 12 CANADIAN AGRICULTURAL ENGINEERING, VOL. 17 NO. 1, JUNE 1975 direct streamflow takings, on the «th TABLE I STATISTICS ON IRRIGATORS AND WATER-TAKING RECORDS day following the commencement of irri gation in the basin for a selected year understudy; Year: 1967 1968 1969 P = scale factor to convert reported daily streamflow takings to total daily stream- Total irrigators 102 102 105 flow takings; Irrigators holding permits * 99 99 102 T = travel time, in days, of streamflow from Permitted water sources* 108 108 113 farthest water-taking site on the stream Irrigators submitting suitable to the inventory station at downstream records (%) 65 61 54 gauge; n = day number following the commence * Certain irrigators are exempted. ment of irrigation in basin; * Certain irrigators use more than one water source. t = time, in days; S( = reported daily streamflow taking on day t\ crops was estimated from water-taking records satisfactory for analysis. Statistics Itn ~ mean daily streamflow loss on the «th records3 on file with the Ministry of the on irrigators and water-taking records are day due to takings from groundwater; Environment for the 1967, 1968 and shown in Table 1. A- constant, characteristic of the study basin; 1969 irrigation seasons. This estimation R = scale factor to convert reported ground was carried out by: Figure 2 reveals a histogram of the water takings to estimated total ground 1. Compilation of a list of permits issued number of irrigators reporting water water takings; by the Ministry to tobacco growers in takings and the histogram of the total b = average delay time, in days, before the the study basin. reported daily takings. These histograms effects of groundwater takings on previ 2. Compilation, assessment, and classifi portray three patterns of water use. The ous days are felt in streamflow reduction cation of water-taking records submit histogram for 1968 shows a period of at the inventory station; ted to the Ministry by the permittees intensive water use as compared to 1967 Gf = reported groundwater taking on day t; C = constant, characteristic of the study for the three irrigation seasons. and 1969. basin; 3. Determination of daily totals of m = day number, counted from first day of reported water takings from each of Water is withdrawn from three main irrigation, for last day of water takings the categories and sources of supply. sources in the basin: groundwater, from groundwater. streamflow, and surface-water storage. Classification of these records was Figure 3 shows histograms of water use Equations (2), (3) and (4) were substi based on the following types of with by source for 1968. tuted into equation (1) to form: drawal sites utilized: 1. Withdrawal from groundwater re n-S The following assumptions were used Qtn =Mtn +^ [Stn - 1+Stn] +AR X Gt sources through water takings from to estimate total daily and seasonal L f = 1 wells and sandpoints and from dugout irrigation water use in the study area: ponds not connected to a stream or (i) All irrigators possessing permits to for located in a streambed of an intermit take water would have submitted tent stream. «<m + 5 water-taking reeords when they had 2. Withdrawal from surface-water re taken water, and sources through water takings from: (ii) Irrigators whose takings are exempt (i) Streamflow, on-stream dugout under water-use legislation would Qtn=Mtn+?[Stn- 1+Sr„] + ponds and dugout ponds con have irrigated according to the same nected to streams; or ratio as the irrigators having permits ARC[n - (m +5)] g G (ii) Surface-water storage behind dams to take water, r = l on permanent or intermittent (iii) Irrigators who submitted unsuitable streams. water-taking records would have for irrigated in the same manner and on The accuracy of water-taking records the same days as those submitting «>m + 5. depends on the irrigator. Information is suitable records. submitted annually by the irrigator regarding dates of taking, duration and The scale factors used to convert STUDY BASIN AND TEST DATA time of operation, and details of the reported water takings to estimated water irrigation system (4). Water use is takings are presented in Table II. Venison Creek, a tributary of Big calculated on the assumption that the Application of these scale factors to the Creek, lies on the Norfolk sand plain, average irrigator operates his irrigation reported annual amounts of irrigation north of Lake Erie. The basin is about 19 system at the recommended pressure water use yields estimates of total annual km long and 5 km wide, and has an area specified by the sprinkler manufacturer. amounts of irrigation water use. of about 90 km2. The location of the basin and observation sites are shown in Figure 1. WATER USE ASSESSMENT GROUNDWATER STAGE VS. GROUNDWATER DISCHARGE The watershed above the Water During the period 1967 to 1969, only RELATIONSHIPS Survey of Canada hydrometric gauge on 54-65% of the known irrigators submitted Venison Creek was selected as the study Relationships were established be area. The area above the gauge is about tween the mean daily groundwater stage 78 km2 and represents about 82% of the a Ontario Water Resources Commission.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Quaternary Geology of the Long Point-Port Burwell Area; Ontario Geological Survey, Open File Report 5873, 212P
    THESE TERMS GOVERN YOUR USE OF THIS DOCUMENT Your use of this Ontario Geological Survey document (the "Content") is governed by the terms set out on this page ("Terms of Use"). By downloading this Content, you (the "User") have accepted, and have agreed to be bound by, the Terms of Use. Content: This Content is offered by the Province of Ontario's Ministry of Northern Development and Mines (MNDM) as a public service, on an "as-is" basis. Recommendations and statements of opinion expressed in the Content are those of the author or authors and are not to be construed as statement of government policy. You are solely responsible for your use of the Content. You should not rely on the Content for legal advice nor as authoritative in your particular circumstances. Users should verify the accuracy and applicability of any Content before acting on it. MNDM does not guarantee, or make any warranty express or implied, that the Content is current, accurate, complete or reliable. MNDM is not responsible for any damage however caused, which results, directly or indirectly, from your use of the Content. MNDM assumes no legal liability or responsibility for the Content whatsoever. Links to Other Web Sites: This Content may contain links, to Web sites that are not operated by MNDM. Linked Web sites may not be available in French. MNDM neither endorses nor assumes any responsibility for the safety, accuracy or availability of linked Web sites or the information contained on them. The linked Web sites, their operation and content are the responsibility of the person or entity for which they were created or maintained (the "Owner").
    [Show full text]
  • Content 2010 Annual Report
    CONTENT2010 ANNUAL REPORT Photo Credit: Dave Reid WWW.LPRCA.ON.CA 2010 ANNUAL REPORT 1 CONTENT The Long Point Region Conservation Authority (LPRCA) is a community-based environmental agency dedicated to protecting, restoring and managing the natural resources in our watershed. Through 62 years of conservation, we have worked in partnership with the Province of Ontario, Government of Canada, our eight member municipalities, and the community to increase natural areas coverage, improve water quality across the watershed, protect people and property from flooding and erosion, and provide education and recreation opportunities. LPRCA’s watershed covers 2,782 square kilometres, taking in most of Norfolk County and sections of Brant, Elgin, Haldimand and Oxford Counties and is home to more than 102,000 people. Together with our community partners, municipalities, the business community, schools, non-profit organizations and residents, LPRCA will continue to contribute to a balanced healthy environment. Backus Heritage C.A CONTENT 2...................................................................... Chairman’s Message 3.............................................................. General Manager’s Report 4...........................................................................LPRCA’s Mandate 5.................................................................................. In Memoriam 6........................................................... Promoting Safe Watersheds 8.......................................................Promoting
    [Show full text]
  • Geographic Index Media Names & Numbers 2009 Geographic Index Listed by Province, West to East and by Town Within Each Province Or Territory
    22 / Geographic Index Media Names & Numbers 2009 Geographic Index Listed by province, west to east and by town within each province or territory Burnaby Cranbrook fORT nELSON Super Camping . 345 CHDR-FM, 102.9 . 109 CKRX-FM, 102.3 MHz. 113 British Columbia Tow Canada. 349 CHBZ-FM, 104.7mHz. 112 Fort St. John Truck Logger magazine . 351 Cranbrook Daily Townsman. 155 North Peace Express . 168 100 Mile House TV Week Magazine . 354 East Kootenay Weekly . 165 The Northerner . 169 CKBX-AM, 840 kHz . 111 Waters . 358 Forests West. 289 Gabriola Island 100 Mile House Free Press . 169 West Coast Cablevision Ltd.. 86 GolfWest . 293 Gabriola Sounder . 166 WestCoast Line . 359 Kootenay Business Magazine . 305 Abbotsford WaveLength Magazine . 359 The Abbotsford News. 164 Westworld Alberta . 360 The Kootenay News Advertiser. 167 Abbotsford Times . 164 Westworld (BC) . 360 Kootenay Rocky Mountain Gibsons Cascade . 235 Westworld BC . 360 Visitor’s Magazine . 305 Coast Independent . 165 CFSR-FM, 107.1 mHz . 108 Westworld Saskatchewan. 360 Mining & Exploration . 313 Gold River Home Business Report . 297 Burns Lake RVWest . 338 Conuma Cable Systems . 84 Agassiz Lakes District News. 167 Shaw Cable (Cranbrook) . 85 The Gold River Record . 166 Agassiz/Harrison Observer . 164 Ski & Ride West . 342 Golden Campbell River SnoRiders West . 342 Aldergrove Campbell River Courier-Islander . 164 CKGR-AM, 1400 kHz . 112 Transitions . 350 Golden Star . 166 Aldergrove Star. 164 Campbell River Mirror . 164 TV This Week (Cranbrook) . 352 Armstrong Campbell River TV Association . 83 Grand Forks CFWB-AM, 1490 kHz . 109 Creston CKGF-AM, 1340 kHz. 112 Armstrong Advertiser . 164 Creston Valley Advance.
    [Show full text]
  • Forest Birds at Risk in the Norfolk Sand Plain Region in Southwestern Ontario
    Forest Birds at Risk in the Norfolk Sand Plain region in southwestern Ontario Final Report on the 2011/ 2012 Field Program Jody Allair, Audrey Heagy, Sarah Dobney, Emily Bird, Myles Falconer, David Bell Bird Studies Canada This report contains a summary of the results of the two-year Forest Birds at Risk in the Norfolk Sand Plain (FBAR –NSP) project. It contains sensitive information on species at risk locations and is not for general distribution. For further information contact Jody Allair, at [email protected], or Audrey Heagy, at [email protected]. Project Funding In 2010-11, Bird Studies Canada (BSC) applied to Environment Canada’s Habitat Stewardship Program (HSP) and the Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources’ Species at Risk Stewardship Fund (SARSF) for support for a two-year project targeting five at-risk bird species breeding in forest habitats in the Norfolk Sand Plain region in southwestern Ontario. On 3 June 2011, BSC was notified that project funding was being provided by the HSP program over a two-year period. On 14 June 2011, BSC was notified that funding provided by SARSF was not available for this project other than for Whip-poor-will survey work in this region. In 2012, BSC also applied for and received funding to hire three students through the NSERC Industrial Undergraduate Student Research Award for a 16-week Species at Risk Intern positions. Survey Effort In 2011, BSC biologists conducted breeding season field surveys at 37 sites within the eastern Norfolk Sand Plain region (all in Norfolk County, Table 1). Thirty-two of these sites and 35 new sites were visited in 2012, giving a total of 67 sites visited in 2012 (in Norfolk and Elgin Counties, Table 2), and 72 sites visited over the two-year period.
    [Show full text]
  • Long Point Region Watershed Characterization Report
    January 2008 Long Point Region Characterization – Executive Summary Page 2 Table of contents 1. Introduction. 3 ■ The Clean Water Act ■ Documents ■ A note to readers 2. Watershed overview . 4 ■ Watershed description ■ Population ■ River quality ■ Uses of the watercourses ■ Drinking water sources 3. Lake Erie Source Protection Region . 6 4. Geology and groundwater . 8 ■ Bedrock geology ■ Surface (quaternary) geology ■ Areas susceptible to groundwater contamination 5. Hydrology and surface water . 12 ■ Overview ■ Watersheds ■ Major groundwater recharge areas ■ Major groundwater discharge areas 6. Reservoirs and reservoir operations . 15 7. Population . 16 ■ Population trends and projections 8. Land cover and land use . 17 ■ Settlement history ■ Municipal structure ■ Urban areas ■ Agriculture: crops and pasture ■ Commerce and industry ■ Forest and vegetation ■ Mining, aggregate and petroleum resources ■ Wetlands 9. Water use. 21 ■ Overview ■ Municipal use and sources ■ Rural domestic ■ Agriculture ■ Industrial ■ Commercial 10. Waste treatment and disposal . 25 ■ Sewage treatment ■ Landfills 11. Water quality . 26 ■ Surface water monitoring ■ Surface water conditions and trends ■ Groundwater quality monitoring ■ Groundwater quality conditions and trends 12. Drinking water issues . 30 ■ Potential groundwater quality issues ■ Potential surface water issues 13. Glossary . 32 Kettle Creek Catfish Creek Long Point Region Grand River Conservation Authority Conservation Authority Conservation Authority Conservation Authority This report is made
    [Show full text]
  • Long Point Region Conservation Authority
    Member of the Conservation Ontario Network 2018 LONG POINT REGION CONSERVATION AUTHORITY ANNUAL REPORT 4 Elm Street, Tillsonburg, ON N4G 0C4 Tel.: 519-842-4242 Toll Free: 1-888-231-5408 Fax: 519-842-7123 Email: [email protected] lprca.on.ca @longpointca fb.com/LongPointConservation @lpr_ca ANNUAL REPORT LONG POINT REGION CONSERVATION AUTHORITY 3 The 2018 year was a year of change that presented many challenges for the internal operations of the Authority. Staff and Board members together can be proud that MESSAGE FROM despite the uncertainty at times there were many great accomplishments in 2018. CONTENTS Staffing was one area of focus as there were key vacancies in 2018. The senior THE CHAIR & management team of four has been staffed with two new employees and other staff positions were filled due to staff turnover. Reflecting back, it is amazing the support 3 GENERAL that the employee team gave to keeping the operation running smoothly. It is key to Message from The Chair & General Manager ensure organizational health and resilience to carry us into the next four years. The MANAGER former Board from 2014 to 2018 focused the Authority to be financially strong and challenged staff to strive to deliver excellent service. 5 Protecting Life & Property The Board of Directors adopted a new Administrative By-Law in September 2018 as a requirement of the new Conservation Authorities Act. The Conservation Authorities Act, as amended by the Building Better Communities and Conserving 9 Watersheds Act, 2017, required conservation authorities to replace current by- enhancing watershed health laws by December 2018.
    [Show full text]
  • Long Point Region, Catfish Creek and Kettle Creek Tier 2 Water Quantity Stress Assessment
    Long Point Region, Catfish Creek and Kettle Creek Tier 2 Water Quantity Stress Assessment Final Report May 2009 Prepared by LONG POINT REGION, CATFISH CREEK AND KETTLE CREEK TIER 2 WATER QUANTITY STRESS ASSESSMENT Executive Summary The Clean Water Act (2006) was introduced by the Province of Ontario in its First Reading on December 5, 2005 and it received Royal Assent on October 19, 2006. On July 3, 2007, the Act and its five regulations came into effect. The intent of this Legislation is to ensure communities are able to protect their municipal drinking water supplies through the development of collaborative, locally driven, science- based Source Water Protection plans. Communities are in the process of identifying potential water quality and quantity risks to local sources and will take action to reduce or eliminate these risks. Municipalities, Conservation Authorities, property owners, farmers, industry, community groups, and the public are working together to meet these common goals. For the purposes of Source Water Protection, the Grand River, Long Point Region, Catfish Creek and Kettle Creek Conservation Authorities have formed the Lake Erie Source Protection Region. The area included within the Long Point Region, Catfish Creek and Kettle Creek Conservation Authorities is approximately 3,900 km 2, and is home to approximately 165,000 people. A number of water resource studies are currently being completed within the Lake Erie Source Protection Region in support of the Clean Water Act. These include vulnerable area delineation, threats identification/classification, and subwatershed-based water budgets. As part of the water budget assessment process, the Clean Water Act (2006) requires the completion of a Water Quantity Stress Assessment to determine potential subwatershed stress.
    [Show full text]
  • Viewpoint Spring-Summer Newsletter 2018
    VIEWPOINT SPRING-SUMMER NEWSLETTER 2018 President’s Message s some of you might know, Mary and I spent a To my way of thinking this doesn’t mean that it can Agood part of this winter in a warmer climate still be used for resources production nor agro down under. Australia is not just big, but the flora forestry. These areas should be managed to protect and fauna are really different and extremely diverse. and encourage natural functions to dominate and It was one of the first countries to recognize the prosper. As for the 17%, some of the most respected importance of its natural spaces and species, and to ecologists are suggesting that 50% is a more realistic start the process of protecting and restoring them. figure which will protect the functions that nature We assumed that there would be many lessons there provides and ultimately sustain humanity itself. for us as conservationists working on restoration and With this in mind, LPBLT is working hard to do its protection, and to some extent this was true. part through securing and protecting important However, at the end of the day, the problems and ecological areas in perpetuity. the take home message was the same as here in Canada: Protected sites need to be big enough to make sure that the core stays intact and is buffered by surrounding areas. It is now understood that over time, small areas are not able to support the comple- ment of species they started with, and as in the “Island Effect” these areas become simplified and lose their functionality.
    [Show full text]
  • A Sutntnary Of·The Breeding Status of Hooded Warblers in Ontario
    84 exempt from controls. Maybe it's would it be possible to send proofs time we took a look down from our to authors for checking before pub­ lofty perches and wised up. lication? Jon D. McCracken Ron Pittaway Vittoria, Ontario Minden, Ontario Editor's Note Corrections to Crow Note Despite rifOTOUS proofreading, errors My note on "wing-tail flicking" as a and omissions do occasionaUy slip means ofseparating crows from through in Ontario Birds. We are ravens in Volume 6(2):74-75 of happy to send proofs to authors who Ontario Birds had a typographical specifically request this when they sub­ error and an omission. In the first mit their manuscript, however, because sentence of the third paragraph, oftime constraints we do wt have the replace "does" with "done". Add luxury ofdoing thisfor all the words "in ravens" at the end of manuscripts. the third paragraph. In the future D. M. Fraser A Sutntnary of·the Breeding Status of Hooded Warblers in Ontario by M. E. Gartshore Introduction repeated here to provide back­ The purpose of the following paper ground to the current information. is to bring together information on I have focussed on records in the Hooded Warbler (Wilsonia citri­ June,July, and August to eliminate na) as it relates to summer occur­ the possibility ofconsidering rence in Ontario. In doing so I have migrants. Given that Hooded attempted to summarize important Warblers begin nesting in May and occurrences and to put them into may not leave until September, such the context ofhabitat and known a restriction may not be valid.
    [Show full text]
  • Long Point Region Source Protection Area
    Long Point Region Source Protection Area Approved Assessment Report Prepared on behalf of Lake Erie Region Source Protection Committee Under the Clean Water Act, 2006 (Ontario Regulation 287/07) March 11, 2019 400 Clyde Road, Cambridge, ON N1R 5W6 www.sourcewater.ca This page left blank intentionally. Long Point Region Source Protection Area APPROVED ASSESSMENT REPORT Prepared on behalf of: Lake Erie Region Source Protection Committee Under the Clean Water Act, 2006 (Ontario Regulation 287/07) March 11, 2019 400 Clyde Road, Cambridge, ON N1R 5W6 • www.sourcewater.ca SECTION 34 DOCUMENT AMENDMENTS The following two tables provide a high-level summary of amendments made in 2017 to the Long Point Region Assessment Report, under Ontario Regulation 287/07, Section 34. Amendments were made using the 2017 Director’s Technical Rules and Tables of Drinking Water Threats. Sections of the Assessment Report that were not updated as part of this Section 34 amendment refer to the 2009 versions of the Director’s Technical Rules and Tables of Drinking Water Threats. SECTION NUMBER DESCRIPTION OF DRINKING WATER SYSTEM AMENDMENT Section 5 Delhi-Courtland drinking water system Norfolk County - two new wells (3A, 3B) added to the Delhi drinking water system Groundwater and new numerical groundwater flow model developed Vulnerability - WHPAs, vulnerability scoring and threats updated for Wells 1, 2, Assessment and 3A, 3B Simcoe drinking water system Section 5 - municipal pumping redistributed and new numerical groundwater Norfolk County flow model developed Groundwater - WHPAs, vulnerability scoring, threats, conditions and issues Vulnerability updated for the Northwest Wellfield, Cedar St. Wellfield and Chapel Assessment St.
    [Show full text]
  • Long Point-Port Burwell Area (Ontario Geological Survey Report, ISSN 0704-2582; 298) Includes Bibliographical References
    Quaternary Geology Long Point–Port Burwell Area Ontario Geological Survey Report 298 1998 Quaternary Geology Long Point–Port Burwell Area Ontario Geological Survey Report 298 P.J. Barnett 1998 Queen’s Printer for Ontario, 1998 ISSN 0704-2582 ISBN 0-7778-6993--4 All publications of the Ontario Geological Survey and the Ministry of Northern Development and Mines are available for viewing at the following locations: Mines and Minerals Information Centre Mines Library 900 Bay Street, Room M2-17 933 Ramsey Lake Road, Level A3 Toronto, Ontario M7A 1C3 Sudbury, Ontario P3E 6B5 Telephone: 1-800-665-4480 (within Ontario) Telephone: (705) 670--5614 (416) 314-3800 Fax: (416) 314-3797 Purchases may be made only through: Publication Sales 933 Ramsey Lake Road, Level B2 Sudbury, Ontario P3E 6B5 Telephone: (705) 670-5691 Fax: (705) 670-5770 1-888-415-9847(toll-free) E-mail: [email protected] Use of Visa or Mastercard ensures the fastest possible service. Cheques or money orders should be made payable to the Minister of Finance. Canadian Cataloguing in Publication Data Barnett, Peter J. Quaternary geology, Long Point-Port Burwell area (Ontario Geological Survey report, ISSN 0704-2582; 298) Includes bibliographical references. ISBN 0-7778--6993-4 1. Geology, Stratigraphic–Quaternary. 2. Geology–Ontario–Long Point (Haldimand–Nor- folk) Region. 3. Geology–Ontario–Port Burwell Region. I. Ontario Geological Survey II. Title. III. Series. QE696.B37 1998 551.7’9’0971336 C98-964002--7 Every possible effort has been made to ensure the accuracy of the information contained in this report; however the Ontario Ministry of Northern Development and Mines does not assume any liability for errors that may occur.
    [Show full text]
  • Papers and Records [Called Ontario History After 1946]
    Ontario History Scholarly Journal of The Ontario Historical Society Since 1899 Papers and Records [called Ontario History after 1946] Volume II, 1900 Published by The Ontario Historical Society, 1900 The Ontario Historical Society Established in 1888, the OHS is a non-profit corporation and registered charity; a non- government group bringing together people of all ages, all walks of life and all cultural backgrounds interested in preserving some aspect of Ontario's history. Learn more at www.ontariohistoricalsociety.ca. ®ntario Jbistorical Society. PAPERS AND RECORDS VOL. II. The United Empire Loyalist Settlement at Long Point, Lake Erie. BY L. H. TASKER, M.A., Collegiate Institute, Niagara Falls. TORONTO: \ WILLIAM BRIGGS. 1900. ®ntario 1bistoricaI Eaocietg. PAPERS AND RECORDS VOL. II. The United Empire Loyalist Settlement at Long Point, Lake Erie. BY L. H. TASKER, M.A., Collegiate Institute, Niagara Falls. TORONTO: VVILLIAl\/I BRIGGS. I900. CONTENTS. clurrnn me»: I. Introduction — ~ - - - — - - — — — ~ - ~ ~ 9 II. Political Aspect of the Revolution - - — - — — - - 10 III. Motives of the Loyalists — — — - - - — — - - — 15 IV. Treatment of the Loyalists During the War - — - — - 17 V. Legislative Enactments for the Punishment of the Loyalists 19 VI. British Parliament and the Loyalists - — - — - — — 22 VII. VVhat Britain Did for the Loyalists — — ~ ~ — — — 25 VIII. Loyalist Emigration — — — — - — — — — — — — — 27 IX. Routes of the Loyalists — — — - - — — — — - - - 29 X. Modes of Travelling — — — — — - — — — — — ~ — 30 XI. Early Accounts of Long Point - — — - - ~ - — - 33 XII. The County of Norfolk - — - — — - — — — — — — 35 XIII. The Townships of Norfolk — - — — ~ — — » — - - 37 XIV. The Indians of the Long Point District — — — — — - 42 XV. The Migration to Long Point — — — — - — — — — — 43 XVI. Charlotteville — — ~ - — - - ~ — » — - — » — 48 XVII. Clearing the Land — — — - - - - - - — — - - 51 XVIII. Buildings - — — — - — - - - — — - - - — . 52 - — — - — — - — — — — - - - - - - XIX. Food .
    [Show full text]